In this activity, you'll read a sentence from the Old Testament's Ecclesiastes. You will also read George Orwell's revision of the sentence, which he designed to illustrate bad habits he found in the written work of his time. Carefully compare the two versions of the sentence. Describe what Orwell changed, in terms of word choice and sentence structure, as well as tone and implied purpose or audience. Before you formulate your answer in paragraph form, you might want to take notes (below or elsewhere) comparing the two versions of the sentence in terms of word choice, sentence structure, tone, and implied audience and purpose.

The sentence from Ecclesiastes:
I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth.

Orwell's revision in "modern English of the worst sort":
Objective consideration of contemporary phenomena compels the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account.

Orwell's revision is a parody of highly technical, quasi-intellectualist style and tone of the academia. He uses robust vocabulary, devoid of imagery that is characteristic of Ecclesiastes' sentence, big words that mean almost nothing, and certainly don't convey anything beyond their abstract meaning. Whereas Ecclesiastes' sentence is written in 1st person and highly evocative, Orwell's is impersonal, faceless, and drab.

Answer Link

Sky50923 Sky50923 · Answer 2 · 2021-01-08T23:54:51+01:00

Answer:

This is the answer given on plato edmentum:

Explanation:

Your answer should include some of the following observations.

°Original has mostly one-syllable words, several two-syllable words, and a couple of three-syllable words. Original words are less abstract. Revised words have many syllables and prefixes and suffixes and seem more abstract, less like common words.

°Original uses the first person, I. The revision doesn't use humans as subjects. Revision uses abstract nouns as subjects, and it uses passive constructions.

°Original forms a list of observations (of what does not happen), then concludes with a contrast (chance). The revision starts with a long phrase to form the subject of the first clause, followed by another long phrase to convey what is in the list of observations. The revision then uses a compound conjunction (but) to set off the contrast. The original describes four distinct aspects of human life, while the revision clumps them all into "competitive activities."

°Original uses nouns, adjectives, and verbs alone, often in a metaphorical form that indicates whole groups of people. The revision has a lot of adjectives with nouns. The adjectives and nouns have many syllables.

°Original seems to be poetic in tone, designed for a thinking audience, probably not a modern one. The revision seems to be trying to impress the reader with a large vocabulary, and it is not friendly to the audience.