Braddon exhibits various examples of jargon to enforce the contributor in marge the write?s argument, that minuscule terra firmas such as Australia chit-chat in study fights, though they impart soon be forgotten for their valiant contribution. Jargon is utilise in the sub-title, characterising the author to be a former ?gunner? who became a ?Changi captive of war?, which stands for ?Prisoner Of War.? The white plague of jargon in this case, ?gunner? and ?Changi prisoner of war? secerns to the audience that this author has go through with(predicate) the war and will narrate a slight biased and more informed revue unlike an author who has not experience the war and would piddle a shortsighted convincing review. The military jargon, ?garrison? is used instead of a more recognisable word. This influences the audience to believe in Braddon?s argument, making the article seemingly pilot light and written from a war-correspondent. JargonThe contrast in war propag anda surrounded by Australia and Japan is a rhetorical device used by Braddon to establish the theme of the article, where Braddon relates to the flaws of the Australian disposal and larger political bodies who did not tell of Japans powerful post. Braddon informs to the reader of the Nipponese status to war. They had aimed to attack their enemy viciously without fear of sacrificing young lives and losing experienced soldiers. An instructor of the emperor?s forces had never banishped familiar relation the soldiers, ?Do not be afraid of combat, and do not come home alive.? It is considered almost shameful to return, a dutiful order, a matter of bravery and courage as hostile by Braddon?s contrasting view of the Australians who apothegm the Nipponese to be ?puny, myopic, afraid of the dark and badly material body up.?The Australian?s racist and under(a)mining view of the Japanese derriere be viewed as the use of irony where the Australians see the Japanese army orga nism weak though the audience knows that the! Japanese will eventu helper overcome the British and Australian soldiers to take into custody capital of capital of Singapore. Braddon?s use of irony is engaging and enforces the article?s motif. Braddon considers the use of metaphors to state the motif of this article, that Australia?s triumphs in the war as an ally of study nations such as Britain and America, had in the end lead to Australia cosmos forgotten. The metaphor, ? We die hard plumes on its chessboard of discreetness and war,? is Braddon?s equality between Australia with the pawns on a chessboard, inform to the audience of Braddon?s belief that Australia, in the eyes of major ally powers, is aught but a small nation willing to proffer itself in order to gain little respect from its father country, similar to a pawn on a chessboard, very much facing a meaningless death when sacrificed on the nominal head line. Braddon comp ares the lesson of Singapore with the Allusion of Vietnam. Singapore and Vietnam s hares a third estate purpose, where a diminished nation when under the control of a foolish come country is in danger, ?a pawn in the detainment of a halfwit is a pawn squandered.?Branddon?s use of this Allusion will enrich this articles meaning, comparing the events of Singapore with Vietnam. This article is narrated in arcminute person, enforcing the reader to believe in Braddon?s idea.
The pronoun ?we? is used especially in the first hardly a(prenominal) paragraphs of the article where the main ideas are introduced. We are a minor nation whose battalions, brigades and few?.. ?we should model aside one twe nty-four hours each year when we think up it. We sho! uld remind ourselves that. We remain pawns on its chessboard of diplomacy and war. The pronoun ?we? establishes a closer writer-reader kindred since the reader?s ideas are slightly agreeing with the writers. The informal uses of lyric as identified by Branddon?s statement,? When Canberra act to nag,? combined with Branddon?s use of pronouns, ?we? and a second person voice, places the writer to the same level with the reader through common language, establishing a closer writer-reader relationship. The use of Rhetorical Questions also contributes to enforcing Branddon?s major idea of the article, questioning Australia?s ability to stop Japan. The rhetorical question enforces Branddon?s major idea through a closer writer-reader relationship. The rhetorical question, ?Had we been armed as the Japanese were armed, supported in the air as they were supported, led as they were lead and move as they were motivated?? implying to the reader that the Australians going away was due to th e lack of preparation, determination, and poor appraisal initiated by government officials. http://mrbraiman.home.att.net/lit.htm If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
write my paper
