Political Parties Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Political Parties - Research Paper Example The normal people in the general population belong to this party electorate. These supporters or those who identify with a particular political party often show a strong tendency to vote for the candidate of that particular party. In addition, they register themselves as members of that party. These supporters tend to support all the policies of their political party blindly. There are various opinions among various scholars regarding party identification. While some opine that party identification is the result of people’s attachment to certain core political values, some others claim that party identification leads to political core values in an individual. In either way, political identification is an essential element in modern national politics. According to people like Green, palmquist, and Schickler, party identification is the sense of personal attachment one feels to a particular party as a result of the closeness he or she has to the social groups associated with tha t party (132). To illustrate, people often decide their political party taking into consideration how they feel about the social group which makes the base of that particular political party. The study by Goren proves that party identification is stable and rather long lasting (882). Admittedly, the first benefit of party identification is the proper representation of people’s requirements and their satisfaction. ... Secondly, though there is the claim that party identification leads to partisan politics, there is the counter argument that party identification leads to a greater degree of unity. For example, Larry shows that an individual’s value selection is greatly influenced by their party affiliation (122). That means a large chunk of population, which believes in a particular political party, tends to blindly support what the party propagates. It will help in reducing individual differences in opinion to a great extent. This is evident from Feldman’s report that party identification leads to greater voter turnout in elections (431). That means identification to a political party encourages participation in democratic process. As Fiorina opines, party identification is the best way to ensure effective running of democracies. For instance, such political parties are the only platform for candidates to reach the masses in a short time (89). Without the presence of parties, the ent ire system will be in chaos as so many candidates might turn up and the population will be divided into so many divisions based on the demands of each small section. Thus, political system becomes an important aspect of a successful democracy. Along with this, political parties play a great role in coordinated social interaction. Forgetting minor differences in individual perceptions, people gather under the banner of political parties and promote group survival and welfare activities instead of individual needs. Finally, in times of trouble and complex social situations, parties provide cues that guide people. Thus, party identification is an important element of party system and political participation, and these both are essential for democracy. 2. Developments in party Identification

12 Angry Men Essay Example for Free

12 Angry Men Essay In 12 angry men there are many themes that are present one of the major themes that is found was present is, one determined and skilled individual can wield a lot of influence. Juror number eight is a â€Å"quiet, thoughtful, gentle man† he seesall points of the argument and wants to find the truth. On the other hand juror number three is â€Å"a very strong, very forceful, extremely opinionated man† his opinion is all that matters and if other people don’t agree with it they are automatically wrong. All of the characters in this story help develop the theme but in my opinion jurors number three and eight play a very large role in it. Juror three is a very outward with his opinion from the beginning. He lets everyone know what he thinks and that no one will be able to change his mind. In his mind his opinion is the most important thing and no one can say anything against it. When others try to look at all the facts and have a discussion he finds that it is pointless and a waste of his time because he will not change his vote from guilty and that means everyone else must be the ones to agree with him. See more: Satirical elements in the adventure of Huckleberry Finn essay This juror is a man who is very â€Å"easily excitable† as the say in the book many times. He will snap at any moment when someone else is trying to share their opinion just because they say something that doesn’t support what he thinks. His anger plays a large part in developing him as a character. There are many jurors that don’t want to deal with him and are scared to speak up to say what they think because there is no telling the next time number three will start to yell at them. The other characters see him as an angry man who is too stubborn to listen to what anyone else has to say. In this book juror three often explodes into extremely loud yelling while everyone else is trying to keep calm and decide on a fair verdict on the case. At one point during the story juror number eight is trying to calmly explain the facts and evidence that proves juror threes opinion wrong and instead of calmly listening like everyone else he tries to attack juror eight; having to be held back by three of the oher men. This shows a lot about his character as a man. He is a loud man set in his ways that has lived with one opinion on the situation nd isnt willing to change it. The boy who is being charged with allegedly killing his father is black and that causes a lot of mixed opinions within the jury room. Juror three doesn’t seem to like anyone who is black or from a certain area of town which is not the best. There is a larhe amount of prejudice in this book not only from juror three,  and it seems to alter a lot