DO IN-TEXT CITATION? USE PROPER MLA FORMAT
Objectives
, paper #2 focuses on textual analysis, argument, evidence, and synthesis of ideas from at least two sources. This assignment aims to assure that you can conduct a careful, thoughtful analysis of a literary work, including the integration of conceptual material from a second source. Specifically, you will analyze self-selected aspects of Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried in conjunction with at least one other text from the second half of the course. You will explore how the selected narratives about the experience of war and human psychology reveal aspects of the human condition and the nature of the human self.

Assignment

1. Carefully read O’Brien’s The Things They Carried, noting the themes, ideas, or passages that resonate most with you.
2. Next, consider Freud’s Civilization and Its Discontents, Levi’s Survival in Auschwitz, the selections from Shay’s Odysseus in America, and Kubrick’s film Full Metal Jacket. Try to make a connection between at least one of these works and The Things They Carried (you may, of course, link to more than one of the above texts if you wish).
3. Develop a thesis directly relevant to The Things They Carried and at least one of the other works specified above.
4. Compose a 6–8 page paper that explores your theme, defends your thesis, and includes supporting textual analysis for all of your main interpretive points.
5. Make sure you support your analysis and central claims with properly documented quotations, paraphrases, or textual references.
6. Carefully edit and proofread your essay prior to submission.

Note the following:

• Limit your analysis in paper #2 to eight pages.
• Be sure to consult with me if any aspects of the assignment pose difficulties. You may also visit the Writing Center (Babson 205; x4356) for assistance, but you must document this assistance in a footnote (see the “Academic Integrity” file). Especially for content-related questions, I urge you always to consult first with me before moving on to the Writing Center, since I am most conversant with the assignment’s objectives and expectations. Sign up for the Writing Center from the Babson Portal (under Smart Tools).
• Before submitting your essay, be sure to complete the Writing Checklist below so as to avoid common content, editorial, and formatting errors. I recommend that you reserve this task for the final stages of preparation. Reserve enough time to work through the checklist one step at a time. Trying to think about too many things at once will likely be counter-productive.
• A printed copy of your essay is due at the beginning of class on Monday, 27 April; essays received after the beginning of class will be subject to my late penalty (see below).
• In addition to the printed copy submitted in class, submit an electronic copy of your essay to me via e-mail ([email protected]) as an MS Word attachment by 6:00 pm on Monday, 27 April.
• Include a Works Cited page in MLA format (in-text citation) to document all quotations and paraphrases (see Diana Hacker, A Writer’s Reference, Section MLA). Include a Works Consulted page to cite additional outside sources consulted. If you have any problems with documentation, be sure to ask me. I also encourage you to use the Writing Center, which is an excellent resource for dealing with documentation issues. The consultants there are trained to help you interpret and master the essential principles of documentation.
• Your work must be entirely your own, unless otherwise documented. Review the document “Academic Integrity and Documentation,” distributed prior to the semester and available in the “Course Documents” section of Blackboard. Note: Failure to provide a Works Cited (and/or Works Consulted) page will result in the loss of a full grade (e.g., an A becomes a B). Failure to format the page correctly in MLA style will result in the loss of one-third of a grade (e.g., a B becomes a B-).
• All formal essays must be typed and double spaced. I will evaluate them on the basis of (1) the cogency and clarity of your analysis; (2) your understanding of the assigned texts; and (3) the quality of your writing, including grammar, style, punctuation, and care of preparation (editing and proofreading). See the Student Guide: Babson First-Year Rhetoric Program, pp. 12–15 for details on grading criteria.

Late Policy

I do not grant extensions, but you may grant yourself an extension if necessary, provided you accept the following late penalty: Papers submitted after the start of class on the due date will be penalized by reduction of one-third grade (e.g., an A- becomes a B+). You will lose an additional one-third grade for each additional day late (up to a seven-day limit). I will accept no papers after seven days, and such papers will receive an automatic zero.

