You are on page 1of 2

ENGW 3304 Miguel de Almansa Peso Peer Review Unit 1

Peer Review Unit 1: Seung Ha Lee

This piece of writing was overall well written and informative. The style and language in

which it was written were adequate to the desired type of reader, which is a non-specialist

in the Finance. I have a good overall impression on the grammar, punctuation and

elaboration of ideas. The text reads fluidly despite small improvable sentences, and ideas

are presented clearly and concisely.

The most important positive point of this piece of writing is that it effectively

addressed Unit Ones prompt. Seung Ha clearly described the key elements of

InvestmentNews discourse characteristics and gave his opinion on how professionals in

the field comunicate with each other. The paper states the aim of the website from the

beginning, which sets the tone for easy reading at later parts of the text. In the same way,

Seung Ha is also concrete in describing the overall funtion of the article, which adds even

more to the clarity of the paper.

However, I see in it two main areas of improvement.

The first and most important mistake in the text is that it would require a more

engaging style to make the reader more interested in InvestmentNews. Finance is often a

hard field to understand, and it becomes sterile and unwelcoming if it is not presented in a

reader-friendly way. This article could be extremely enriched by a few more interesting

examples, colourful adjectives and other stylistic elements. It can be seen that Seung Ha

intended this article to be extremely objective, and that goal is perfectly achieved, but one

can be both engaging and informative at the same time.

Secondly, the text lacks a strong conclusion. Seung Has article seems to finish

abruptly without giving the reader a final overarching thought to think about. In my

opinion, it is essential for every text to leave a lasting impression, a footprint that will
ENGW 3304 Miguel de Almansa Peso Peer Review Unit 1

provoke one last thought on the reader. This can be a clear summary of the ideas presented,

a follow-up question worth answering in another essay, a specialists quote, a revealing

anecdote or a humorous (but relevant) comment. In this case, it could have been a few

sentences supporting the opinion that this website constitutes a form of expression for a

discourse community made up of Finance professionals, and that these professionals

communicate with each other in the community by presenting facts objectively and without

decoration of any kind.

Minor additional recommendations are to avoid long subordinate sentences, to

clearly make the goal of paragraphs known to the reader and to explain what acronyms

stand for (i.e. IMO). As mentioned above, the reader is not necessarily a Finance specialist,

and could easily struggle with terms that are alien to him/her.

After the careful analysis of Seung Has text, I can conclude that I admire the

thoughtfulness of his ideas and the precision of his language. It has been especially

interesting to see how Seung Ha has adopted the same style in which his discourse

community exchanges information: raw, undecorated objectiveness that highlights facts

clearly and concisely.