How have language conventions been used to represent an idea/s in the extract?

The text Kafka on the Shore uses many language conventions such as the conversational
tone and grammatical errors to represent the idea of naivety surrounding the main character
of the text. As the protagonist explains what he is packing, he tells the reader that he takes
‘a small, old gold lighter’ just because he ‘likes the design and feel of it’. This implies that he
is not just packing for practicality, but also for illogical and childish reasons. The action of
taking an item of such value from his father without asking also highlights the lack of love or
generosity in their relationship of the two, and suggests that their relationship is not open,
and implies that the father may not be very loving or generous. These qualities of the
fatherwhich contributes to the naivety of the main character, as it is evident that there is no
guardian figure to guide him to what is right and wrong. Furthermore, in the third paragraph
of the story, the character makes a grammatical error, saying ‘me and my older sister’
instead of my older sister and I, which displays his immaturity. This quote grammatical error
makes the character appear more child-like, as grammar errors are often made by children,
who are lesss conscious of their grammatical usage and are more egocentric, with the
prioritisation of “me” as the subject not practiced in their language yet. The error, which can
be easily fixed by another who is has more knowledge in English, insinuates that there is no
one in his life who is available to teach him or care for him properly. Kafka on the Shore uses
tone and grammatical error to convey the naivety of the protagonist of the story.

The idea of neglect is represented in the story through the use ofusing contrast and
symbolism. As the character is packing to leave home, the reader is introduced to the
character and his father’s watches- ‘my father’s favourite sea-dweller oyster Rolex … my
cheap plastic Casio’. His father’s watch is a Rolex, which is a brand notorious for being
expensive and luxurious and suggests that he is very wealthy and well off. Contrastingly, the
protagonist’s watch is described as cheap and plastic, which may be surprising to the reader,
since if the father has such an expensive watch, it is expected that the son would have
something nice too. The contrast between the two character’s watches suggests that the
main character is treated without much affection and pushed aside by his father. Further on
in the text, the protagonist describes the only photograph that his father kept, which is of
him and his sister from years ago.

In text 2, juxtaposition is used to represent the issue of poverty in Tijuana, Mexico. The
image shows a poor neighbourhood behind the newly constructed amazon facility, which in
contrast to it, looks more modern, fancy, and bright. The juxtaposition of the two causes
readers to question why some of the 21 million was not used toward the poor
neighbourhood, instead of the multi-million company amazon. The contrast is used to
highlight the issue of poor distribution of money, and how many well-off companies should
use it to do more meaningful things, instead of just trying to expand their profits. This is also
symbolised in the logo of the building, which stands out from the white walls. It is written in
black, which represents evil and corruption. Furthermore, the newly constructed building is
far taller and bigger than all the buildings in the neighbourhood combined, which displays
the difference in wealth and power of the two. The juxtaposition between the amazon
facility and the poor neighbourhood is utilised to represent the issue of poverty in Mexico
and criticise amazon for using their money in selfish ways.

The issue of poverty is further highlighted through the composition of the image, by utilising
salience and levels. Although the neighbourhood all blends in together, as it is all the same
colour and made up of very similar looking houses, the single car stands out to the reader,
and is a salience point. This may confuse the reader, as in contemporary society most people
own their own cars, but it is clear that in this neighbourhood, it is very rare, and that only
one of many households has the privilege of owning a car. Compared to the facility which
houses several trucks, the neighbourhood is starkly different. This also positions the
audience to feel emotions disbelief, as something they may take for granted- like their car is
depicted as a luxury from the perspective of the residents of Tijuana. Additionally, the facility
seems to tower over the neighbourhood, and is at a higher level than all houses combined.
This towering height conveys that Amazon has more money, influence and power than the
village, and points out the irony that a foreign company has this capability. The issue of
poverty is represented through the salience and levels of text 2.

Text 2 effectively utilises figurative language such as personification, hyperbole and simile to
depict a critical attitude towards mining in Australia. While describing the gold mine site in
Williamstown- Super Pit, the author uses personification to depict the mine as a negative
force who ‘gobbles up’ cars and ‘is swallowing up the town’. This personification paints the
Super Pit as a greedy person who is taking over people’s lives, which conveys to the reader
what the residents of Williamstown may feel. The townspeople are having to give up their
livelihoods and houses just so that Australians can mine more gold. The negative way in
which Australian greed is portrayed showcases the author’s critical attitude towards mining.
Furthermore, while Keren Calder is describing the effects that the gold mining industry has
on her house, she uses hyperbole and simile. She describes the air pollution in her home
and compares it to ‘when someone has emptied a vacuum cleaner’ all over it. This simile
enables the reader to relate to Keren better and understand her dislike toward mining. She
then describes the noise in her home, which she says is ‘so close you think a miner’s going to
pop up the plughole’. This hyperbole is entertaining and humorous and is able to help the
audience imagine the horrible sounds which further emphasises how she holds a negative
attitude towards mining. Thus, Text 2 employs figurative language such as personification,
hyperbole and simile to highlight the critical attitude toward mining in Australia.

The passage from Kathy Marks’ Tears of the Sun manipulates persuasive devices and tone to
underline the condemning tone toward mining in Australia. The text has a slightly urgent
tone, which can be seen through the long syntax and emotive language that the author uses.
In the first paragraph, Marks uses emotive language to illustrate the effects of mining on the
natural landscape. ‘Gigantic holes gouged out of the earth’, paints an image of violence in
the minds of the readers. This also influences them to unconsciously perceive the mining
industry in a bad light, as evil has connotations of violence and destruction. The strong
language also showcases the horrible impacts on the environment. Ethos is also utilised
effectively to persuade the audience of how mad mining is for the natural environment of
Australia. The opinion of Tony Cooke- who is a professor at John Curtin, is utilised to
encourage readers to take on the critical attitude toward mining. He predicted that ‘some
households will have to move as mining activity creeps closer’. The audience will trust his
opinion, as he is an educated professor, and be more inclined to agree with the negative
attitude. In this way, text 2 manipulates persuasive devices and emotive language to create a
condemning attitude toward mining in Kalgoorlie.