Writing Checklist

1. ? Introductory paragraph (or early phase of an alternative format): Try to establish the theoretical framework for your paper. You may develop your view later in the paper as well, but the reader needs to know what the issue is before proceeding. You should also try to give a specific overview of the main points constituting your argument. This gives the reader a kind of map and makes it much easier to follow your analysis. Avoid making vague or grandiose statements in the introduction, such as “W. H. Auden points out different elements . . .” (vague: tell me which elements) or “Throughout history . . .” (grandiose: stick to what you know). Make sure the course of the argument follows your map.
2. ? Body: Be sure to give adequate discussion of the position or positions you are defending. This means that you should not leave too many questions about your meaning or interpretation of the text. Be concise but thorough.
3. ? Keeping your conclusion in mind, be sure that you develop a step-by-step argument to convince the reader of the cogency of your point of view. Each paragraph or component (for alternative formats) should contribute to your final conclusion. Especially in a relatively short paper, do not use your conclusion simply to repeat or summarize the paper. Instead, pull everything together for the first time and leave the reader with some memorable line or thought.
4. ? Avoid vague or unjustified claims. Always explain yourself and try to integrate textual support for your interpretations. Doing so will enhance the persuasiveness of your argument.
5. ? Avoid overuse of the passive voice, which only creates wordiness and makes your claims less direct. So, instead of saying, “It is argued in Plato’s Sophist that X,” use the active voice and say, “In his Sophist, Plato argues X.” Instead of saying, “It will be shown in this paper that X,” use the active voice and say, “I show that X.” This change yields prose that is more aggressive, confident, and persuasive, eliminating a lot of academic verbiage along the way.
6. ? Feel free to use the first person. Especially in philosophy, you should take responsibility for your thesis and argument, instead of pretending to keep them at an artificial “objective” distance. There is no need to overdo it, however. Don’t keep saying, “I believe” or “in my opinion,” since this weakens your point, especially given the weak status of belief when compared with knowledge. Just make your claims and defend them,
7. ? Format: Staple your paper. Make sure it is double spaced. (Note: alternative formats may require special arrangements. See me to discuss the matter.) Use black ink and a 10- or 12-point easily read font, such as Times New Roman. Set margins at 1 inch. Number your pages. You do not need a title page. Just put your name, class, assignment, and date in the upper left corner of page one (single space this). You may also include your last name in the header, next to the page number.
8. ? Do not permit MS Word to insert extra space between paragraphs (which it currently does by default). If MS Word is inserting such space automatically, go to the paragraph menu and set “spacing before” and “spacing after” at 0. I recommend that you then click the “default” button to make this the default spacing for your MS Word documents.
9. ? Quotations and Documentation: Be sure you have included a Works Cited page and/or Works Consulted page, properly formatted in MLA style. Refer to Diana Hacker, A Writer’s Reference, section MLA.
10. ? Be sure you use in-text citations to document quotations, paraphrases, and or implicit references to the ideas and theories contained in the assigned texts or other sources. Do not use footnotes, except explanatory footnotes or footnotes acknowledging outside assistance, such as assistance received at the Writing Center.
