module-4-assignment.docx
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Toronto Metropolitan University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
402
Subject
Communications
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
5
Uploaded by PresidentBravery10950
Module 4 Assignment
The following assignment for Module 4 is due no later than Friday 5 pm (EST).
1.
The following statement might appear in a recommendation letter:
In my opinion, you will be very fortunate to get this person to work for you.
How does this statement send two messages?
This statement is simultaneously praising and shaming the employee by first, claiming that the
company will be lucky if they gain the attention of the person since they are of high
qualifications. Or the statement can be shaming the employee by warning the company that
they will have trouble getting the employee to work for them, since they do not complete their
work. Therefore, it sends a positive and negative message to the company about the
recommendation of the employee.
2.
Which one of the following is not an ambiguous recommendation that simultaneously
supports and attacks the job candidate? Assume that the sentences occur among many
other sentences describing the candidate.
a.
I simply cannot recommend this person highly enough.
b.
I most enthusiastically recommend this candidate with no qualifications whatsoever.
c.
In my opinion you will be very fortunate to get this person to work for you.
d.
The recommendation that I can offer for this candidate is that she works hard and is
productive.
e.
I would urge you to waste no time in making this candidate an offer.
3.
If a headline were to say, "New Pill Controls Birth Twice a Month," it would be
unintentionally funny. Which one rewriting of it says only what was most probably
intended?
a.
New Pill Works Twice a Month to Control Pregnancy
b.
New Birth Control Pill can be Taken Twice a Month
c.
Taking New Pill Twice a Month Promotes Birth
d.
Taking New Pill Controls Pregnancy Two Times a Month
4.
Explain why the following passage contains a semantic disagreement rather than a
substantial disagreement.
Emilio: When you think about American foreign policy, you've got to admit that Andre is a
real American. He is always first to fly the flag. He supports America when other
Americans are bad-mouthing it.
Juanita: Andre is a citizen of Argentina who is living here and hoping to become a
citizen. So, he's not a real American. He just happens to support American foreign
policy.
Emilio: You’ve got to admit that Andre would support America against its enemies.
Juanita: What about his not being an American citizen?
This passage contains a semantic disagreement as the characters have different interpretations
of the meaning of being a true American. As Emilo claims that since Andre publicly supports
America despite the country's wrongdoings, he is a true American. Juanita thinks that a true
American is someone who is a citizen of the country and since Andre is from Argentina he is not
an American. Thus, as the meaning behind what is considered a “true American” has not been
clarified and so it has different interpretations which causes a semantic disagreement to ensue.
5.
The following four choices for completing the sentence vary in their precision. Rank
them, beginning with the most precise. Starting with the new budget, our country will be
a.
focusing more on the unemployment problem.
b.
making changes for the better.
c.
changing the definition of unemployment as far as statistics are concerned for
computing the percentage of workers who are unemployed.
d.
reconsidering the unemployment calculations.
C, D, A, B
6.
As far as logical reasoning is concerned, identify the most significant difficulty with the
following astrological forecast:
May 20 is an unusually bad time for a Leo or a Scorpio to make major decisions.
a.
Some astrologers might not like either a Leo or a Scorpio.
b.
A bad time for a Leo is usually a good time for a Scorpio.
c.
Ambiguity occurs with time because it could mean time of day or time of week or
time in music.
d.
The difficulty is with not specifying which major decisions.
e.
There have been some bad times at Ridgemont High School, says Beyoncé.
7.
Why would a critical thinker say the following report from the planning commission is
odd?
If traffic density continues to grow as predicted, then the flow at Howe Avenue and
Marconi Boulevard should become congested in two years from next December 21st.
This report is seen as vague as “what is the predicted density?” Also it can be seen as odd
since they are using the date of December 21st as a fixed date without explaining the reason
why the congestion will occur exactly 2 years from that date.
8.
Suppose Brad’s height is determined to be 5.1147 feet. It was, let's say, measured by
using the following operation. Scientists placed a horizontal bar on Brad’s head while he
stood next to a vertical beam. They marked on the vertical beam where the floor was
and then marked on the beam how high the bottom of the horizontal bar reached. Using
very precise instruments, the scientists then measured the distance between the marks.
What did you notice that was unusual, from a critical thinking perspective, in the previous
paragraph?
The description of how Brad’s height is measured is seen as vague and confusing since, the
vertical and horizontal beams were placed are confusing as it says they use the bottom marking
of the vertical beam but then they used the height of the horizontal bar, which is confusing since
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
the horizontal bar would calculate the width or the top of Brad’s height. So, how they used the
horizontal bar to measure Brad’s height is confusing to the reader along with what precise
instruments were used to gain the output of Brad's height to be 5.1147 feet.
9.
For the following disagreement, answer these questions: (a) Is the disagreement factual
or merely verbal? (b) If it is factual, state the fact in dispute and then state what
observation, test, or discovery would settle the dispute. If it is verbal, identify the key
term in the dispute and state the different senses in which the two persons are using it.
Leonard: I visited Elvis Presley's grave in Tennessee last summer. I know the King is
dead, but it is hard to believe.
Angela: The King isn't dead. He is still influencing music. He is alive and well and living
in London where he works as a ghost writer.
Leonard: Ha! A ghost maybe, but not a ghost writer. Elvis departed this world in Las
Vegas and was buried at Graceland in Tennessee. Why do you say he's ghost writing?
Angela: A music magazine I read said he is. Everyone in the article said he is still active
musically.
a)
verbal disagreement
b)
Term in dispute is “Alive'' as Leanard has visited Elvis Presley’s gravesite whereas Angela has
read in a music magazine that he is alive and well and still active musically. The verbal dispute
shows since Leonard is speaking about Elvis, the human, being dead whereas, Angela is
referencing that he lives on due to his musical legacy. Thus, the argument is about the different
interpretations of the word “Alive”.
10.
Create an original example of equivocation. Underline or italicize the term that changes
meaning.
If a parent asks their child how long they would be out for and they reply with “I’ll only be out for
a
few
hours”. The term “Few” is subjective to the individual and is vague to the exact number of
hours they will be out