of the thoughts of some of the jurors. The way that he tries to influence people to be on his side is not very effective at all, no one wants to listen to him because all he does is yell and scream at them without backing up what hes saying with any facts. Juror number eight also has a set opinion from the beginning of the story but he has a completely different way of approaching things. He is very quiet and keeps his thoughts to himself at the beginning. When it gets to talking about facts and evidence he has a lot to say but doesn’t try and force the other jurors to agree with him. He only wants to fully discuss all of the information that has been presented to try and determine what the fair verdict should be. At first I don’t think he was even 100% sure that he wanted to vote not guilty he did it mostly because a boys life is at atake and he couldn’t let that go without talking about it. Juror eight is a calm man who is very nice and tries his best to state what he thinks is right but not do it in a forceful way. He isnt saying that there is only his opinion on the case but he also doesn’t say that what anyone else thinks is wrong. This man wanted only to try and come to find the truth instead of just saying that the boy is guilty without full examining everything. Juror eight took the time to look at the facts and put personal opinions aside which is the compete opposite of what juror number three did. The way that he stayed very calm even when everyone else was yelling at each other is one thing that I think really helped influence othe r jurors to change their vote. Even after jjuror wight said only a few things they tooka asecond vote and he already had convinced someone to agree with his view on the case. The way he could calmly debate what everyone else was gettinginto large arguments about without changing from the very calm and not outspoken person that he is was a large factor in amking other people change their vote. He brought up very valid points that no one else would have thought twice about without him. By keeping his personal feelings on the boys race etc he was able to come up with a better end result than that of everyone else. He is a very influencial man who was really only looking for the truth in a case that is made up of a lot of lies and exxagerations. Juror eight and juror three might seem like complete opposites who could never be thought of as having some things alike. This though is not completely true. Yes, they have very different personalities and ways of going about explaining their  opinions but there is some similarity. They both have aclear stance on whether or not they think the boy is guilty. Also they both want to convince the rest of the jury that their opinion is right. Even through all the arguments and yelling that was done they do have a couple of things that are similar between them. The way that everyone in this book especially juror eight debated his point shows how someone who is determined and who knows what they are saying can convince many to believe their side. Juror eight in the end got everyone to vote not guilty because of the way he went about explaining his point. He didn’t yell and just say that his opinion was right just because he thought so, there was evidence to back it up that no one else would have seen if it weren’t for him.

The Pleasure Principle in Perraults Little Red Riding Hood and Brother

Sigmund Freud, commonly referred to as "the father of psychoanalysis", is best known for his studies of sexual desire, repression, and the unconscious mind. Freud came to see personality as having three aspects, all of which work together to produce our complex behaviours: the Id (â€Å"It†), the Ego (â€Å"I†) and the Superego (â€Å"Over-I†). His psychoanalytic theories are used today in many different fields, including literature analysis. â€Å"Little Red Riding Hood†, written by Perrault in the 17th century, as well as in â€Å"The Little Red Cap†, written by the Brothers Grimm in the 19th century, are both famous folktales turned fairy tales about a young girl’s encounter with a cross-dressing wolf. The tale makes the clearest contrast between the safe world of the village and the dangers of the forest. It also seems to be a strong morality tale, teaching children not to â€Å"wander off the path†. However, when applied to both Perrault's and the Grimm Brothers’ tale, we see that these tales are dominated by the Id, the function of the irrational and emotional part in the mind. The authors are trying to show us that being impulsive and basically giving in to your Id is not wise and might eventually lead you to your own doom. This is apparent in both tales, where Little Red Riding Hood gives into her desires and impulses by disobeying her mother and speaking to the wolf, whereas the wolf has more self-control and is able to restrain impulses. At the beginning of the story, the first thing Little Red Riding Hood’s mother tells her is â€Å"Here is a piece of cake and a bottle of wine. Take them to your grandmother. She is sick and weak, and they will do her well. Mind your manners and give her my greetings. Behave yourself on the way, and do not leave... ...delaying of gratification. Even though the wolf wants to eat the little girl, he realises he will enjoy it later when the time is right, when the risks are lower. After waiting for the right moment and delaying his desires and impulses, the wolf’s Id takes over and he not only eats the little girl, but the grandmother as well. In the end, both Little Red Riding Hood and the wolf are guilty of giving into their Id. The moral of the story warns the reader that there are wolves in the real world that are just like the wolf in the story. These â€Å"wolves† are just preying on young, impressionable young girls in order to fulfill their sexual desires. These little girls are not just victims though. They are also able to act on their desires and be bad little girls. Everyone is capable of giving into temptation as well as what is not necessarily the right thing to do.

