Using Argumentative Topic Sentences For Essay

Using Argumentative Topic Sentences For EssayIf you have been a teacher in the last several years, then you will know that there are many advantages to writing a number of argumentative topic sentences for essay. These sentences, when combined with the writing structure of an essay will help you to get your arguments across to your readers.The writing of argumentative sentence is very easy and all you need to do is to use the sentence structure that is commonly known as the thesis statement. As long as you use the thesis statement, you will be able to create a number of sentences that will support your argumentation. It is also important to keep in mind that you will need to get as many sentences in your essay as possible, so try to make each sentence count as much as possible.The sentences you will be using will be very short and you will only be using different words that you find will support your argument. Here are some examples of how this can be done.First of all, you will be u sing the 'I' statement when you are trying to write a thesis statement. This statement will support your argumentation as it will be pointing out how someone else already agreed with you.Secondly, you will use the 'is' statement when you are trying to write a premise statement. This will point out that if something is true, then it should be accepted by others.Finally, you will use the 'can' statement when you are dealing with the read-write students. When you state that others must accept the idea, it will show that you agree with them.When you are writing argumentative sentences for the essay, you will also be including a number of different topics. You will use these topics to support your arguments.The fact that you are using a number of different topics will also help you to ensure that you get your essay across in a way that is a good choice for a college student. As long as you follow these simple rules, you will be able to get the essays that you want to write.

macbeth Theme Sharing

with Laertes and when he stabs him he unknowingly poisons him with the blade of Laertes own sword, eventually leading to his death. Although actual poison was used throughout the play, the poison of the mind was just as important. When Hamlet had learned that Claudius had killed his father for his own greed, Hamlet’s mind was poisoned. All he could think of was a way to avenge the death of his beloved father. Later when Hamlet had accidentally killed Polonius thinking he was Claudius, Hamlet had also accidentally â€Å"poisoned† two separate min... macbeth Theme Sharing Free Essays on Hamlet/macbeth Theme Sharing Theme sharing in Hamlet and Macbeth In William Shakespeare’s two most popular works of art, Macbeth and Hamlet, several parts of the plays are similar. These two plays can be compared easily because Shakespeare used the same formula for each of his tragedies. The tragedies use supernatural incidents to intrigue the reader’s interest and included in the play is a hero who has a tragic flaw, which eventually causes him to make a fatal mistake. Throughout both of these plays, Shakespeare uses the leit motif of poison, death, ambition, and appearances can be deceiving. We are first introduced to poison in Hamlet in the very beginning of the play. King Hamlet is killed when his brother, Claudius, pours poison into his ear while King Hamlet is asleep in his apple orchard. This causes a fast but excruciating death. Poison is later brought back into the play when Claudius will try to slip a poison into Hamlet’s drink of wine. His plan backfires when his wife takes a drink from the cup instead of Hamlet and the poison eventually kills her. During the time of that incident, Hamlet is fencing with Laertes. Laertes sees that Hamlet if far beyond him in his fencing ability, so he decides to wipe the blade of his sword with a cloth soaked in poison. As the fight goes on Hamlet is cut on the arm, causing the poison to slowly seep into his blood. While they are fencing Hamlet is able to switch swords with Laertes and when he stabs him he unknowingly poisons him with the blade of Laertes own sword, eventually leading to his death. Although actual poison was used throughout the play, the poison of the mind was just as important. When Hamlet had learned that Claudius had killed his father for his own greed, Hamlet’s mind was poisoned. All he could think of was a way to avenge the death of his beloved father. Later when Hamlet had accidentally killed Polonius thinking he was Claudius, Hamlet had also accidentally â€Å"poisoned† two separate min...

