Passage - General Questions

[lathlee]

VIEWSTAMP

Viewpoints:
V1 (author) : 1-3, 10-18, 30-36, 40-47 , 48-49 also author tends to agree with V6. Commentator : 44-47 as well
V2 (John Stuart Mill) 4-7
V3 (Clauade Levi Strass,) 7-10
V4 (hopi) 12-16, 48-53
V5. General Facts: 19-29, 36-40
V6. Commentator : 44-47

Structure:

P1: Intro how a name can be regarded in 2 major ways in this context.
John Stuart Mill and Claude Levis’ way even though there are differences between the two.
the first way is European manner then the second way is how Hopi Tribe’s way.

P2: How name related events occur, birth, puberty, ceremony, what is supposed to represent, how the name can be interpreted.

P3: Example of how a name of clan member, Oraibi, can be interpreted. What is represented by a name-giver and name giver’s clan ‘s supposed influence. Combining all these features of Hopi personal names, be poetic.

P4: What name can do in a various manner (Compare and contrast Trap with Mills, Straus and Hopian custom) How we should interpret and accept Hopian name to decipher such name.

Tone : (Beauty, significant) (line 58) describing Hopian names by an author.
(Tiny, imaginist poem) . Line 47, By a commentator which an author seems to be agreeing with. Describing the quality of such name.

Arguments:

John Mills: Names used for distinguishing one another.

Strauss: Social Classification.

Author: the conventional way of thinking name according to European perspective does not work in knowing and deciphering Hopian way of Name which involves Historical and ritual circumstance as well as Beauty and significant associated with Hopian custom naming.

Hopian: names are more than a mere function of social classification or distinguishing role in HOpian custom tribes.

MP: L 13-18 and 48-53.

what do you think?

[Adam Tyson]

Similar to my reply on another thread, I think you have overthought this and done too much unnecessary work. "General facts" is not a viewpoint. Who holds a view, and what do they think or believe? Lists of facts are not viewpoints - opinions and beliefs are, and those are what we get asked about. I'm not sure the commentator has a viewpoint - maybe, but is it one you are likely to be asked about, given how little information we have? Is a "tiny imagist poem" a good thing or a bad thing? How does the commentator feel about Hopi names? What is his viewpoint, other than to describe something?

Keep the analysis of structure to a minimum, and think about the way those answer choices are built.

Are Mills and Straus making arguments? I don't see any premises to support their claims. Those are just facts - the author saying what they said. Don't seek to turn statements into arguments - there is enough work to do on these passages without seeing arguments around every corner.

Back away from the tremendous amount of work you are putting into these analyses. I suspect that it's eating into your time, a lot, and time is a precious commodity on this test! Keep it simple, keep it concise, predict questions, note where things are, and get to the questions. More than that and you are losing sight of the goal here, which is to answer questions based on the text. VIEWSTAMP is good, and helpful, but it's not the goal - it's a tool to help you reach that goal. Put too much effort into the tool and there's no time left to put it to use!

[lathlee]

Viewpoints:
V1 (author) : 1-3, 10-18, 30-36, 40-47 , 48-49 also author disguised as an commentator : 44-47 as well
V2 (John Stuart Mill) 4-7
V3 (Clauade Levi Strass,) 7-10
V4 (hopi) 12-16, 48-53

Structure:

P1: Intro how a name can be regarded in 2 major ways in this context.
John Stuart Mill (L 4-7) and Claude Levis’ way (L 7-10) even though there are differences between the two.
there are more ways to view names other than these two ways, the other way is the Hopi Tribe’s way and it's mechanism (Trap of CC)

P2: name related events to occur; birth, puberty, ceremony, (Trap of List) what is supposed to represent, how the name can be interpreted in Hopian culture

P3: Example of how a name of a clan member, Oraibi, can be interpreted; What is represented by a name-giver and name giver’s clan ‘s supposed influence. Combining all these features, Commentator (author) regards Hopi personal names, be poetic.

P4: What name can do in a various manner (CC Trap with Mills, Straus and Hopian custom) How the readers should interpret and accept Hopian name to decipher such name.

Tone : (Beauty, significant) (line 58) describing Hopian names by an author.
(Tiny, imaginist poem) . Line 47, By a commentator disguised as the author, seems to be agreeing with. Describing the quality, opinion of the Hopian name (poetic, L 51)

Arguments:

Author: the conventional way of thinking name according to European perspective does not work in knowing and deciphering Hopian way of Name which involves Historical and ritual circumstance as well as Beauty and significance associated with Hopian custom naming.

Hopian: names are more than a mere function of social classification or distinguishing role in HOpian custom tribes.

MP: L 13-18 and 48-59.

what do you think?

[Adam Tyson]

Viewpoints look good.

Structure looks good, although I don't understand your references to "traps" or what "CC" means in this context (we usually use that to denote a section of "compare and contrast" language, which I don't see happening here).

I don't know what you are saying about the tone. You are referring to some language that might suggest a certain tone, but not to the tone itself. Try to make your tone prephrases be single words - the tone is "supportive" or "critical" or "neutral". Tone isn't the evidence - tone is what you GET from that evidence. Tone can also change over the course of the passage, and there can be tones specific to certain subjects. Here, I would say the tone is somewhat critical of European thinkers and appreciative of the Hopi. That's it - just "critical" and "appreciative".

Your first argument is valid - that is the argument made by the author. The Hopi did not make an argument in this passage - we never heard from them, only from the author telling us about them. I have no idea what the Hopi's premises are or what they conclude about anything, because they made no argument. They just did what they do.

I think your line references for Main Point are a little too expansive, but not by much. Instead of quoting line references as your prephrase, say it in your own words. In my own words, the main idea here is that European thinkers have been too narrow in their view of personal names, and they need to broaden their thinking, as shown by the example of the Hopi.

Keep whittling away at it, lathlee! You need to simplify, simplify, simplify! Otherwise this process will take you too long during the test, and you will over-analyze everything instead of using simple notes to help you prephrase and support your answers. That's the goal of the analysis, to help find answers quickly. The longer and more detailed your analysis is, as counter-intuitive as this may sound, the less helpful it will be for you, because instead of using it as a shortcut it will just be a long detour!