Syndetonâ€Definition and Examples

Syndeton is a  rhetorical term for a sentence style in which words, phrases, or clauses are joined by conjunctions (usually and). A construction that uses many conjunctions is called polysyndetic. Examples and Observations At the marina, rain, and steam rising from the bay shrouded boats and birds, and made the few scurrying people indistinct.Blaize Clement, Raining Cat Sitters and Dogs. Minotaur Books, 2010I crawled back under the cover of the boat and huddled there, wet, cold and sobbing.Sam McKinney, Sailing Uphill. Touchwood, 2010The fine rain made a desolate, even sound like breathing in the pinewoods, and below, milky layers of mist covered the lake, and were stained here and there by the darkness of the water beneath.Elizabeth Bowen, Salon des DamesYou are talking to a man who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom, and chuckled at catastrophe.The Wizard in The Wizard of Oz, 1939Rain on all the silent streets and squares, alleys and courts, gardens and churchyards and stone steps and nooks and crannies of the city.Susan Hill, The Mist in the Mirror. Sinclair-Stevenson, 1992 Polysyndeton​​ He and Rawlins had unsaddled the horses and turned them out in the dark and they were lying on the saddle blankets and using the saddles for pillows. The night was cold and clear and the sparks rising from the fire raced hot and red among the stars. They could hear the trucks out on the highway and they could see the lights of the town reflected off the desert fifteen miles to the north.Cormac McCarthy, All the Pretty Horses. Alfred A. Knopf, 1992 Marking Coordination Coordination is usually but not invariably marked by one or more coordinators. Three patterns to be distinguished are shown in (6): (6) i SIMPLE SYNDETIC You need [celery, apples, walnuts, and grapes].(6) ii POLYSYNDETIC You need [celery and apples and walnuts and grapes].(6) iii ASYNDETIC You need [celery, apples, walnuts, grapes]. The major contrast is between syndetic coordination, which contains at least one coordinator, and asyndetic coordination, which does not. In constructions with more than two coordinates, there is a further contrast within syndetic coordination between the default simple syndetic, which has a single coordinator marking the final coordinate, and polysyndetic, where all non-initial coordinates are marked by a coordinator (which must be the same for all of them). The coordinator forms a constituent with the coordinator which follows: we refer to expressions like and grapes as an expanded coordinate, with grapes itself a bare coordinate.Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum, Coordination and Subordination. The Handbook of English Linguistics, ed. by Bas Aarts and April M. S. McMahon. Blackwell, 2006

Company Profile Of Tagerty Pty Ltd Essay - 1983 Words

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Company Profile Tagerty Pty Ltd is organization which sells beauty care products, situated in low-lease external rural territory of Melbourne. The organization was set up in 1996 by 18-year-old young men (Andrew, Bernard and Carlo. They were inspired by Poppy King – a young cosmetics entrepreneur in Melbourne. Scope and methodology Limitations 2. INDUSTRY ANALYSIS 2.1. Industry that the company is in Tagerty is small Australian based company who manufactures cosmetic products especially for men (body and skin care, sun protection and recovery, shaving and facial care, fragrances, deodorants and hair care). The company operates in low-key manner and has enjoyed success since beginning. With the emergence of new organic, natural and green products consumers became more sensitive towards their choice of product in Australia (Client1.ibisworld.com.au.2016). Therefore, company decides to explore new market. 2.2. Statistics on the size and growth of the industry Cosmetics and personal care industry is growing day by day as people are becoming more sensible about their appearance. Not only women but men are also attracted to improve their looks. Canadian men had started taking care of their skin and became more conscious about beauty to enhance their professional credibility. Men’s grooming market has viewed growth since 2010 with little downfall in 2014 and then again grew and reached at CAD 1,009.0 million in 2015 (Graph 1) (Passport