11. ? Do not set quotations in italics. Use italics only if they appear in the original or if you wish to emphasize a key word or phrase. If you do add italics to a quotation, include the phrase “emphasis added” (or some equivalent phrase) after the cited page number: (172, emphasis added). Make sure the in-text citation appears outside of the quotation marks. Final punctuation should appear after the citation: Frodo said, “I will take the Ring” (Tolkien 264). Long quotations (more than four lines) must be set as block text. See Hacker, § MLA3b for one acceptable way of handling long quotations. Do not enclose block quotations in quotation marks. (I will accept single-spaced, indented block quotations, however. In this case, insert an extra space above and below the quotation and indent the entire quotation on the left side only.) Always use double quotation marks (“x”) for non-block quotations or so-called “scare-quotes.” Use single quotation marks (‘x’) only for quotations within quotations.
12. ? Be sure to introduce quotations with adequate context. And make sure you integrate quotations in such a way as to yield complete or correctly formed sentences. If you use an introductory phrase with a quotation in such a way as to yield a complete sentence, use a comma before the quotation. Example: According to Descartes, “I think, therefore I am.” Introduce evidentiary quotations (quotations that serve as direct evidence for a preceding statement, but which do not flow into a complete sentence) with a colon. Example: Plato thinks knowledge is open to everyone: “The power to know is already in every soul.”
13. ? If you add any words to a quotation or alter any words, enclose the additions or alterations in brackets: [ ]. Do not enclose the added words or alterations in parentheses, since that will imply they are part of the original source.
14. ? Quote precisely. Misquotations are unacceptable and show inadequate attention to detail. You should proofread your quotations word for word against the original during the final stages of preparing the paper for submission.
15. ? Proofreading and Editing: Make sure you verify the spelling of all proper names, along with the book title and author’s name! Hint: Once you have verified a proper name, highlight it, then right-click and add it to the dictionary.
16. ? Book titles should be underlined or italicized both in the paper and in the Works Cited. I prefer italics throughout, but whichever you choose, be consistent. Do not underline some titles and italicize others. Italicize foreign words (e.g., eudaimonia, nous, cogito)
17. ? Make sure you form possessives properly: one’s theory, not ones theory; Socrates’ or (Socrates’s) theory, not Socrates theory, etc.
18. ? Insert one space between ellipsis dots and quoted material. Examples: “blah blah blah . . . blah blah.” MLA recommends that you not use ellipsis dots at the beginning of quotations, since the reader takes it granted that material may have been omitted. If you omit a whole sentence, insert a period at the end of the sentence that appears prior to the omission: Plato says, “blah, blah, blah. . . . blahdy blah blah.”
19. ? Avoid contractions altogether in formal writing (may be appropriate in alternative formats, such as written dialogue).
20. ? Be sure you do not make the following all-too-common mistakes: confusing than with then; confusing it’s (a contraction for “it is”) with its (a possessive); confusing there, their, and they’re; confusing principal and principle; confusing affect and effect. To avoid other common usage errors, familiarize yourself with Hacker’s section on usage (§ W1).
21. ? Learn to avoid comma splices (marked CS in the margin), run-on sentences, and fragments! Refer to Hacker, §§ G5 and G6. The presence of such poorly punctuated sentences will lower your grade.

