• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Help with english essay (DUE THURSDAY)

Status
Not open for further replies.
can everyone delete their posts? now?


Locking thread per OP request. We do not delete posts.

Administrator Idontcare
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll try to add more in depth comments but I have some Jaffna curry on the stove that I don't want to leave alone too long.

First, no way that's 3 pages of writing, you'll need to add more to that to meet the minimum. Second, I feel like you have some issues with tense. For example...

This event was called the Sri Lankan Civil War.
Within this civil war in Sri Lanka, many insurgencies are involved...

You switch from past tense to present tense. I don't know MLA rules, but I'm pretty sure you're supposed to keep to one tense.

Also, to be blunt your essay doesn't feel like it flows. I think you need to do a better job of tying paragraphs together. More suggests to come later, maybe.

Wow dude how old are you? That's pretty poor writing.

In all fairness I believe he's in high school.
 
Guessing English isn't your first language?

Original said:
Through out our time as human beings, many things have changed for better or for worse. Things have been done that cannot be changed backed to how they were before. There is one awful thing that has happened many times through out our history, mainly during wars between culture, race, and religion. Recently, one of these events has come to a close, after more than 25 years of killing. This event was laced with the civil war that was happening between the minority and the majority. Mixed with this civil war, there were mass killings committed, child soldiers being used, abuse, and assassinations. This event was called the Sri Lankan Civil War.

My fixes/suggestions said:
Throughout our time as human beings, many things have changed for better or for worse. Things have been done that cannot be changed back to how they were before. There is one awful thing that has happened many times throughout our history, mainly during wars being fought over culture, race, and religion (what is this awful thing you refer to? teenage pregnancies? obesity? how much shit comes out of Glenn Beck's ass I mean mouth?). Recently, one of these events (swap the beginning part of this sentence out with whatever you clarify in the previous sentence) has come to a close, after more than 25 years of killing. This event was interlaced with the civil war that was happening between the minority and the majority (minority/majority what? race? religion? social class?). Mixed with this civil war (this is repetitive), there were mass killings committed, child soldiers being forced into fighting, abuse, and assassinations. This event was called the Sri Lankan Civil War.

First sentence, in my opinion, is weak. The opening paragraph is the thing that's supposed to capture your audience's attention, and it failed to do so with me. A lot of ambiguity. Stop using the word 'thing.' Assuming your thesis is that the Sri Lankan civil war was "an awful thing," you could do a lot more to elaborate on that to make a stronger argument.

You could always go with the classic "tell a gripping story" approach to get started. Something like a story of a child soldier taken from his home and put in the battlefield (I'm just thinking of the LRA right now) would do great.

For instance:

"After a long day of school and tending to his family's farm, Herpity Derpity had just crawled into his bed when the front door of his family's small, one-room hut banged open. In the pale glow of the moonlight, he saw four silhouettes, each carrying a rifle, burst inside and begin to yell. Two of the men quickly huddled his parents into a corner and shot them several times, killing them almost instantly. The other two hauled Herpity out of bed, tied his arms and legs together, and dragged him outside. He would never return to see his home again."

Been a couple years since I took AP English. Most of my essays have been analytical ones, but in general an essay that starts out with a bang does well. Strong thesis, strong arguments and support.

Read this article if you need a better example than mine for an opening.
 
Last edited:
You could always go with the classic "tell a gripping story" approach to get started. Something like a story of a child soldier taken from his home and put in the battlefield (I'm just thinking of the LRA right now) would do great.
Concur.
 
I didn't really read it, but I don't see any in-text citations... which your rubric says you need to use.

If he was anything like me, he just probably planned to put them in later. I always saved the citations and works cited junk for last. At least he doesn't have to use footnotes.

I also tended to start papers the night before they were due...
 
I'm not going to write text crudely in MS paint just for some lulz. Don't you need a diagram or something?
 
Alright, I'm feeling stupid and decided to take the time to write out some comments for your paper. I'm not the greatest writer either, but I'm miles ahead of you. If you're lucky maybe someone else will take a look at it and add more comments/suggestions. By the way, I didn't really look at your teacher's criteria, I was just focused on making the writing itself better.

You can view and download the document here.