Challenging Reality Essay

Challenging Reality Essay M.C. Escher: Challenging RealityM.C. Escher was a master of perspective. He challenged reality, and his critics minds. His artwork was considered to be highly mathematical, even though Escher never had any formal training in the math or sciences. Yet artists around the still world regard his work as great. Escher was able to manipulate geometry to create illusions that were often used to tell a story. In Day and Night and Ascending and Descending, Escher illustrated daily events and their meaning by using his artistic and mathematical techniques.In Day and Night, one of Eschers most acclaimed pieces, the idea of transformation from basic geometric shapes was used to depict a linking together of two separate events. In the center of the woodcut he began his design with a simple square which transformed into the farmland and geese. From these geese a city, in both the day and the night, emerged. The city in the day was a mirror image of the city at night that suggested the two events w ere inseparable. Day and Night was particularly special because Escher eliminated all negative space. Every inch of the paper was used to illustrate an event, which aided in the idea of day and night being one. Ascending and Descending is another well-known piece by Escher. This architectural drawing illustrated Eschers ability to create realistic designs, or did it? If the viewer took a closer look, he would see that Escher was once again playing with perspective to tell a story symbolically. To every person (monk) walking on the castles roof, there seemed to be an endless amount of stairs. Yet, these stairs were completely useless. These fictitious monks were either perpetually ascending or descending hence the title. This lithograph appeared to show the mundane and useless life that was lead by a monk in this time period. Once again Escher was able to symbolically show the life of a monk through his mathematical techniques. In contrast to both Day and Night and Ascending and Desc ending was a piece titled Grasshopper. This woodcut did not contain a symbolic message or tell a story of the grasshoppers life, but rather was a still life. Here Eschers realistic artistic ability shone. The detail that was carved into the woodcut was intense and very finely created, which proved, if not otherwise seen, that Escher could create extremely detailed and beautiful pieces of art that were completely realistic in form. Eschers use of intricate repeating patterns and mathematically complex structures created wonderful illusions for his viewers. However, he was able to depict realistic events with the same amount of mastery. MC Escher was, and will continue to be through his art, one of the great artists.

Affirmative action of law Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Affirmative action of law - Research Paper Example Affirmative action as framed up by the law had lots of confusions. In the American employment law framework affirmative action grew through a series of governmental announcements. Policies taking race into account to break the effects of long term unfairness were not simply endured but often necessitated by courts and civil rights agencies. Affirmative action policies were enforced on by the bodies approving them if they were voluntary, while on the other hand affirmative action policies obliged by the government mandates could be enforced through the legal system (Crosby & Iyer, Clayton, Drowning, 2003, pp. 94-95). The affirmative action of law laid its root during 1960’s. Since then it had been growing with constant development. The affirmative actions by law were multi faced. As the background check we can refer to the following instances. School unification remedies by the late 1960s had explicit racial goals and required punctual reassignment of students and teachers on a racial basis to fabricate truly desegregated schools. In connection to that the Voting Rights Act’s powers were elicited. Statistic showed a history of prohibiting and conditions were to be expected to be responsible for those differences in a state or community. Trial to prove biasness against each and every minority voters in every community had proved out to be inadequate. Affirmation action in college admissions were a part of these problem too. The peak of the movement for diversity on campuses came in the mid 1970s. As a result the Supreme Court gave decision. The decision limited the affirmative action and opened up campuses which suits by the whites. This move was highly criticized by the academic leader. During 1996 Texas decision made some amendments in the law. It stated that no harmony existed on the benefits of diversity. The higher education and the civil rights communities also followed the same pathway in the limelight of affirmative action enforced by law. A s an outcome of these efforts judgments were passed against the negative impact on the diversity was made in the court premises. The issues sharpened by legal consideration personified in the most important judicial proclamations on the major issue of diversity and related civil right issues. This witnessed the first positive move made by the law on affirmative actions. The declaration by the Court made exerted a strong positive impact on diversity issues which was resolved to a great extend. The problems of indifferences in the society were resolved to a great extend. The affirmative action boosted the morals of many living in the society (Orfeild & Kurlaender, 2001, pp. 1-10). Affirmative action was also observed its implication in the field of employment. In this arena, an organization was required to supervise its workforce statistics, keeping vigilance on the underrepresented gender and ethic group. Goals delineated in the action plan of affirmative action did not constitute un fair favored treatment. But in certain issues the affirmative action on employment was hugely criticized. The opponents depicted the policy as a simple matter of preferential treatment (Crosby & Iyer, Clayton, Drowning, 2003, pp. 95). The federal affirmative action policy may be sculpted as a tax on white male employment in contractor firms. As a cascading effect it could be analyzed in the standard two sector models applied to taxation. During the maturation period of affirmative action, enforcement of it did become more antagonistic. The employment data showed that black male and female employment shares amplified momentously faster in the contractor establishment than

