A Rhetorical Analysis Linguistic Power Dynamics in Oleanna - Literature Essay Samples

David Mamet’s short, two-character play Oleanna deals with the shifting linguistic power dynamics between professor John and student Carol over the series of three separate meetings. Both characters continually trail off, interrupt one another, and digress from the primary issue at hand: Carol’s confusion in the class. John is excessively verbose while Carol, conversely, tends towards vague colloquialisms, but both manage to disastrously miscommunicate. In the beginning, as their interactions become increasingly hostile, John and Carol derive power from interrupting one another and, complementarily, avoiding interruption from the counterpart character. As the play progresses, the frequency of these interruptions lessens and both characters, each more composed, begin to extract power by repeating and misappropriating their counterparts language. In both overlapping circumstances, John and Carol use short, succinct, complete sentences maintain their power. In doing so, they literally limit the number of words available for interruption or expropriation while also articulating their expressions with more clarity. This conciseness merges offensive and defensive rhetorical strategies, making it the most effective power-play. In terms of linguistic succinctness, both characters’ respective power shifts continuously throughout; however only Carol’s makes an intentional and lasting shift towards brevity, ultimately empowering her over John. As their relationship becomes increasingly contentious during their first interactions, Oleanna and John empower themselves by interrupting one another and manipulating their own language so that it cannot be interrupted. John, as the teacher and authority, begins with the inherent power dominion; Carol, too, accepts her stereotypical role as the confused female student, beginning their interaction with a question. Rather than continuing this question-answer, student-teacher dynamic, John immediately diminishes his pedagogical power with with a vague and pretentious response, sarcastically asking Carol â€Å"to take the mysticism out of it.† (9) Backtracking to redundantly, inarticulately reword his original question, â€Å"Is that what you want to talk about?,† John also undermines his authoritarian power with self-doubt. (9) Carol, though, does not immediately capitalize upon this vulnerability, maintaining the facade of a helpless student as she speaks only in inquis itive fragments (enclosed by ellipses) that John consistently interrupts. As the play begins, neither the verbose john or bewildered Carol, have significant power; instead they both continue to interrupt one another, neither clearly articulating their point of view. However, as the meeting progresses and John’s language becomes increasingly complicated and digressive, Carol’s syntax shortens and takes on a declarative tone. As she reclaims some power, Carol listens to John’s tangential, â€Å"pedantic† arguments and responds with the simple dismissals of â€Å"yes† or â€Å"no† and pointed questions like, â€Å"what do you want from me?,† so concise and imperative that they cannot be interrupted. (29, 30) As the play progresses, John and Carol slowly (though erratically) reverse their inherent roles, Carol gaining linguistic leverage over John. As Carol uses less interruptible language, the syntax of both characters becomes more complete. Therefore, rather than interruption, the characters begin to derive power from stealing and appropriating their counterparts words. This gives Carol the upper hand because, having already cut down her syntax, she has less words available to steal. John, appealing to her sense of guilt, claims Carols accusations of sexual harassment are â€Å"sufficient to deprive a family.† (32) However, repeating his words and saying â€Å"Sufficient? Sufficient? Sufficient? Yes,† Carol concurs that is sufficient, but only because of his â€Å"vile and classist and pornographic† actions. (32) As John consistently digresses to the topics abstract academics, his house and the tenure committee, he provides more literal words and personal details for Carol to use against him. Claiming to know what John â€Å"says to himself† and accusing him trying â€Å"to strutto postureto perfo rm..to act like a patriarch,† Carol fills her own long speeches with John’s words. (33) Therefore, for John to appropriate and twist these statements, would be for him to refute his own argument. Carol furthers this tactic by beginning her sentences with â€Å"you,† making John the subject: â€Å"You want me to stay,† â€Å"You have done it to me,† â€Å"You tried to rape me.† (30, 38, 46) When Carol does speak with personal pronouns, saying â€Å"I’m going† or â€Å"I am told† her sentences are brief and declarative, so as not to give John any ammunition. The play culminates as Carol murmurs â€Å"yes, that’s right,† to Johns many final insults, qualifying his words and allowing them to speak for themselves as a representation of his character. (47) This repeated strategy on Carols part empowers her further and, getting the last word, she is ultimate winner of this shifting power struggle. Both characters consistently manipulate language so that power dynamics shift erratically throughout, making neither character a clear winner in terms of power. Their language and respective empowerment changes frequently, such that a case could be made for either character. However, John becomes increasingly verbose and personal, playing into his weaknesses, while Carol’s language transitions from vulnerable fragmentation to succinct and declarative speech. Ultimately, the power lies in this specific change. Only Carol effectively shifts her style and flips the originally-assumed power dynamic.

