<p>I said the rhetorical devices were diction, metaphors, and repetition.</p>
<p>what was your assertion that you were proving</p>
<p>it means nothing if it didnt back up your assertion</p>
<p>I'm trying to remember as many MC questions and write them down... I was unsure about quite a few :/ Especially the last paragraph.</p>
<p>For the second essay, i said parallelism, reasoning and...get this...syntactical variety. I said that the use of one long sentence for most of the passage emphasized the first and last sentences. Coarse, I got my assertion completely wrong since i didnt notice any satire in the passage, like some of the other posters on this site did. My assertion was basically the first sentence of the passage all over again.</p>
<p>how much do you think we will get crushed for no satire mentioning</p>
<p>I didn't notice satire, nor did the people I know that I've asked...</p>
<p>I only used imagery for the 2nd one... "negative imagery"... :/</p>
<p>It was only 2 pages...:-(((((</p>
<p>I totally SKIPPED the last reading passage. It was disgusting.</p>
<p>I know. I answered a few questions about the last reading passage.</p>
<p>I agree with mcz, I'm pretty sure there was nothing satirical about that passage...</p>
<p>^I'm glad you agree.</p>
<p>i didn't see any satire either....until the last sentence, which i then included.</p>
<p>Yeah, I didn't sense ANY satire/irony. It just sounded like a guy who really wanted to get across his point that life without wealth is hell.</p>
<p>I thought #2 was the easiest by far. It said it in the first line; I noticed no satire at all.</p>
<p>I'm glad, then.</p>
<p>Hope u guys are right!!!!:):):):):):):):)</p>
<p>Who actually saw this whole satire idea anyway? Tell us where it was.</p>
<p>There was definite irony in the second one. The first sentence contradicts the next, and the diction in the last sentence conflicts directly with the rest of the diction. It was not satire, however... I thought it wasn't because it was direct.</p>
<p>I actually thought that the author was talking about himself at part of it, and I believe that was the best thing I managed to do in the essay. </p>
<p>Oh, and I mentioned inductive reasoning because the examples go from general to specific.</p>
<p>Yeah i want to agree with some of the above. Remember the first statement. The first line.</p>
<p>There was absolutely no satire. The beginning of the second sentence said said something about a man who desires money. The author pretty much is against money, as it is a deceptive and dominatory force in ones life, and society burdens people to feel the need for money. I'm good at rhetorical analysis, but terrible at argumentation (1st & 2nd essays I thought were easy, 3rd I blew off because I used absolutely no examples). However, I don't know how I truly did as I got 6 hours of sleep the night before, after having been up for 38 hours.</p>
<p>BTW, anyone who's worrying they didn't write enough with TWO pages, I never write more than 1.25 pages and I almost always get 8's (and my teacher is an AP grader)...and to people who say that they mention about the authors diction, syntax, etc, if you use those words do not expect to do well. You should have argued the authors purpose, not the strategies, as those will naturally fit into a well-written essay focused on the purpose.</p>
<p>me</p>
<p>last sentence </p>
<p>wiseacres whill give the dead a monument at a high expense (while he lived thru life in poverty) and laments his genuis lost to misfortune (while the public is cold, materialistic, and envious when he lived)</p>
<p>i'm prob. totally off tho.</p>
<p>nameless1 I said the same thing about the emphasis on the first and last sentences! Wow that makes me excited lol. </p>
<p>Lol I actually read the essay but didn't focus at all on any of the specific things he said...I just treated it as a big list that was essentially a set of parallel examples with hyperbole. One of my friends talked about the progression of ridiculousness through the examples.</p>