or example, as Sundiata’s mother sings her lines, we see repetition of her words that convey a sense of desperation and urgency in her embarrassment. In the first text, we visually see her frustration written out, but not to the degree of the second text, when it can be assumed how hysterical and upset she was at their situation.
Good - I like the way you show that features like repetition can be part of both the dynamics of oral composition and also part of artistic effects.
Another claim of Ong’s oral culture can be seen through another form of redundancy, but in a formulaic way. Whenever a character is being addressed to in the second text, the pronoun of that character is often repeated over and over again in each stanza. By doing so, readers can follow the storyline without the need of directly addressing the character within each line. This is seen in both Sundiata’s lines and his mother’s. T
Good - this would be clearer if you provided quotes and textual evidence.
Ong states that an oral culture is one that exists without depending on written texts. Such examples of this can be seen in history, via storytelling, songs, poems, etc. that have survived throughout history. They are often known to hold certain characteristics, such as repetition and redundancy, oral patterns throughout the oral style, formulaic for memory support, enrichment in definition and detail, empathetic and intimate.
Nice introduction and overview of Ong.
sense rather than to the direct individual. His rebuttals are persuasive, but do hold more of a bitter tone in my opinion. What interested me the most was seeing him connect both the “old” and “new” ways of public thinking, considering that there is a big audience that likes to separate the two from each other.
The are some good insights and thoughtful comments in this post. It does seem general, and to move quickly from the text to general response Try to move more deeply into the texts you are analyzing and give a precise account of their claims (with examples from the text) before moving to discussion.
Least persuasive, however, was when he argued against the statement that the “old way” of thinking and doing things will cease to exist under the new age of media and such
This is interesting but I am not sure which part of his argument you are referring to. Are you talking about the past when people wrote less? If you bring in quotations to illustrate your points that may help in future posts.
sense rather than to the direct individual. His rebuttals are persuasive, but do hold more of a bitter tone in my opinion. What interested me the most was seeing him connect both the “old” and “new” ways of public thinking, considering that there is a big audience that likes to separate the two from each other.
The are some good insights and thoughtful comments in this post. It does seem general, and to move quickly from the text to general response Try to move more deeply into the texts you are analyzing and give a precise account of their claims (with examples from the text) before moving to discussion.
Least persuasive, however, was when he argued against the statement that the “old way” of thinking and doing things will cease to exist under the new age of media and such
This is interesting but I am not sure which part of his argument you are referring to. Are you talking about the past when people wrote less? If you bring in quotations to illustrate your points that may help in future posts.