General Strike of 1926 Essay Example For Students

General Strike of 1926 Essay : The General Strike of 1926 lasted only ninedays and directly involved around 1.8 million workers. It was the short butultimate outbreak of a much longer conflict in the mining industry, which lastedfrom the privatisation of the mines after the First World War until theirrenewed nationalisation after the Second. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-* Copyright DueNow.com Inc. *Category:HistoryPaper Title:General Strike of 1926Text:The General Strike of 1926Essay written by Michael FunkWhy did the General Strike of 1926 fail and what were the effects the strikehad upon industrial relations in Britain?The General Strike of 1926 lasted only nine days and directly involved around1.8 million workers. It was the short but ultimate outbreak of a much longerconflict in the mining industry, which lasted from the privatisation of themines after the First World War until their renewed nationalisation after theSecond. The roots of the General Strike in Brit ain, unlike in France or othercontinental countries, did not lie in ideological conceptions such assyndicalism but in the slowly changing character of trade union organisation andtactics. On the one hand, unskilled and other unapprenticed workers had beenorganised into national unions since the 1880s to combat sectionalism and tostrengthen their bargaining power and the effectiveness of the strike weapon. Onthe other hand, at the same time and for the same reason trade unions haddeveloped the tactic of industry-wide and sympathetic strikes. Later duringthe pre-war labour unrest these two forms of strike action, national andsympathetic, were more often used together which in an extreme case could havemeant a general strike. The symbol of this new strategy was the triple alliance,formed in 1914, which was a loose, informal agreement between railwaymen,transport workers and miners to support each other in case of industrialdisputes and strikes. As G.A. Phillips summarised:The General S trike was in origin, therefore, the tactical product of apattern of in-dustrial conflict and union organisation which had developed overthe past twenty-five years or so in industries where unionism had beenintroduced only with difficulty, among rapidly expanding labour forcestraditionally resistant to organisation, or against strong opposition fromemployers. Therefore, a large majority of the British Labour movement saw a generalstrike along the traditional labourist view, which emphasised the separationof the political and the industrial sphere, as a purely industrial act. Thisnotion was supported the developments in the 1920s when the depression and theemployers offensive weakened the militant and revolutionary forces , whereas thesuccess of the Labour Party and the reorganisation of the TUC General Councilfurther strengthened these labourist forces. The governments and the employers view, of course, was a different one. Since the French syndicalists in 1906 had drawn up the Charter of Amiens,reaffirming their belief in direct political action and the general strike as ameans of overthrowing the Parliamentary system, governments and industrialistsall over Europe saw a general strike as a revolutionary challenge for theconstitution and the economic system. Although the British Labour movement hadnever been really committed to this idea, during the post-war boom when it wason the offensive, there were two examples of semi-syndicalist conceptionsconcerning the use of industrial action against the war and British interventionagainst the Soviet Republic. Government and employers were warned and did nothesitate to condemn every notion of nation wide industrial action asunconstitutional and revolutionary. The mining dispute which caused the General Strike emerged after the FirstWorld War when the triple alliance broke and the miners were left to fight aloneagainst the governments plans to privatise the mines. As a result the minessuddenly returned to their private owners and the miners faced demands for verysubstantial wage cuts of up to 50 per cent . The dispute escalated because thecrisis was seen by all the key players -the government, the em-ployers and theTrade Union Council (TUC)- as an example for future industrial relations inBritain. The trade un-ion movement saw its opportunity to challenge the notionthat wage reduction could solve Britains economic diffi-culties and decidedtherefore that a future united action in support of the miners would take theform of a general strike. But as Margaret Morris emphasised. It was theabsence of any possibility of finding an agreed solution to the difficulties inthe mining industry which made a confrontation on the lines of the GeneralStrik e almost inevita-ble, not any generalised will to class conflict. The Conservative government, however, saw its role as a neutral, standingbetween the contending parties and rep-resenting the British people as a whole. Its industrial policy included the application of the principle ofco-partnership in industry, in the hope that workers and management would beginto see their interest as identical, a policy which was ultimately challenged bya general strike. The Government was completely aware that a trade union victorywould have important political implications such as government intervention inthe coal industry as well as encouraging further industrial action of a similardimension. Moreover, in 1926 the government was very well prepared