Business Finance - Accounting Homework help business

I. Introduction

A. Hook: Language is one of the most powerful tools we have yet its use is often overlooked.

B. Introduce the subjects being compared or contrasted: In “There is No Proper English,” Kamm explains that the concept of proper English is not a real thing. In “Breaking Out the Broken English” Chu explores the struggles of speaking broken English in a world that degrades those kinds of voices. Both authors have their opinions on language but approach it from different perspectives, one academic and the other personal.

C. Thesis: Both Kamm and Chu evaluate the societal judgment of broken English, Kamm focuses on proving there are many myths about language through logic and evidence, but Chu shares a personal journey of being heard through language.

II. Body

A. Paragraph 2 - Reason #1: Both evaluate the idea of proper English Topic Sentence: Both authors argue that the concept of proper English is harmful and exclusionary.

1. Kamm shows how grammar rules are random and misleading. 2. Chu expresses how his broken English made hisfeel ashamed and less than. 3. Both suggest that language norms are used to limit our way of speech. 4. Each text leaves you wondering who gets to define the correct way of language.

Conclusion Sentence: Despite their different styles, both authors urge society to rethink rigid language standards.

B. Paragraph 3 – Reason #2: Differences in approach Topic Sentence: Kamm and Chu differ significantly in their approach, with one taking an academic side and the other a personal style.

1. Kamm uses examples from linguistics and writing guides to make his claims. 2. His approach is logical, persuasive, and meant to educate the reader. 3. Chu shares sensitive moments from his life and experiences. 4. His approach is emotional and expressive of his feelings helping readers feel his

struggle. Conclusion Sentence: Their differences in approach show their unique purposes, one to inform and other to connect with others.

C. Paragraph 4 – Reason #3: Use of identity and expressing yourself Topic Sentence: Chu and Kamm both talk about how language is connected to identity, but Chu focuses more on expressing yourself.

1. Chu talks about how his language was tied to his Asian identity. 2. He shares how reclaiming his way of speaking was an act of dedication. 3. Kamm highlights identity more broadly discussing how class and education shape

linguistics. 4. Kamm focuses on social outlook while Chu focuses on believing in himself

Conclusion Sentence: although both highlight language and identity, Chu’s story personalizes the emotional impact of language discrimination.

D. Paragraph 5 – Reason #4: Impact Topic Sentence: The impact of each text changes based on their approach and message.

1. Kamm empowers readers by influencing them to think about rules they may have never thought to use.

2. His facts and examples encourage readers to reflect on biases they may have made. 3. Chu encourages through being vulnerable, encouraging others to embrace their voices. 4. history repeats with those who have been affected by language discrimination.

Conclusion Sentence: Each leaves the reader with a different kind of empowerment, one through self reflection and the other through emotional encouragement.

III. Conclusion

Restate thesis: Kamm and Chu both challenge the use of proper English but they do so in structured and supportive ways.

Brief summary of similarities or differences: They both agree on the need to break down harmful language norms but Kamm uses analysis while Chu uses storytelling. Their approaches, styles, and personal experiences differ but both aim to empower voices that have been suppressed.

Closing thoughts: Together these texts show us that English is not just a language, it’s a reflection of whose voices are valued compared to others. These texts show we can take a step toward a more inclusive way of communicating.

I. Introduction

A. Hook: Language is one of the most powerful tools we have yet its use is often overlooked.

B. Introduce the subjects being compared or contrasted: In “There is No Proper English,” Kamm explains that the concept of proper English is not a real thing. In “Breaking Out the Broken English” Chu explores the struggles of speaking broken English in a world that degrades those kinds of voices. Both authors have their opinions on language but approach it from different perspectives, one academic and the other personal.

C. Thesis: Both Kamm and Chu evaluate the societal judgment of broken English, Kamm focuses on proving there are many myths about language through logic and evidence, but Chu shares a personal journey of being heard through language.

II. Body

A. Paragraph 2 - Reason #1: Both evaluate the idea of proper English Topic Sentence: Both authors argue that the concept of proper English is harmful and exclusionary.

1. Kamm shows how grammar rules are random and misleading. 2. Chu expresses how his broken English made hisfeel ashamed and less than. 3. Both suggest that language norms are used to limit our way of speech. 4. Each text leaves you wondering who gets to define the correct way of language.

Conclusion Sentence: Despite their different styles, both authors urge society to rethink rigid language standards.

B. Paragraph 3 – Reason #2: Differences in approach Topic Sentence: Kamm and Chu differ significantly in their approach, with one taking an academic side and the other a personal style.

1. Kamm uses examples from linguistics and writing guides to make his claims. 2. His approach is logical, persuasive, and meant to educate the reader. 3. Chu shares sensitive moments from his life and experiences. 4. His approach is emotional and expressive of his feelings helping readers feel his

struggle. Conclusion Sentence: Their differences in approach show their unique purposes, one to inform and other to connect with others.

C. Paragraph 4 – Reason #3: Use of identity and expressing yourself Topic Sentence: Chu and Kamm both talk about how language is connected to identity, but Chu focuses more on expressing yourself.

1. Chu talks about how his language was tied to his Asian identity. 2. He shares how reclaiming his way of speaking was an act of dedication. 3. Kamm highlights identity more broadly discussing how class and education shape

linguistics. 4. Kamm focuses on social outlook while Chu focuses on believing in himself

Conclusion Sentence: although both highlight language and identity, Chu’s story personalizes the emotional impact of language discrimination.

D. Paragraph 5 – Reason #4: Impact Topic Sentence: The impact of each text changes based on their approach and message.

1. Kamm empowers readers by influencing them to think about rules they may have never thought to use.

2. His facts and examples encourage readers to reflect on biases they may have made. 3. Chu encourages through being vulnerable, encouraging others to embrace their voices. 4. history repeats with those who have been affected by language discrimination.

Conclusion Sentence: Each leaves the reader with a different kind of empowerment, one through self reflection and the other through emotional encouragement.

III. Conclusion

Restate thesis: Kamm and Chu both challenge the use of proper English but they do so in structured and supportive ways.

Brief summary of similarities or differences: They both agree on the need to break down harmful language norms but Kamm uses analysis while Chu uses storytelling. Their approaches, styles, and personal experiences differ but both aim to empower voices that have been suppressed.

Closing thoughts: Together these texts show us that English is not just a language, it’s a reflection of whose voices are valued compared to others. These texts show we can take a step toward a more inclusive way of communicating.