Article Summary: Why Did the Bank of Canada Emerge in 1935?

Wednesday, October 5, 2011 HIST 113: Article Summary: Why did the Bank of Canada Emerge in 1935? The article, Why did the Bank of Canada Emerge in 1935, written by Micheal Bordo and Angela Redish, discusses the creation of the Bank of Canada in 1935. In a time where other westernized countries had already existing central banking systems, this article questions why the Bank of Canada emerged in 1935, and the authors question why it even emerged at all. The article looks at three major reasons for the creation of the Bank of Canada.It emerged because it was just another process in the evolution of the banking system; it was a substitute for the Gold Standard, and that political pressures/influences that surrounded it. The authors attempt to disprove the first two reasons, contrary to what many economists have claimed as reasons for the creation of a central bank in Canada, and offer evidence to support the claim that the Bank of Canada emerged due to political pressures. ?First, econo mists have assumed that the Bank of Canada came about in 1935 due the evolutionary process of the banking system.In many countries, a central bank is considered a â€Å"lender of last resort† to provide aid to citizens in times of liquidity crises and financial difficulty, enhancing a sense of control and balances of risks. The authors ague that this is not an acceptable argument, since the Bank of Canada rather came about as a favor to government. During the 1900’s, Canada had various banking institutions, with the Bank of Montreal being one in particular. It was able to fulfill some of the duties that a central bank would normally do.In addition, the concept of nationwide banking minimized the impact that liquidity and uncertainty had on consumer confidence and risks of crises. As a result, the emergence of the Bank of Canada was not influenced by its natural process of evolution, since institutions and services existed that fulfilled some of the responsibilities tha t a central bank would have. ? The second reason attributed to the emergence of the Bank of Canada was that it served as an important service to maintain convertibility to the gold standard.With the removal of the gold standard in Canada, the Bank of Canada would serve as an anchor to the money supply, the price level, and the exchange rate in its absence. With this in mind, a central bank with the ability to control money supply would yield differences in the way prices behaved without a central bank; therefore, data would reveal fluctuations in regression residuals for the time period near 1935, when the Bank of Canada emerged. However, empirical time-series data, looking back from 1920 to 1940, shows that macroeconomic variables were affected very little.In fact, any time eras where there are fluctuations in the data can be attributed to other events and circumstances. The third reason attributing for the emergence of the Bank of Canada was due to political forces that acted upon it. Due to the effect of the Great Depression, trust in the traditional market was decreased on domestic level. Citizens had less faith in traditional market system mechanisms and this left a requirement for the government to provide institutions and services.Pressures from the influence of the global community pushed for the emergence of a central bank because international monetary cooperation was said to be dependent on the existence of Central Banks. In addition, due to Canada’s recent independence from Britain in 1931, the emergence of the bank was a part of a general program to create more sovereign institutions to help Canada create its own identity. A banking system, where decisions regarding money supply were made independently by Canada, was something that emphasized sovereignty.