In general, I think you need to set the paper up better. After the introduction the paper doesn't seem chronological. Put events in order and link them together. For example, talk about Sri Lanka's location and earlier history and how that's important to the war. Basically what you said about India supporting the Sinhalese and the British fostering fighting, but move all that stuff up to an earlier paragraph.

I haven't had to write an essay in quite a while, so others like chubbyfatazn probably have better suggestions.
 
Alright, since I'm a bit more bored than usual, I read your conclusion. I'm only analyzing it as a recap of what you should have talked about in the body (since I haven't read that yet).

This paper is rife with grammatical and spelling errors. I'd strongly suggest going to tutoring/your school's writing center to get those fixed up (unless you want to pay me $10 to do it now 😀).


original said:
The civil war and genocide in Sri Lanka wrecked havoc on the Tamils, the Sinhalese, and the other minorities living in the country. It caused a lot of damage to the Sri Lankan economy and this civil war will always be part of their history. Even though the war against them is officially over, there is always a chance of this group making a comeback and avenging those who were killed. There is a great deal of knowledge from this event taking place. Many countries can learn from this event, knowing that anger can trigger the mass killing on a single group.

mein said:
The civil war and genocide in Sri Lanka wreaked havoc on the Tamils, the Sinhalese, and the other minorities living in the country. It caused a lot of damage to the Sri Lankan economy (and... what else? family lives? land? damage to buildings/property?). and this civil war will always be part of their history (suggest deletion). Even though the war against them (suggest simply changing to the word 'conflict') is officially over, there is always a chance of this group making a comeback and avenging (are they avenging, though? or is it going to be more ruthless killing? i'd say the latter, so make it seem like they're in the wrong) those who were killed. There is a great deal of knowledge from this event taking place (what? unnecessary). Many countries can learn from this event, knowing that anger can trigger the mass killing on a single group (also unnecessary).

I'll come back later to read the rest of the paper once I finish my own work, but as a conclusion it should re-summarize, briefly, the central arguments backing up your thesis. All I got that supported the "Sri Lankan civil war was an awful thing" argument was that it "caused a lot of damage to the Sri Lankan economy." In addition, the very last sentence doesn't provide a sense of closure to the paper. It's just another ambiguity that doesn't pertain to the focus of your paper at all.
 
I have one tip for now: avoid using any derivative of "Throughout history..." in your opening sentence. It is a cardinal sin of writing, which you seem to have committed.
 
Since you posted your essay on the internet, wouldn't it now be flagged in any plagiarism detector?

Probably, he just screwed himself. When I TAed, turnitin.com would scour the internet pretty much daily updating with new material. I think there's also an algorithm in it that searches google for bits and pieces of the submitted document.
 
Essays: One of the many reasons I'm glad I'm done school.

What I used to do when I was in school is publish info on the internet, then use it as a resource. Often they asked for 3 or more resources with citations or whatever so it helped fill things in. If I was desperate I would even make up BS like "some believe that..." and then quote that stuff. worked great as long as I did not overdo it or keep using the same site. I'd just make a random tripod/yahoo/homestead etc page.
 
OP, do yourself a favor and read George Orwell's Politics and the English Language. It's meant for a discussion of political writing, but the content applies to any philosophical or technical writing. He goes into an explanation of why sloppy language is bad, but the crux of how you should write is thus:

(i) Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
(ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.
(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

It's ok to write conversationally when you first put thoughts down on paper, but you should go through every sentence with the question "How can I make this simpler?" Your writing will become more direct (it may even appear abrasive at first), but it will also expose holes in your arguments that your language would have otherwise hidden.

If you follow the above rules, you will never be complimented for elegant prose, but it will be clear, direct, and most importantly, effective.
 
There are a few things in general:

You should think more about how your words flow together. Not just the way you use words to build an argument, but how words and sentences sound next to each other. Read it out to yourself.

Speaking of arguments, it needs to be set up a lot better. It should be in broad chronological order, and it should sound like you're thinking about what you've just written. The inquiry questions are there to help you with this; make the questions so that your essay has a purpose instead of a plain regurgitation of facts. In other words, make a logical argument.

I know you don't have the space to be so specific about as big a topic as a genocide, but you should try to be less vague. For example, the first paragraph: most of that is complete waffle. Word or page limits and formatting constraints are there to make you think about how to write concisely, and at the moment, you are failing utterly.