Investment In Court Chambers Plc Finance Essay - Free Essay Example

That is incorrect to keep the goodwill in the balance sheet unchanged, as its value will decrease day by day. The products are sold less and decrease price during the product life time. For example, telephones are at high price at the beginning of the sell. After new and better telephones appear, the selling price and quantities of the old will decrease. The selling of the products represent the goodwill of the company, therefore, it is incorrect to keep the goodwill. Capitalisation with annual impairment unchanged. It is to include the value of purchased goodwill at its original price, and only make a charge to the income statement when it is impaired. For example, if a company buy plant which had a resale value of 5% of the cost ¼Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢then depreciation should be 95% after it starts to use. Its not sensible, the charge should be over the life of the product. Writing off directly to reserves in the year of acquisition It is wrong to writing off the cost of the goodwill directly to reserves in the year of acquisition. Because at acquisition, the loss in value of the good which should be in income statement will does not happen. It happened over a long time and the goodwill decreases with time. Writing off directly to the income statement in the year of acquisition It is wrong to write off directly to the income statement in the year of acquisition. Because the loss in value of the goodwill does not happen at acquisition, it is over a longer period. Amortising the goodwill over its expected life It is a good way to make the charge in the income statement. For many companies, a life of about five years may be suitable, but some have much longer life. It is simple to us straight-line amortisation. The advantages are more in earlier years than later years. It could use actual sales/expected total sales. It is difficult but accounts still this accounting method, which need to make some judgements when value the items in the balance sheet. Lets use McDonalds and Wendys as an example. McDonalds decided to buy Wendy, spend a total of $3,000,000,000. Since the book value of Wendys is only $1,000,000,000, and McDonalds paid $3,000,000,000, McDonalds paid a premium of $2,000,000,000 which is going to the balance sheet as goodwill. It should be amortized for 40 years. It means that every year, 1/40 of the goodwill amount should be subtracted from McDonalds earnings, therefore by the 40th year, there is no goodwill left on the balance sheet. b. Goodwill is recognised as an asset at acquisition. Initially measurement. Purchased goodwill should be capitalized as assets. Goodwill should be tested for impairment at least one year and treated as if it has an indefinite life. (a) Leases and insurance contracts should be based on the classification of contract terms and other factors at the beginning of the contract .Contingent liabilities of a business combination that are a present obligation and measured reliably can be recognized. Some assets and liabilities are required to be recognized or measured in accordance with other IFRSs, rather than at fair value. Indemnification assets are recognized and measured on a basis that is consistent with the item that is subject to the indemnification, even if that measure is not fair value. The acquirer should identify any difference between: the aggregate of the consideration transferred, non-controlling interest in the acquiree and, the acquisition-date fair value of the acquire rs previously held equity interest in the acquiree; and the net identifiable assets acquired. The difference is goodwill. If the acquire earn from a bargain purchase that gain is recorded in profit or loss. Sufficient information is disclosed in the financial statements to enable users to determine the impact of goodwill on the financial position and performance of the reporting entity Question 3: A related party transaction is defined as resources or obligations transfer between parent and subsidiary ¼Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢no matter if a price is charged. Examples of transactions that may lead related party disclosures are ¼Ãƒâ€¦Ã‚ ¡ purpose or sale of goods, property or other assets, providing or receiving services, agency arrangements, leasing arrangements, transfer of research and development, licence agreements, finance and management contracts. Disclosure of related party transactions in consolidated financial statements provides no useful information is unreasonable. There are some inter-company transactions which should be adjusted in consolidated financial statements in order to not double count the asset or liabilities as follows: Preferred shares and Bonds When preferred shares are held by a parent company in its subsidiary, which means they are acquired on the acquisition and have to in calculation of goodwill. The cost of parent company purchase the preferred shares are included in the cost of investment. So do the bonds, should be recorded as the net assets acquired by parent and included in the calculation of goodwil. But the part of preferred shares which are not required may be considered as minority interest, while for bonds, the parts which are not required are regarded as long term loan. (Elliott and Elliott 2007) Inter-company Dividends payable/receivable When dividend declared by subsidiary but not paid, then record in subsidiarys current liabilities as Dividend Payable and in Parents current Assets as dividend Receivable. In consolidated financial statement, the transactions should be cancelled off. Inter-company sales Transactions between the parent and subsidiary company can be seen from their respective financial statements, if the profit is only for one party but not for the group. These kinds of transactions have to be cancelled off in consolidated financial statement, because the transactions have not really happened. Its only the intra-group transactions, not transacted with the third party. For instance, when parent company sell  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡500 goods to its subsidiary company, there will be recorded  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡500 debtor to parent company and  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡500 creditor to subsidiary company, then both of them should be cancelled off. If the goods have not been sold on to a third party before the year-end, the profit should be eliminated when preparing the consolidated financial statement. The adjustments are reducing retaining earning and reducing the inventory. For an example, the cost of goods of the parent company was  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡600 ¼Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢th en parent company sold to its subsidiary company for  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡800, it seems that parent company have a profit of  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡200. But half of the goods are still in subsidiary companys inventory at the end of the year. So  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡400 ( ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡800* 1/2) of goods are still in company s balance sheet as inventory, which included a profit  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡100 ( ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡200*1/2 ). The parent company can get all the profit after the subsidiary company sold all the goods to a third party. And now  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡400 goods are still in companys balance sheet as inventory and the  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡100 is the unrealised profit. At last,  ¿Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¡100 should be removed from the group balance sheet by reducing parent companys retained earnings and subsidiary companys inventory. (Benedict and Elliott 2008) To conclude, it is necessary to disclose the related party transactions in consolidated financial statements and the information is us eful.