Stylistic: Public Speaking and Oratorical Style

Linguistic peculiarities of publicistic style The publicistic style is used in public speeches and printed public works which are addressed to a broad audience and devoted to important social or political events, public problems of cultural or moral character. It falls into three varieties, each having its own distinctive features. Unlike other formal styles, the publicist style has spoken varieties, in particular, the  oratorical  sub-style. The development of radio and television has brought into being a new spoken variety â€Å" the radio and television commentary. The other two are theessay  and  articles  in newspapers, journals and magazines.The general aim of the publicist style is to exert influence on public opinion, to convince the reader or the listener that the interpretation given by the writer or the speaker is the only correct one and to cause him to accept the point of view expressed in the speech, essay or article not merely by logical argumentation, but b y emotional appeal as well. 1. Explain the differences and similarities between publicistic and scientific prose style. This brain-washing function is most effective in oratory, for here the most powerful instrument of persuasion is brought into play: the human voice.Due to its characteristic combination of logical argumentation and emotional appeal, the publicistic style has features in common with the style of scientific prose or official documents, on the one hand, and that of emotive prose, on the other. Its coherent and logical syntactic structure, with an expanded system of connectives and its careful paragraphing, makes it similar to scientific prose. Its emotional appeal is generally achieved by the use of words with emotive meaning, the use of imagery and other stylistic devices as in emotive prose.The publicistic style also has some elements of emotionally coloured colloquial style as the author has no need to make their speech impersonal (as in scientific or official styl e), but, on the contrary, he or she tries to approximate the text to lively communication, as though they were talking to people in direct contact. 2. Explain the typical features of oratory and speeches. The oratorical style is the oral subdivision of the publicistic style. The most obvious purpose of oratory is persuasion, and it requires eloquence.This style is evident in speeches on political and social problems of the day, in orations and addresses on solemn occasions as public weddings, funerals and jubilees, in sermons and debates and also in the speeches of counsel and judges in courts of law. The sphere of application of oratory is confined to appeal to an audience and therefore crucial issues in such spheres as science, art, or business relations are not touched upon. Direct contact with the listeners permits the combination of the syntactical, lexical and phonetic peculiarities of both the written and spoken varieties of language.In its leading feature, however, the orato rical style belongs to the written variety of language, though it is modified by the oral form of the utterance and the use of gestures. Certain typical features of the spoken variety of speech present in this style are: a) direct address to the audience by special formulas (Ladies and Gentlemen! ; My Lords! â€Å" in the House of Lords;  Mr. Chairman! ; Honourable Members! ; Highly esteemed members of the conference! ; or, in less formal situation,  Dear Friends! ; or, with a more passionate colouring,My Friends! ).Expressions of direct address can be repeated in the course of the speech and may be expressed differently (Mark you! Mind! ). b) special formulas at the end of the speech to thank the audience for their attention (Thankyou very much; Thank you for your time). c) the use of the 1st person pronoun  we; 2nd person pronoun  you:  We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienabl e Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness ¦(Th. Jefferson,  The Declaration of Independence). ) the use of contractions  Iâ„ ¢ll; wonâ„ ¢t; havenâ„ ¢t; isnâ„ ¢t  and others:  Weâ„ ¢re talking about healing our nation. Weâ„ ¢re not talking about politics. Weâ„ ¢re all here to do everything in our power to save lives ¦ Iâ„ ¢m here to thank you for hearing that call. Actually, I shouldnâ„ ¢t be thanking you, I should be thanking a Higher Power for giving you the call  (George W. Bush). e) features of colloquial style such as asking the audience questions as the speaker attempts to reach closer contact:  Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself.Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to  govern him? (Th. Jefferson), or calling upon the audience:  Let us then, with courage and confidence, pursue our own federal and republican principles  (ibid). Like the colloquial style, oratory is usually characterized by emotional colouring and connotations, but there is a difference. The emotional colouring of the publicist style is lofty â€Å" it may be solemn, or ironic, but it cannot have the lowered connotations (jocular, rude, vulgar, or slangy) found in colloquial speech.The vocabulary of speeches is usually elaborately chosen and remains mainly in the sphere of high-flown style: Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived and so dedicated in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live.It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this (A. Lincoln, The Gettysburg Address). The stylistic devices employed in the oratorical style are determined by the conditions of communication. If the desire of the speaker is to rouse the audience and to keep it in suspense, he will use various traditional stylistic devices. Stylistic devices are closely interwoven and mutually complementary thus building up an intricate pattern. For example, an antithesis is framed by parallel constructions, which, in their turn, are accompanied by repetition, while a climax can be formed by