for a majorindustrial dispute, whereas unemployment and uncertain economicallycircumstances forced the trade union movement in the defensive. Rainforest deforestation EssayAmong historians the most controversial issue concerning the General Strikeis its impact on the development of the Labour movement. For Marxist historians,such as Martin Jacques and Keith Burgess, the General Strike marked a centralwatershed in this development. They emphasised a shift to the right of the wholeLabour movement and a further strengthening of traditional labourist forces ,whereas the left and especially the Communist Party was isolated and lost itsinfluence. Jacques described this new direction as a general rejection ofmilitancy and the use of industrial action for political ends, the strictseparation of the political and the industrial spheres, the notion of solvingLabours problems within the capitalist system and finally the acceptance of thecommon interest between wage-labour and employers. For Burgess, the idea ofclass collaboration which was symbolised in the Mond-Turner talks especiallymarked a sharp watershed. The extent to which t he TUC as a whole was wonover to these ideas marked the final stage in the containment of the challengeof labour to the existing social order. Besides the impact of the GeneralStrike both historians also emphasised other factors for this shift, such as thechanging eco-nomic environment , but as Jacques suggested:Mass unemployment, structural chance and the rise in real wages do notthem-selves explain the politics and ideology of working-class movement duringthe inter-war period. Nevertheless, they provide an essential explanation. Forthey help to reveal what might be de-scribed as the objective basis of the shiftto the right on trade union movement. Although mass unemployment influenced the Labour movement from the beginningby forcing the workers on the defensive, undermining multi-sectionalconsciousness and weakening sectional solidarity, it was not until the Gen-eralStrike that it played a crucial role in determining the politics and ideology ofthe trade union movement. This notion of a watershed has been challenged by several other historians,above all by G.A.Phillips. He suggested that the General Strike had asignificant short-term effect upon union strength -measured primarily in termsof membership and its distribution- but almost no lasting consequences. Onindustrial tactics, and especially the use of the strike weapon, their impactwas rather to provide a further restraining influence where inhibiting factorswere already in evidence, than to initiate any change of conduct. Furthermore he emphasised this the reinforced trend towards industrial peace washappening anyway, as well as the long-established faith in a regulated system ofvol-untary collective bargaining. Thus he described the shift to the right ofthe whole Labour movement and the isola-tion of the Marxist left more as afurther strengthening of already familiar principles than as a significantwatershed. Moreover, the strike itself and especially its failure was the resultof the structural development of the trade union movement along these familiarprinciples -especially the labourist one- over two generations. Altogether,from this point of view it seems that the pattern of trade union activity andindustrial relations was not altered by the General Strike. The only thing thatreally changed was the Labour movements rhetoric style and as LaybournEmphasised, the isolation of the rank and file activists from the trade unionofficials and therefore the final decline of the shop stewards movement. However, there is little doubt that the 1920s saw a transition of the wholeLabour movement towards the separation of the political and the industrialspheres, collaboration and moderation. At the end of the 1920s the Labour Partywas much stronger and even the trade unions, despite their defeat in the GeneralStrike and their reduction in both finances and members, were now much moreeffective. The General Strike, of course, played an important role in thistransition, but more for its final consolidation than as a crucial watershed. Moreover, its origin and its failure seem today like a paradigm of thistransition. Nevertheless, in the long term the General Strike left some marksupon the Labour movement, which determined its future fate. Most importantly,after defeat the miners lost their crucial position within the Labour movementand great bitterness and frustration emerged among the miners in particular, butalso within the Labour movement as a whole. Bibliography:Burgess, Keith: The Challenge of Labour. Shaping British Society 1850-1930,London 1980. Clegg, Hugh Armstrong: A History of British Trade Unions since 1889. VolumeII 1911-1933, Oxford 1989. Jacques, Martin: Consequences of the General Strike, in: Skelley, Jeffrey(ed.): The General Strike 1926, Lon-don 1976. Laybourn, Keith: a History of British Trade Unionism. Ch. 5: Trade Unionismduring the Inter-War Years 1918-1939, Gloucestershire 1992. Mason, A.: The Government and the General Strike, 1926, in: InternationalReview of Social History, XIV 1969. Morris, Margaret: The British General Strike 1926, The Historical association1973. Phillips, G.A.: The General Strike. The Politics of Industrial Conflict,London 1976. Renshaw, Patrick: The General Strike, London 1975. Wrigley, Chris: 1926: Social Costs of the Mining Dispute, in: History Today34, Nov. 1984. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

