Applied Linguistics World Englishes

Description

Write an essay on World Englishes. The files show the requirements. I would like the essay to be on Politics and show how unequal the use of American English is now compared to British English, i.e. because of American films, songs etc.
The other files are some of the coursebooks

This is a 6,000-word assignment (+/- 10% tolerance)

Instructions

Choose one of the themes on page 3
Review the literature relevant to the theme of your
Discuss your theme with reference to a setting (which can be as large as a whole world region or as small as a particular community) with which you are familiar (e.g. because you currently live/work or have lived/worked there, it is the place where you come from, ) This means that you have to explain how the issues you discuss how relevant and what implications they have to the part of the world of your choice.

NB: The themes above are not mutually excluding, but are to be considered points of particular emphasis.

How to structure your work

The structure of your work should look like a funnel. That is, it should move from the general (broad) to the specific (narrow). This means, you should start by discussing your theme in general terms, primarily by dis- cussing literature and main concepts/issues related to it and, and then shift your focus towards the context of your choice, saying how those concepts/issues are relevant there. It would be a good idea (but not essen- tial), if you included a bit of primary research in the more contextualised section of your work. This won’t need to reveal significant findings, of course, but it could be an interesting trial run for a possible dissertation. Also, it would make your work more interesting and, hopefully, fun.

Evaluation

The assignment will be marked according to:

Evidence of familiarity with relevant literature – 25%
Evidence of knowledge of fundamental principles in World Englishes – 25%
Contextualised discussion of those principles– 30%
Adherence to referencing conventions (Harvard/APA) – 15%
General neatness and presentation – 5%

Band descriptors for marking criteria

	excellent	good	fair	just passable	poor
familiarity with literature	Ample evidence of familiarity with the relevant WE literature.	Good familiarity with the WE literature, with occasional key texts not referred to where relevant.	Adequate familiarity with the WE literature, although not very comprehensive.	Some familiarity with WE literature, but incomplete, especially as regards key texts and scholars.	Very little or no familiarity with the WE literature.
Principles of WE	Comprehensive knowledge of the issues, concerns and proposals within the WE field.	Good knowledge overall of the issues, concerns and proposals in WE, with some inaccuracy and/or incompleteness.	Evidence of adequate familiarity with the WE field in general, if with some visible imperfection.	Familiarity with the WE field can be evinced but is rather fragmentary.	Very little or no evidence of familiarity with the main issues, concerns and proposals in the WE field.
Contextualised	Perceptive, cogent and relevant analysis and discussion, very well connected with relevant literature	Good analysis and discussion overall, well connected to relevant literature. Occasional weaker arguments.	Adequate analysis and discussion. Arguments not always very strongly made. It may rely excessively on secondary sources.	Some interesting comments made, analysis and discussion rather weak, succinct and/or heavily reliant on secondary sources.	Very little or no personal analysis and discussion. Very weak arguments.
referencing	In-text references to a range of sources used where relevant. Accurate format.	In-text references used well, but at times not included where they should be. Accurate format with few minor errors.	In-text references used fairly well, but not always. Range not as wide as it could be. Some inaccuracies in the format.	Some in-text references used, but too few and not always in relevant points. Limited range of sources. Errors in the format.	Very few or no in-text references used. Serious errors in the format.
presentation	No typos. Very clear use of headings and subheadings. No ‘widow’ headings.	Only very occasional typos. Clear use of headings and subheadings. Only very occasional ‘widow’ headings.	A few typos here and there. Adequate use of headings and subheadings. A few ‘widow’ headings.	Many typos. Headings are used but not always very clearly. A number of ‘widow’ headings.	Many careless typos. No use of headings. Generally untidy presentation.

NB: ‘widow headings’ are headings that are at the bottom of a page, with no writing underneath them.

Continue to order Get a quote

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.