¶ … sensory information throughout most of this book is highly noticeable. Also apparent is the lack of symbolic language -- metaphor and simile -- that the author employs. His purpose is specifically to be concrete, and so he avoids abstractions.
The language of the text is most definitely formal, though it manages to refrain from becoming dry and overly technical. The author achieves a sense of authority and command when it comes to his subject through this tone, and he attempts to define any words that might seem ambiguous or over-laden with extra meaning.
Punctuation is used in a straightforward manner, but has a definite effect on the text's meaning. An abundance of subordinate clauses and parentheticals complicate many of the sentences. Most sentences begin with subjects, though some start with descriptive subordinates clauses.
The author does his best to remain (or at least appear) objective throughout this text, though certain of his conclusions necessarily demand an opinion. His language, however, is not figurative enough to lend such details on a subtextual level.
The author's point-of-view is certainly visible in the text, but it is based purely on objective facts and as such the text's language remains highly objective, as well. There is no discernible overall shift in the book, though there are sentences where is personal opinion is made more clear than others. He quickly recovers by stating mitigating facts, however, remaining highly objective.
You’re 72% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.