John Sousa Essays - John Philip Sousa, Music Of Washington, D.C.

John Sousa Artists do not create in a vacuum. They reflect their times or at the very least are affected by the lives they lead which are also influenced by the public sphere. The term for this reflection is "Zeitgeist." It literally means"spirit of the times." John Philip Sousa and his works can be classified under this term of "Zeitgeist." Most of Sousa's music was composed during a period known as the gilded age. This period is known for its gross materialism and blatant political corruption in the United States. However, Sousa's music does not seem to reflect this corruption, but rather it reflects a way to deal with the corruption and mishaps of the times. John Philip Sousa, also known as the "March King," was born on November 6,1854, in Washington D.C., near the marine barracks where his father, Antonio, was a musician in the marine band. He received his grammar school education in Washington and for several of his school years enrolled in a private conservatory of music operated by John Esputa, Jr. . There he studied piano and most of the orchestral instruments, but his main passion was the violin. He became very good at the violin, and at age 13 he was almost persuaded to join a circus band . As a young boy, the martial music of army bands in the streets of Washington during and immediately following the Civil War had a profound effect on him. When he was not yet fourteen he enlisted in the Marine Corps and succeeded in becoming a member of the marine band . This is where he picked up a liking for marches. After being discharged from the Marine Corps, Sousa toured with several traveling theater orchestras and in 1876 moved to Philadelphia. There he worked as an arranger, composer, and proofreader for publishing houses . While on tour with an opera company in St. Louis, he received a telegram offering him leadership of the Marine Band in Washington. He accepted and reported for duty on October 1, 1880, becoming the band's 17th leader . The marine band was Sousa's first experience conducting a military band, and he approached it unlike most of his predecessors. Rehearsals became exceptionally strict, and he shaped his musicians into the country's premiere band . The military was important to Sousa's music style. His main musical compositions were marches, which were the most widely used form of music in the military. His first two marches that he wrote as leader of the band, "The Gladiator" and "Semper Fidelis," were received with great acclaim in military band circles and from that time on he received ever-increasing attention and respect as a composer . Both of these marches were high-spirited and uplifting, just the thing to raise moral among the troops as well as promote nationalism within the states. In 1889, Sousa wrote a march called "The Washington Post" march, which was soon adapted and identified with the new dance called the two-step. Right after this march was written, a British band journalist remarked that since Johann Strauss, Jr. was called "The Waltz King," that American bandmaster Sousa should be called the "March King." With this Sousa's regal title was coined and has remained ever since . Sousa lived most of his life during a time known as the gilded age, named after the famous book by Mark Twain. The gilded age was a time of gross material interest among the American people and blatant corruption among the politicians . Within congress the Senate generally overshadowed the House of Representatives. Some critics even called the Senate a "rich man's club." The House was one of the most disorderly and inefficient legislative bodies in the world. As a result of the civil war, the division between the Democrats and the Republicans was even more sectional than ever . In this case it is very hard to find the "Zeitgeist" in Sousa's compositions of this time. In fact they even seem to contradict the spirit of that era. All of the marches that Sousa wrote during the gilded age were extremely upbeat and energetic, while the time was corrupt and backhanded. This is because Sousa was responding to the negative messages being sent out by the political society by helping Americans realize how great their nation is. All of his musical pieces expressed a certain proud nationalism that helped the people cope with the harsh times. Sousa's most famous march, "The Stars and Stripes Forever," was written, in 1896, by Sousa on a boat ride