- What is the main issue or problem that the author addresses? 2. What is the authors central claim, argument or thesis? How convincing is it? 3. What parts of the text were the most intriguing, helpful or problematic to you? (Do not simply list a series of points) 4. In your own voice, weigh the arguments and evaluate the evidence in the text. What did you learn that was important to you? 5. Conclude with at least 2 questions you would like to discuss.
he ELAN software has been use to mark and annotate all the variables in the question (see Appendix A). Each variable has been given a value. The variables have also been marked within the categories i.e. “General American English” or “African America Vernacular English”. For example, if there is an annotation with an (ING) variable in the speech, the categorical annotation marks the annotation as either GAm or African America Vernacular English. The marks give us the ratio that helps distinguish between the two categories. The ratios will give us a statistical view of the number of occurrences of the variables in the speech. Furthermore, the paper also investigates the vowel used in the speech in a limited scope. (Detert, Rasmussen and Kristensen, p.8) Results The research is focused on finding whether the variants indexical of African America Vernacular English is due to natural flow or is triggered intentionally. The aim was to determine whether there is a relative progression in the use of African America Vernacular English variants in the speeches as it would reject the hypothesis i.e. to use African America Vernacular English for achieving strategic goals by President Obama. To analyze the fractures, each speech was divided into a ten minute intervals. Unfortunately the technique did not provide an accurate evidence of the relative progression i.e. highlighting the (HAPPY) tokens by retrieving only the orthographic –y words did not draw any significant progression in variants. Furthermore, the retrieval of (HAPPY) vowels at the end of an utterance which is followed by a short pause did not draw an significant result too. Despite the fact that each speech and each ten minute interval has been closely analyzed for number of possibilities, the author could not find any relative progression of the use of African America Vernacular English in the speeches. Therefore the technique will not be pursued any further. Any other important factor that influences the use of variants indexical of African America Vernacular English is the topic of the speech. In order to find out the influence of the topic on the ratio of the African America Vernacular English to Gam variants, the research divided the dataset into five different topics. The five categories in which the topics were divided are: African Americans; references from Bible; The United States of America; personal thoughts and experience of President Obama and the category according to the theme of the speech. It is easy to evaluate and analyze the hypothesis when the speech has the same topic of discussion while the audience is different. One can easily point out whether a topic can trigger the use of variants of the two variations in question. It is also the aim of the analysis to connect the overall findings of different to help make it possible the retrieval of the two variants based on the topic and the evaluation of whether certain topics cause the use of high or lower number of variants indexical of African America Vernacular English. Unfortunately, the evaluation reveals that no topic provoked any significant use of variants indexical of African America Vernacular English. Just like the previous retrieval of the (HAPPY) vowels in orthographic revealed a higher number of African America Vernacular English variants, analyzing (HAPPY) vowels for the topics also revealed higher number of African America Vernacular English variants. This analysis did not show any significant results. In the end, it can be said that for the present research the topics were divided very broadly. However in future, detailed division of the topics can produce better results. However the hypothesis of the use of higher frequency of African America Vernacular English variants can be impacted by the topic of the speech will not be pursued further. In the following section, the author will present the number of the analysis and the ratios provided for the results. Discussion This section presents the yields on the evaluation of the four speeches of President Obama. The analysis done will be to answer the question whether Obama shift style based on the audience and whether Obama uses the African America Vernacular English style in front of the Black audience or not. In the discussion, we will try to connect the internal finding of the speeches with the external context. It is said that the speech is greatly influenced by the social context of the speaker or the speech. Therefore for the evaluation the audience of the speech in taken into consideration and President Obama’s personal background can also help in providing insight into whether Obama uses African America Vernacular English variants when delivering speech in front of the African Americans. (Bell, p.141) If one tries to evaluated President Obama’s speech against the list of unique phonological African America Vernacular English characteristic, one can find out that the above analysis will not be able to provide proof to term Obama’s speech style an African American Vernacular English. By using a list of phonological African America Vernacular English characteristic to measure Obama’s speech will ignore the fact that style construction is a process of bricolage. (Eckert, p.4) The idea is to>