The vocabulary is different in this book from other books because this is based in the 1920's. The author uses formal vocabulary because people spoke formally back then. "Anyway, it was mortifying. I looked like such a bluenose. And that is why we now have to go back lickety-split, so that this time I can actually show my face. Proudly. Oh, and you can come with us, of course," (Larkin 45). This quote is relevant to my topic because I don't know anyone who says 'mortifying', 'bluenose', or 'lickety-split'. They didn't use the same slang words like we do now. Everyone talks properly; from adults to children. It's interesting to see how much has changed when it comes to vocabulary throughout the years. The vocabulary in this book is important because you can't write a book about the 20's and use the words that we use now. You have to use proper vocabulary to convince the reader that you know the difference from the culture back then to the culture now. It makes an impact on the reader on how well you know the right vocabulary.
Most of the diction that I decided to use was abstract/concrete. "You have to use proper vocabulary to convince the reader that you know the difference from the culture back then to the culture now." I used words like 'formally', 'properly', and 'culture', because they make the concept easier to understand. The sentence length in this post is approximately 18 words, which is medium length. "This quote is relevant to my topic because I don't know anyone who says 'mortifying', 'bluenose', or 'lickety-split'." This sentence has exactly 18 words in it, and not all of the sentences have 18 words, but most of them are close to about 18 words.
I have worked towards achieving my blogging goal that I set for myself at the beginning of the trimester because my goal was to post at least once a week and comment twice a week. I haven't exactly been posting once a week and commenting twice a week, but I've been keeping up with my posts. I made sure to stay on the topic that I chose, use compelling ideas, and use specific textual details. I used a variety of syntactical structures, effective diction, and an engaging style. I had a consistent understanding of grammatical conventions.
Do the kids still talk more "slang" than the adults in the 1920's? Or do they speak the exact same way?
ReplyDeleteI really like book thats are from the past, I think there easier to reflect on and sometimes even connect too. I have never heard of this book let me know how you like it.
ReplyDeleteyou should post more on this book; it seems very interesting and i am interested.
ReplyDeleteI have the same thing on my book. Except it is very informal unlike yours. I agree that the vocublary helps take the book into the past.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the vocabulary leaves an impact on the reader. This book seems interesting.
ReplyDeleteHey Gabby! I’m kind of obsessed about everything vintage and old-fashioned so Vixen seems like a book I might enjoy. As you mentioned in your post, I think it was very smart of the author to be aware of the 1920’s setting and only use sophisticated and elegant words, and only write about the lifestyle back then.
ReplyDeleteIt’s so subtly in books the vocabulary I never noticed it’s had that much of an effect on the story. Though the way you show it does show that it does have a great affect on the story. If a book about the 1920’s had the characters speaking like us I will be confused.
ReplyDelete