Argumentative Essay: Writing Is Not Really Like A Car

Words: 376
Pages: 2

1. I do indeed agree that writing can be taught, as Provost suggests. The reasoning for literature courses all throughout our school years were to teach us to write. If writing was not capable of being taught to individuals, we would not have been required to learn how to write in school. Although not every single writing skill can be taught to perfection. The reasoning behind my statsment is that some people are naturally better writers, while others may never be as good even with all the education in writing they can receive. Overall, I do indeed believe writing can be taught.
2. The provost uses the analogy of a vehicle, with its many parts, to help us think about parts of writings. The significance in his later statement that, "writing is not really like a car" is that in writing every part; description, dialogue, and style, can be the same. Meaning, a piece of writing can be interpreted in many different ways. Although, a car part can only be
…show more content…
In sentence B, the authors goal is to make the audience laugh. I know this because, of his choice of words For example, he compared Bobby to a silly clown and instead of just saying Bobby tripped the author instead specifically described that Bobby tripped over his own feet, which is a trait of clumsiness and usually is found funny by others.
In sentence A, the authors tone is more serious. The usage of the more complex word "soil" instead of dirt is an indication of her serious tone. Also, the way she brought it to the audience’s attention that he had fallen onto a wet ground instead of just saying he had tripped.
4. I personally believe "writing that works" is a successful writing technique that accomplishes the purpose of an author’s writing. It is when the audience is able to comprehend your reason for