Alright folks, I'll keep this short and to the point. I'm writing an English paper and I would LOVE some feedback on which of these thesis statements seems to work out best.
You could also tell me that none of them work but I'd really appreciate a why so I can figure out what to do to fix them. Also if you think I need to rethink my whole paper premise, that opinion would also be greatly appreciated if expounded upon.
I wrote 5 different types of statements.
1. [Policy Claim]
Although A.A. Milne has many grammatical errors throughout his Winnie the Pooh stories, children should read them because they encourage imagination which helps them develop cognitive skills.
2. [Definition Claim]
While many people consider A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh stories to be inappropriate for children learning to read because of the stories' grammatical errors, the stories are in fact beneficial for children to read because they encourage imagination which helps them develop cognitive skills.
3. [Comparison Claim]
Despite the fact that some children's books are written specifically to teach, A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh stories are most noteworthy because they encourage imagination which helps children develop cognitive skills.
4. [Evaluation Claim]
Although grammatical errors in a children's story seem like they would hinder a child's learning, the errors that A.A. Milne cleverly adds to his Winnie the Pooh stories serve the purpose of making the stories more relatable in order to encourage children to develop an imagination. Children who have a strong imagination are more likely to succeed in various aspects of their life because imagination fosters cognitive development.
5. [Cause/Effect Claim]
While A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh stories are littered with grammatical errors, they serve the purpose of creating a childlike tone to relate to children and encourage the development of imagination which helps cognitive development.
Thanks for reading. Show your love and opinions in the comments below please!
I love your premise! My only suggestion is to vary your word choice in the evaluation claim because "imagination" is used a couple of times and to maybe vary the sentence structure for each thesis to show your prof that you know all theses don't have to start with a dependent clause. I'm guilty of that, so I always catch it in other's writing!
ReplyDeleteOhhh and I just thought of something! Maybe you could be more specific for the comparison one. For instance, books like Huck Finn and aesops fables use dialect to inspire imagination and a closer connection to the text similar to the way Milne uses the grammatical errors. I don't know if that's a stretch, but specificity is always good!
ReplyDeleteI like number three, but I would phrase it slightly different. "Unlike some children's books that are written specifically to teach, A.A. Millne's Winnie the Pooh stories stories are valuable to learners not because of their pristine grammar but because they encourage imagination and and thus further cognitive development." Some of that is just my personal wording preference, but I do like Unlike instead of despite at the beginning. It makes a stronger comparison.
ReplyDeleteThanks Jess, that's awesome!
DeleteI like the evaluation claim (even though I think it could be stated more succinctly) because you deal with WHY A.A. Milne broke grammar rules and HOW he was justified in doing so. At the same time, you're not writing off grammar rules as completely useless.
ReplyDeleteI think you are trying to do this with some of your other thesis statements too, but it doesn't necessarily come across because you say things like "Winnie the Pooh stories encourage imagination" instead of "grammatical errors in Winnie the Pooh stories encourage imagination." So it's not clear that whether you think the grammar/syntax is worthwhile or you think the story is worthwhile despite lousy grammar/syntax.
And, by the way, I love your whole idea in general!
Thanks! It's nice to hear that my idea isn't completely retarded haha. And I appreciate your feedback!
DeleteI like Jess's revision of your thesis -- thanks! And Danielle makes good points, too. I don't think we initially care about grammatical errors. It's better to start with a broader framing issue that more people would see is important.
ReplyDeleteIn my very first post, I referenced Dorothy Parker's literary criticism of A. A. Milne, whom she couldn't stand. Her reviews of his plays crack me up: one gem
ReplyDeleteAnd it is that word 'hummy,' my darlings, that marks the first place in The House at Pooh Corner at which Tonstant Weader fwowed up.
Her "Constant Reader" book review of The House at Pooh Corner by A. A. Milne, in The New Yorker (20 October 1928)
So clearly she was put off by the twee language, the whimsical spellings, and the general cutesiness. Her scathing review of Give Me Yesterday is a highlight of the criticism genre.
So, you could frame your paper as a direct response to her attacks. It wasn't something as rote as cute widdle spewwings, though. It runs much deeper, to questions of taste, maturity vs. childlike wonder, I'd even argue romanticism vs. realism.
Thanks Charly! I'll definitely check that out. I'm sure it would help me find my voice and argument.
Delete