Don't tell us; show us. Be subtle about the way you confer information. I know it's all written, but the way it's written is important. There is no need to spell out every single thing explicitly. For example, the first sentence of the third paragraph; it's useless. Length of the conflict is important, but you're telling us that already later on. Also, we don't need to know that it was 9431 days long, nor do we need to know that's 25 years, 9 months, and 25 days. It's a novelty, but you don't have the space to indulge in novelties. In the same vein, the list in the second half of that sentence is also useless. With modern warfare it's a given that civilians suffer during wartime. And obviously if it lasted for twenty five years peace talks failed at least once.

Bolded below are things I consider unnecessary. Underlined are my contributions or comments.

Through out our time as human beings, many things have changed for better or for worse. Things have been done that cannot be changed backed to how they were before. There is one awful thing that has happened many times through out our history, mainly during wars between culture, race, and religion. Recently, one of these events has come to a close, after more than 25 years of killing. This event was laced with the civil war that was happening between the minority and the majority. Mixed with this civil war, there were mass killings committed, child soldiers being used, abuse, and assassinations. This event was called the Sri Lankan Civil War.[This is your introduction. It's the first thing people read, and first impressions count. Take the opportunity to say something profound and important, not waffly and useless and vague.]

Within this civil war in Sri Lanka, many insurgencies are involved and are [were - get your tenses consistent, if not right] fighting for the same goal; to create a separate country for the Tamils. The main insurgency group is called the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).There are also two main ethical[You mean ethnic] groups involved, the Tamils and the Sinhalese. The Sinhalese has help from the Indian government during a short period of time; they were doing a peace keeping mission which ultimately ended when the two sides started fighting again.

For 9431 days, the civil war raged on in Sri Lanka, that’s 25 years 9 months and 25 days of fighting, failed peace talks, rape, murder, abuse, assassinations, and many of horrible things the people of Sri Lanka had to deal with. Along side all of this, there was also a genocide going on. The Tamils were being targeted by the Sinhalese for various reasons, but genocide usually comes after a war in which the bases of it are not for economical reasons. The genocide wasn’t a quick one, but it was a long and drawn out event that happened immediately after the start of the civil war.

This civil war and genocide took place in Sri Lanka, a small country that lies in the Indian Ocean, just south of India. The country is in the shape of a tear drop and consists of many beaches, mountains, forests and arid plains. Sri Lanka is also known for their tea and also for their coconuts. - [no shit. It's called the Sri Lankan genocide because it happened in Brazil? And unless any of the information here has any direct bearing on what you're going to say, it's completely unnecessary.]

[move the Black July explanation up here; that makes this paragraph redundant] This all started on July 23rd 1983, with an event called Black July; which was also considered the beginning of the genocide. Even though the official starting date was the 23rd of July, there has always been a tension between the Sinhalese and the Tamils. On May 18th 2009, after 9431 days of war, the Sri Lankan government announced that it had defeated the LTTE and also boldly stated that it had become the first nation to eradicate terrorism all together.[Move this last part to the end of your account of the actual war]

May things contributed to the start of the civil war,[Factors contributing to the war go back] going all the way back to when the British controlled Sri Lanka. During 1919, the Sinhalese and the Tamils worked together to try to allow more rights[for whom?]. They worked together and well until late 1960 when rumors circulated about a separate Tamil state being in the works. Meanwhile, an employee of the British High Commission began collaborating with the separatist[who? More detail is needed here at just about every level, if you think this is important]. This is around the time that the LTTE was formed [closely followed by many other similar groups - or somesuch]Following some violence against the government, many other groups formed with the same or somewhat similar ideology as the LTTE. Many of these groups also formed their own political parties as well, to back up their ideology in the government[legitimize their ideology]. As the years draged on, [over time] many of the groups merged with the LTTE, making it a larger, stronger, and more sophisticated group [you use 'group' too often - try organization] allowing for more high profile assassinations and attacks. This was the beginning of a long and expensive war for the Tamils, the Sinhalese, and the people of Sri Lanka.