repetitions of different kinds.But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate â€Å" we cannot consecrate â€Å" we cannot hallow  this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated  here to t he unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.It is  rather for us to be dedicated  to the great task remaining before us â€Å" that from these honoured dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion â€Å" that we here highly resolve that these dead  shall not have died in vainâ€Å" that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom  Ã¢â‚¬Å" and that the government of the people,  by the people, for the people,  shall not perish  from the earth  (A. Lincoln). As the audience rely only on memory, the speaker often resorts to repetition to enable his listeners to follow im and retain the main points of the speech. Repetition is also resorted to in order to persuade the audience, to add weight to the speakerâ„ ¢s opinion. The following extract from the speech of the American Confederate general, A. P. Hill, on the ending of the Civil War in the U. S. A. is an exampl e of anaphoric repetition: It is high time  this people had recovered from the passions of war. It is high time  that counsel were taken from statesmen, not demagogues ¦Ã‚  It is high time  the people of the North and South understood each other and adopted means to inspire confidence in each other.A mere repetition of the same idea and in the same linguistic form may bore the audience and destroy the speaker-audience contact, therefore synonymous phrase repetition is used instead, thus filling up the speech with details and embellishing it, as in this excerpt from a speech on Robert Burns: For Burns exalted our race, he hallowed Scotland and the Scottish tongue. Before his time we had for a long period been scarcely recognized; we had been falling out of recollection of the world. From the time of the Union of the Crowns, and still more from the legislative union, Scotland had lapsed into obscurity.Except for an occasional riot, or a Jacobite rising, her existence was almos t forgotten. (All those different phrases simply repeat the idea nobody knew us, Scots, before). Repetition can be regarded as the most typical stylistic device of the English oratorical style. Almost any piece of oratory will have parallel constructions, antithesis, climax, rhetorical questions and questions-in-the-narrative. It will be no exaggeration to say that almost all typical syntactical devices can be found in English oratory. Questions are most frequent because they promote closer contact with the audience.The change of intonation breaks the monotony of the intonation pattern and revives the attention of the listeners: No? You donâ„ ¢t want to leave the U. N. to the Europeans and Russians? Then letâ„ ¢s stop bellyaching about the U. N. , and manipulating our dues, and start taking it seriously for what it is â€Å" a global forum that spends 95 percent of its energy endorsing the wars and peacekeeping missions that the U. S. wants endorsed, or taking on the thankle ss humanitarian missions that the U. S. would like done but doesnâ„ ¢t want to do itself. The U. N. actually spends only 5 percent of its time annoying the U. S.Not a bad deal! (Thomas L. Friedman. The New York Times, May 29, 2001) The desire of the speaker to convince and to rouse his audience results in the use of simile and metaphor, but these are generally traditional ones, as fresh and genuine stylistic devices may divert the attention of the listeners away from the main point of the speech. Besides, unexpected and original images are more difficult to grasp and the process takes time. In political speeches, the need for applause is paramount, and much of the distinctive rhetoric of a political speech is structured in such a way as to give the audience the maximum chance to applaud.One widely used technique is an adaptation of an ancient rhetorical structure â€Å" the three-part list: X, Y, and Z. These lists are not of course restricted to politics only:  signed, sealed and delivered; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; Tom, Dick, and Harry; the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; this, that, and the other. Such lists, supported by a strong rhythm and a clear rising + falling intonation sequence, convey a sense of rhetorical power, structural control, and semantic completeness. They are widely used in formal writing.And they are especially common in political speeches, where the third item provides a climax of expression which can act as a cue for applause. In an acclaimed study of speech and body language in political speeches, using videotaped data, specialists found such instances: * Governor Wallace:  and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever. * Norman Tebbit:  Labour will spend, and borrow and borrow, and tax and tax. * Tony Ben:  and they kill it secretly, privately, without debate. History and literature provide numerous examples: * Abraham Lincoln:  Government of the people, by the people, fo r the people. Mark Anthony:  Friends, Romans, Countrymen ¦ * Winston Churchill:  This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps the end of the beginning. And even crowds use tripartite sequences: Lone voice:  Maggie, Maggie, Maggie. Crowd:  In, in, in. Consider the prosodic pattern of a fragment of the speech delivered by Margaret Thatcher at the Conservative Party Conference in 1980. (Pauses are shown in seconds or tenth of a second; stressed words are underlined; pitch jumps are shown by arrows):  This week has demonstrated  (0,4)  that we are a  party  unitedin  ? ±Ã‚  purpose  (0,4),  strategy  (0,2) and  resolve.Audience:  Hear, hear  (8,0). (After M. Atkinson, 1984. ) In the House of Commons, as in other government chambers, the period set aside for MPs to put questions to ministers is a linguistic game  par excellence. The formal asking of a question is a chance to do several things