Education for Citizenship: A Vital Subject in the Curriculum
Characterization
The text is argumentative, advocating the inclusion of Education for Citizenship in the school curriculum. The author’s voice is evident, supporting the subject’s importance. Based on the concise language, high standard, and presentation of ideas, it can be classified as an opinion piece, likely belonging to the journalism genre.
Two types of arguments are employed: personal, where the author presents their own ideas (e.g., “students should learn”), and refutation or antithetical argument, where an opposing idea is presented and then countered by the author’s viewpoint (e.g., the discussion of ‘cross-content’ in the first paragraph).
The text’s structure can be interpreted in two ways. It leans towards being synthetic or inductive, as the author’s main point about the importance of teaching basic values through Citizenship Education is presented at the end. However, starting from the third line (“let me argue the opposite view”), it could also be considered analytical or deductive, with the remaining text defending this initial position.
Language Functions
The primary language functions are expressive, referential, and conative. The expressive function dominates as the author conveys their opinions, using both first-person (“let me”) and false referentiality (e.g., “No one will deny”). The use of first-person plural in the last paragraph creates a sense of partnership with the reader.
The referential function is limited and connotative, with one example being the first sentence: “Some regions have insisted…”.
Textual Coherence and Cohesion
The text demonstrates coherence through its organized and purposeful argumentation. Cohesion is evident through the use of textual markers introducing each of the final three paragraphs. “But” signals a contrasting viewpoint, “in effect” reinforces the preceding arguments, and while the fifth paragraph lacks an explicit marker, the use of “please” subtly encourages the reader to agree with the upcoming thesis. The phrase “The case is…” at the beginning of the second paragraph effectively draws the reader into the core issue.
Language Use
The text exhibits a high linguistic standard, characterized by correct and expressive language use, both syntactically and semantically. This aligns with the text’s persuasive purpose.
Nouns are prevalent, solidifying the concepts and arguments. Adjectives are scarce and often serve a specific purpose (e.g., “cross-content”). Verbs are strategically used, with future tense verbs like “discover”, “learn”, and “know” conveying a sense of future action. The subjunctive “explain” maintains consistency. Obligation verb combinations (“must + infinitive”) and modal verbs (“may arise”) are also employed.
Simple sentences and phrases effectively emphasize key ideas (e.g., “Students must learn…”). Different sentence types are used, including those with noun clauses as direct or indirect objects to expand on the verbal referent. Adverbial clauses are common, explaining causes (e.g., “because the math…can only be learned”), conditions (e.g., “if you do not want…”), and purpose (e.g., “to avoid”). A juxtaposed sentence with a closing copulative conjunction forms a list in the second paragraph (“must respect…are obliged…and should encourage”).
Conclusion
In conclusion, the text is an opinion piece with a strong expressive function and cohesive structure. It demonstrates a high standard of language use, effectively conveying the author’s argument for the importance of Education for Citizenship in the curriculum.