CLICK BUTTON TO ORDER NOW

English 101

In one or two paragraphs for each, answer the following questions:

1-What, according to Governor Edmund Randolph, were the defects of the Articles of Confederation?

2-By what logic did the majority of the Supreme Court rule in 2015 that state laws forbidding same-sex marriage violated the Fourteenth Amendment?

1
Gov. Edmund Randolph, Speech to the Virginia Constitutional
Ratifying Convention, 1788
After the Constitutional Convention ended in Philadelphia, each state convened a ratifying
convention to decide whether to adopt the Constitution as the nation’s governing document and
to become a member of the union of states. As the two most populous states at the time the
ratifying conventions in Massachusetts and Virginia were particularly important – and
particularly polarized. Gov. Randolph, who had attended the Constitutional Convention and
come away unhappy with the final result, changed his mind and was instrumental in convincing
enough delegates to the Virginia ratifying convention to support the adoption of the Constitution.
[W]heresoever you look [in America], you see danger. Where there are so many witnesses in
many parts of America, that justice is suffocated, shall peace and happiness still be said to reign?
Candor, sir, requires an undisguised representation of our situation. Candor, sir, demands a
faithful exposition of facts. Many citizens have found justice strangled and trampled under foot,
through the course of jurisprudence in this country. Are those who have debts due to them
satisfied with your government? Are not creditors wearied with the tedious procrastination of
your legal process — a process obscured by legislative mists? Cast your eyes to your seaports:
see how commerce languishes. This country, so blessed, by nature, with every advantage that
can render commerce profitable, through defective legislation is deprived of all the benefits and
emoluments she might otherwise reap from it. We hear many complaints on the subject of
located lands; a variety of competitors claiming the same lands under legislative acts, public faith
prostrated, and private confidence destroyed…
My intention…is to [prove]…that a national government is absolutely indispensable, and that a
confederacy is not eligible, in our present situation: the introductory step to this will be, to
endeavor to convince the house of the necessity of the Union, and that the present Confederation
is actually inadequate and unamendable… If…Virginia, from her situation, is not inaccessible or
invulnerable, let us consider if she be protected by having no cause to fear from other nations.
Has she no cause to fear? You will have cause to fear, as a nation, if disunited; you will not only
have this cause to fear from yourselves, from that species of population I before mentioned, and
your once sister states, but from the arms of other nations…
Paper money may also be an additional source of disputes. Rhode Island has been in one
continued train of opposition to national duties and integrity; they have defrauded their creditors
by their paper money. Other states have also had emissions of paper money, to the ruin of credit
and commerce. May not Virginia, at a future day, also recur to the same expedient?… This
danger is taken away by the [proposed] Constitution, as it provides “that no state shall emit bills
of credit.”…
We want a government, sir — a government that will have stability, and give us security… How
far the Confederation is different from such a government, is known to all America. Instead of
being able to cherish and protect the states, it has been unable to defend itself against the
encroachments made upon it by the states. Every one of them has conspired against it; Virginia
as much as any. This fact could be proved by reference to actual history…
2
What are the powers of Congress [under the Articles of Confederation]? They have full
authority to recommend what they please; this recommendatory power reduces them to the
condition of poor supplicants. Consider the dignified language of the members of the American
Congress. May it please your high mightinesses of Virginia to pay your just proportionate quota
of our national debt: we humbly supplicate that it may please you to comply with your federal
duties. We implore, we beg your obedience! Is not this, sir, a fair representation of the powers of
Congress? Their operations are of no validity when counteracted by the states. Their authority
to recommend is a mere mockery of government…
In [the Articles of Confederation] one body has the legislative, executive, and judicial powers;
but the want of efficient powers has prevented the dangers naturally consequent on the union of
these. Is this union consistent with an augmentation of their power? Will you, then, amend it by
taking away one of these three powers?
Suppose, for instance, you only vested it with the legislative and executive powers, without any
control on the judiciary; what must be the result? Are we not taught by reason, experience, and
governmental history, that tyranny is the natural and certain consequence of uniting these two
powers, or the legislative and judicial powers, exclusively, in the same body? If any one denies
it, I shall pass by him as an infidel not to be reclaimed. Whenever any two of these three powers
are vested in one single body, they must, at one time or other, terminate in the destruction of
liberty.
In the most important cases [under the Articles of Confederation], the assent of nine states is
necessary to pass a law. This is too great a restriction, and whatever good consequences it may,
in some cases, produce, yet it will prevent energy in many other cases…
If anything were wanting to complete this farce, it would be, that a resolution of the Assembly of
Virginia, and the other legislatures, should be necessary to confirm and render of any validity the
Congressional acts; this would openly discover the debility of the general government to all the
world. But, in fact, its imbecility is now nearly the same as if such acts were formally requisite.
An act of the Assembly of Virginia, controverting a resolution of Congress, would certainly
prevail. I therefore conclude that the Confederation is too defective to deserve correction. Let us
take farewell of it, with reverential respect, as an old benefactor. It is gone, whether this house
says so or not. It is gone, sir, by its own weakness.

English 101

In one or two paragraphs for each, answer the following questions:

1-What, according to Governor Edmund Randolph, were the defects of the Articles of Confederation?

2-By what logic did the majority of the Supreme Court rule in 2015 that state laws forbidding same-sex marriage violated the Fourteenth Amendment?