â€Å" to focus public attention on an issue, express identity with a party political line, or cause trouble for the other sideâ„ ¢. It is a chance to get oneself noticed, settle old scores, or repay a constituency debt. Just occasionally, it is a real question, to which the questioner wishes to receive a real answer.Parliamentary questions are asked for a reason, which are often little to do with the semantic content of the question and more to do with the kind of confrontation which is taking place. Skilled politicians can resort to several techniques in order to evade an awkward question e. g. to ignore the question, to decline to answer it, or acknowledge it without answering it, etc. The questions politicians receive are rarely straightforward, but are preceded by a series of often unclear and controversial claims. This can be seen in the analysis of one question which was addressed to a cabinet minister during a radio interview.Well now â€Å" when Mr. Helistine protested at the cabinet meeting on December 12th â€Å" over the fact that Mrs. Thatcher had cancelled this meeting on December 13th â€Å" he raised a protest â€Å" which as you know â€Å" in his resignation statement he said â€Å" he said wasnâ„ ¢t recorded in the cabinet minutes â€Å" and now heâ„ ¢s gone back and said that he wants that protest recorded â€Å" can you say â€Å"as â€Å"as a bit of an expert on the constitution â€Å" probably more than a bit of an expert â€Å" can you honestly say â€Å" as a member of the cabinet â€Å" that you were happy that Mrs.Thatcher allowed proper discussion by all the cabinet in detail of this very important decision for defence? Elucidating the content of this question brought to light 20 possible issues, among them * Presuppositions for the validity of the question: There was a decision on defence. The decision was important. The cabinet did not properly discuss the decision ¦ * Assertions about others: Thatcher cancelled the cabinet dis cussion. Helistine protested the cancellation. Somebody omitted the protest from the record ¦ * Attributions about respondent: You are an expert on the constitution.You are a member of the cabinet ¦ * Propositions in question: Thatcher allowed discussion. Thatcher allowed discussion in detail ¦ * Questions to be answered: do you agree that some/all propositions are true? Can you agree that some/all propositions are true and be honest about it? * Yes * No Of course, no one would have reached cabinet minister rank who would use such one-word answers by way of reply. What the questioner will receive is better categorized as a response rather than an answer. 3. Explain the most characteristic language features of essay.This genre in English literature dates from the 16th century, and its name is taken from the short Essays (=experiments, attempts) by the French writer Montaigne, which contained his thoughts on various subjects. An essay is a literary composition of moderate length on philosophical, social or literary subjects, which preserves a clearly personal character and has no pretence to deep or strictly scientific treatment of the subject. It is rather a number of comments, without any definite conclusions.Consider an extract from Ben Johnson (16th century): Language most shows a man; speak, that I may see thee. It springs of the most retired and in most parts of us, and is the image of the parent of it, the mind. No glass renders a manâ„ ¢s form or likeness so true, as his speech, and, as we consider features and composition in a man, so words in language. Some men are tall and big, so some language is high and great. Then the words are chosen, the sound ample, the composition full, all grace, sinewy and strong.Some are little and dwarfs; so of speech, it is humble and low; the words are poor and flat; the members are periods thin and weak, without knitting or number. Nowadays an essay is usually a kind of feature article in a magazine or newspape r. Essays are written commonly by one and the same writer or journalist, who has cultivated his own individual style. Some essays, depending on the writerâ„ ¢s individuality, are written in a highly emotional manner resembling the style of emotive prose (Hail, Nickel. Mother of Murder! Blessed destroyer of human flesh! Balm of twenty-six million corpses in six years!D. Cusack), others resemble scientific prose and the terms review, memoir, or treatise are more applicable to certain more exhaustive studies:  Taking English Poetry in the common sense of the word, as a peculiar form of the language, we find that it differs from prose mainly in having a regular succession of accented syllables. In short it possesses metre as its characteristic feature ¦(S. Maugham). The essay on moral and philosophical topics in modern times has not been so popular, probably because a deeper scientific analysis and interpretation of facts is required.The essay in our days is often biographical; p eople, facts and events are taken from life. These essays differ from those of previous centuries â€Å" their vocabulary is simpler and so is their logical structure and argumentation. But they still retain all the leading features of the publicist style. The most characteristic language features of the essay, however, remain 1. brevity of expression; 2. the use of the first person singular, which justifies a personal approach to the problems treated; 3. rather expended use of connectives, which facilitates the process of grasping the correlation of ideas; 4. the abundant use of emotive words; 5. the use of similes and metaphors as one of the media for the cognitive process. In comparison with the oratorical style, the essay aims at a more lasting, hence at a slower effect. Epigrams, paradoxes and aphorisms are comparatively rare in oratory, as they require the concentrated attention of the listener. In the essay they are commoner, for the reader has an opportunity to make a caref ul and detailed study both of the content of the utterance and its form.