When it comes to wars, there are many reasons for this act, ranging from economical purposes to political reasons. The civil war however, was for a small minority wanting to be separated from the others.[there are better ways to phrase this] The Tamils, the small minority with only 7% of the population, wanted to take on the larger Sinhalese, the larger with 74%, and find a way to form their own little country[The minority Tamils desired independence from the Sinhalese - or some such] They felt discriminated from the rest. This was their fuel for their fire.[There are better ways to phrase this] When they Tamils did a small attack, the Sinhalese came back hard and an even called Black July occurred, which was what help create a larger fire and enraged the Tamil population even more.[Useless now. And ditch the fire metaphor] These little things slowly added up until the Tamils couldn’t take it any longer and they launched an assault against the Sinhalese and the Sri Lankan government. The Sinhalese and the government do what comes natural, they defend themselves, and the government now pronounces them as a terrorist group; condemning them and their cause.[We can imagine what happens next. If you're going to be so vague about it, you might as well leave it to the reader - we already know]

Through out this paper, the event called Black July has come up multiple times. This event happened on July 23rd 1983, which later also became the official start of the Sri Lankan Civil War. This was an anti-Tamil pogrom and angry mobs attacked anything involving Tamils or have some meaning to them, from stores to statues. These attacks and riots came after the LTTE killed 13 Sri Lankan soldiers, making this the LTTE’s first high profile attack on the government. The riots killed anywhere from hundred to thousands of Tamils and it launched a wave of fleeing. The riots took place everywhere, from the streets all the way to prison. No one who was a Tamil was considered safe. This is the first act of genocide by the people; who were angry and wanted to retaliate.[The seminal event of the civil war occured on July 23 1983, now known as Black July. In retaliation for the LTTE killing of 13 Sri Lankan soldiers, riots broke out throughout the country, attacking anyone and anything associated with Tamils. Hundreds or thousands of Tamils were killed and triggered a mass exodus... - look, I'm even writing it for you. It needs work, but you get the picture. Paper space is precious. Use it wisely.]

There is a great wealth of news about the LTTE, the main group behind many of the attack against the Sri Lankan government. This group was very organized and had specific divisions for certain tasks (a total of 31 divisions ranging from armed forces to global communications), a lot like[analogously to] the United States Armed Forces. For example, the LTTE had a division called the “Sea Tigers” which were a group trained to attack vessels at sea and help with sea attacks, a lot[if you want to use 'a lot', you have to quantify] like our Navy, but the Sea Tigers did have a small advantage; which were the[had a] fleet of suicide bomber vessels which were used to sink at least 20 vessels, one of which was a freighter[What were the rest? Kayaks? What is the significance of this?]. The LTTE worked to insure[ensure] that anyone willing to help for the cause was used, since there were[also had] two [combat]divisions specifically for women only, Malathi brigade and Sothiya brigade. Those two divisions were used for all tasks including fighting. The LTTE followed a simple ideology, which was Tamil nationalism. They also had a very steady income of about 200 to 300 million dollars a year with many people on their payroll who were working for them, ranging from[employing, among others,] intelligence officers to[and] homeland defense. This group was a very hard on the Sri Lankan government and the civilians living there as well.[if you want to talk about the LTTE effect on everyone else, talk about it. Don't dance around the subject.]

The civil war and genocide in Sri Lanka wrecked[wreaked] havoc on the Tamils, the Sinhalese, and the other minorities living in the country. It caused a lot of damage to the Sri Lankan economy[You haven't specified] and this civil war will always be part of their history. Even though the war against them is officially over, there is always a chance of this group making a comeback and avenging those who were killed. There is a great deal of knowledge from this event taking place.[What does this sentence even mean?] Many countries can learn from this event, knowing that anger can trigger the mass killing on a single group[This isn't the only genocide. Also, too vague.].

Basically, the whole thing needs a rewrite. So much of it is useless waffle, that what's left is irrevocably tainted by what was taken out. Do it again, and when you start, don't worry about length. Worry about writing something coherent, profound, and interesting. You can always cut later on.
 
Last edited:
Why is your essay so fucking short?

The format requirement might have been for it to be double-spaced. I put it into a Word doc with 1" margins, TNR 12 point, and it clocks in at 3.75 pages. So if that's the case it's within guidelines.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top