1
Gov. Edmund Randolph, Speech to the Virginia Constitutional
Ratifying Convention, 1788
After the Constitutional Convention ended in Philadelphia, each state convened a ratifying
convention to decide whether to adopt the Constitution as the nation’s governing document and
to become a member of the union of states. As the two most populous states at the time the
ratifying conventions in Massachusetts and Virginia were particularly important – and
particularly polarized. Gov. Randolph, who had attended the Constitutional Convention and
come away unhappy with the final result, changed his mind and was instrumental in convincing
enough delegates to the Virginia ratifying convention to support the adoption of the Constitution.
[W]heresoever you look [in America], you see danger. Where there are so many witnesses in
many parts of America, that justice is suffocated, shall peace and happiness still be said to reign?
Candor, sir, requires an undisguised representation of our situation. Candor, sir, demands a
faithful exposition of facts. Many citizens have found justice strangled and trampled under foot,
through the course of jurisprudence in this country. Are those who have debts due to them
satisfied with your government? Are not creditors wearied with the tedious procrastination of
your legal process — a process obscured by legislative mists? Cast your eyes to your seaports:
see how commerce languishes. This country, so blessed, by nature, with every advantage that
can render commerce profitable, through defective legislation is deprived of all the benefits and
emoluments she might otherwise reap from it. We hear many complaints on the subject of
located lands; a variety of competitors claiming the same lands under legislative acts, public faith
prostrated, and private confidence destroyed…
My intention…is to [prove]…that a national government is absolutely indispensable, and that a
confederacy is not eligible, in our present situation: the introductory step to this will be, to
endeavor to convince the house of the necessity of the Union, and that the present Confederation
is actually inadequate and unamendable… If…Virginia, from her situation, is not inaccessible or
invulnerable, let us consider if she be protected by having no cause to fear from other nations.
Has she no cause to fear? You will have cause to fear, as a nation, if disunited; you will not only
have this cause to fear from yourselves, from that species of population I before mentioned, and
your once sister states, but from the arms of other nations…
Paper money may also be an additional source of disputes. Rhode Island has been in one
continued train of opposition to national duties and integrity; they have defrauded their creditors
by their paper money. Other states have also had emissions of paper money, to the ruin of credit
and commerce. May not Virginia, at a future day, also recur to the same expedient?… This
danger is taken away by the [proposed] Constitution, as it provides “that no state shall emit bills
of credit.”…
We want a government, sir — a government that will have stability, and give us security… How
far the Confederation is different from such a government, is known to all America. Instead of
being able to cherish and protect the states, it has been unable to defend itself against the
encroachments made upon it by the states. Every one of them has conspired against it; Virginia
as much as any. This fact could be proved by reference to actual history…
2
What are the powers of Congress [under the Articles of Confederation]? They have full
authority to recommend what they please; this recommendatory power reduces them to the
condition of poor supplicants. Consider the dignified language of the members of the American
Congress. May it please your high mightinesses of Virginia to pay your just proportionate quota
of our national debt: we humbly supplicate that it may please you to comply with your federal
duties. We implore, we beg your obedience! Is not this, sir, a fair representation of the powers of
Congress? Their operations are of no validity when counteracted by the states. Their authority
to recommend is a mere mockery of government…
In [the Articles of Confederation] one body has the legislative, executive, and judicial powers;
but the want of efficient powers has prevented the dangers naturally consequent on the union of
these. Is this union consistent with an augmentation of their power? Will you, then, amend it by
taking away one of these three powers?
Suppose, for instance, you only vested it with the legislative and executive powers, without any
control on the judiciary; what must be the result? Are we not taught by reason, experience, and
governmental history, that tyranny is the natural and certain consequence of uniting these two
powers, or the legislative and judicial powers, exclusively, in the same body? If any one denies
it, I shall pass by him as an infidel not to be reclaimed. Whenever any two of these three powers
are vested in one single body, they must, at one time or other, terminate in the destruction of
liberty.
In the most important cases [under the Articles of Confederation], the assent of nine states is
necessary to pass a law. This is too great a restriction, and whatever good consequences it may,
in some cases, produce, yet it will prevent energy in many other cases…
If anything were wanting to complete this farce, it would be, that a resolution of the Assembly of
Virginia, and the other legislatures, should be necessary to confirm and render of any validity the
Congressional acts; this would openly discover the debility of the general government to all the
world. But, in fact, its imbecility is now nearly the same as if such acts were formally requisite.
An act of the Assembly of Virginia, controverting a resolution of Congress, would certainly
prevail. I therefore conclude that the Confederation is too defective to deserve correction. Let us
take farewell of it, with reverential respect, as an old benefactor. It is gone, whether this house
says so or not. It is gone, sir, by its own weakness.