Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 19:59:46 -0500
X-Sender: rlstrick@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu
X-Ph: V4.3@freya
To: rlstrick@ilstu.edu
From: Ron Strickland <rlstrick@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu>
Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown

>X-Sender: dlmeyer@odin.cmp.ilstu.edu
>Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 04:18:47 -0500
>To: rlstrick@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu
>From: Deidre Meyers <dlmeyer@odin.cmp.ilstu.edu>
>Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown
>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 18:14:27 -0500
From: MAILER-DAEMON@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown
To: <dlmeyer@odin.cmp.ilstu.edu>

  --- The transcript of the session follows ---
550 acad.comp.cmp.ilstu.edu.tcp... 550 Host unknown
550 <eng560-l@acad.comp.cmp.ilstu.edu>... Host unknown

  --- The unsent message follows ---
Received: from labi127.mlb57.ilstu.edu by rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (AIX
>4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA30654; Mon, 1 Sep 1997 18:14:26 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19970901171451.006a2f34@odin.cmp.ilstu.edu>
X-Sender: dlmeyer@odin.cmp.ilstu.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 17:14:51 -0700
To: eng560-l@acad.comp.cmp.ilstu.edu
From: Deidre Meyers <dlmeyer@odin.cmp.ilstu.edu>
Subject: Micro-essay #2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
<b>
>Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 17:06:13 -0700<br>
 
>From: Deidre Meyers <dlmeyer@odin.cmp.ilstu.edu></b><p>
<hr>
 For my second micro-essay I would like to address the question  brought
up in class; should Literature( according to my definition) be mandatory in
universities?  My definition of Literature is some what like that of Samuel
Johnson; but with a slight twist.  I consider Literature to be a written
work that pleases, hightens the readers consciousness and analytical
skills.  I stress that Literature with a capital "L" be taught because it
has to do more with analyzing, rather than literature with a lower case "l"
simply because I consider it to be a watered down version of the truth.
>From first hand experience I have found that many of my college courses
require critical analytical skills as a means to perform well in the
course.  Why should universities deprive their students of  a deversified
and enriching education, which I believe Literature has the capacity to
provide.  I think universities should require at least one course in
Literature. I feel it would benefit their students in the long run.  For
the second part of my essay I wish to comment on Saussure's notion that
language derives its' meaning from at any given point in time when it is
used, instead of its' historical meaning. To revert back to the books
example when we hear or see the word 'cat', we generally think of a four
legged creature with furr that purrs.  I feel we make this association not
because it has simialr vowels and consanants of the words cap, cad, and
bat, but because it is what we were taught back in first grade.  The
meaning of the word is and should be based on denotation and not
connotation.  For instance in modern day we have come up with what some
might term a "Black Dialect", (which I disagree with), but nevertheless
it's callled "Ebonics". In Ebonics words such as bomb. out of pocket, and
tight have almost adverse meanings than the original meanings.  True these
words may presently have a "new" meaning, but it still cannot cancel the
original meaning without world wide acceptance, and since I have just
stated that Ebonics is the "Black dialect,"( once I totally disagree with)
it just means the words have been used out of context for a group of
people, which means it is not accepted world wide.  This can be true for a
lot of words, because a word may have a specific meaning in one place and a
total different meaning elsewhere, would Saussure say that each meaning was
correct because they occurred at different places at a given time.  If that
were true there would be total coas in the world and cause more severity to
the already enormous language gap.  To return back to the word 'cat',
during the days when "Beatniks" roamed the earth, the word 'cat' may have
stood for a "cool person".  This phrase soon phased out , and I am sure
phrases such as "Dats da bomb!" too will phase out.  Thats why in the
ninties when people hear the word cat they think of a four legged furry
creature and not a "cool daddy-o."  I think no matter how a word is used
today tomorrow it will revert back to it's original meaning.  Tomorrow if
people began to call cats caps just because they were similar in spelling
it would not make it any more or less than a cat , it just would be a new
way of refering to it.<p>



>
>
>