Product Cost and Budgetary Control Methodologies and Systems Essay

Product Cost and Budgetary Control Methodologies and Systems - Essay Example The budgetary control systems controls costs through the preparation of budgets, comparing actual performance with the budget. This allows the managers to act upon the budget and results in order to attain maximum profitability (FAO, 2010). Over the last two decades the computer world is changing how companies operate and report. The need to incorporate computerized systems in every business aspects is still ongoing research. Budget information systems and product cost systems are analysed in this report, their benefits and challenges they pose. The product cost and budgetary control methodologies and systems There are two budget control methodologies i.e. the budgets and the budgetary control. The budget is the formal statement that represents the projected financial resources that are needed to undertake business activities. Budgetary control on the other hand is a technique and a tool that is used by management to compare the budget with the actual performance. Any discrepancies a re then acted upon either by revising the budget or exercise control action. The budget information system (BIS) BIS has been in use for the last 25 years having been used for budgetary needs in schools, cities and even countries. BIS integrates all the budget functions into one single application. These functions are capital budgets, human resources, operations, performance measures, reports and producing final budget documents. The system provides all the necessary features for maximizing the efficiency of the budget process. BIS is software that interfaces with the finance, personnel and payroll departments. It then condenses the historical data into database structures. This enhances performance in strategic planning, reporting, document processing, capital planning and improvements. Benefits of BIS The system improves overall performance by enhancing planning process. The system reduces errors hence planning is made easier and effective. The use of BIS accelerates the speed wit h which comparison of data is undertaken. It enables accurate tracking of costs in the system. The system quickens the budget preparation process hence few hours are spent in this process. Use of the BIS lowers the number of personnel needed for database management. To implement BIS in an organisation, there is need for training the involved staff. This is enhanced through videos materials, online sites, documents that come with the softwares and use of experts. The system can be customized to meet the individualized needs of a company i.e. application process, reports format and document processing. Different computer softwares are used for the BIS depending on the manufacturing company. However aspects of budgeting can be incorporated in one single software or broken down into budget softwares separately, control aspects, comparison parts etc. It is highly recommended for the company to incorporate the single application software of BIS. It may be expensive and complicated but wit h enough training and customer support from the producing company, the system is easy to use. The product cost is defined as the cost of direct labour, direct materials and direct overheads utilized in the production process. These costs are incorporated in the budget process and actual results compare for any variances. The product cost system sets out the process for accounting for the organisation’s product costs for the purpose of producing information

Artificial Intelligence in William Gibson’s Neuromancer Essay -- Neuro

Artificial Intelligence in William Gibson’s Neuromancer   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Artificial Intelligence is a term not too widely used in today’s society.   With today’s technology we haven’t found a way to enable someone to leave their physical body and let their mind survive within a computer.   Could it be possible?   Maybe someday, but for now it’s just in theory.   The novel by William Gibson, Neuromancer, has touched greatly on the idea of artificial intelligence.   He describes it as a world where many things are possible.   By simply logging on the computer, it opens up a world we could never comprehend.   The possibilities are endless in the world of William Gibson.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   This world of artificial intelligence has the power to produce many questions and theories because we don’t understand something that isn’t possible.   â€Å"How smart’s an AI, Case?   Depends.   Some aren’t much smarter than dogs.   Pets.   Cost a fortune anyway.   The real smart ones are as smart as the Turing heat is willing to let ‘em get.†Ã‚   (Page 95)   This shows that an artificial intelligence can be programmed to only do certain ...

“Judgements about dialects are often essentially judgements about the speakers of those dialects

Language is primarily considered to perform two major functions in society. It is designed to convey information to those around us as well as establish and maintain relationships. However, linguistically (albeit from social stereotypes) certain paradigms relating to class, social and financial status are attributed to dialects – a consensus that has been perpetuated in recent times due to the diversity of today's society and the integration of many differing dialects and languages in cities and countryside alike. Indeed, a stereotype regarding a dialect usually derives from the views held on the characteristics of its speakers. Although a direct correlation between the aforemented stereotypes and linguistic fact has little scientific basis in reality it has not served to reduce the almost established dialect prejudice rife in the media, judiciary and education systems. In the early 20th Century, the ‘Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis' advanced the theory that the derivative of language we use is respective of our social, cultural and ideological background, and ever since various linguists and sociolinguists have studied dialectal differences and correlation between dialect and social judgments therein to determine the extent and implications of prevalent dialect prejudice. The size of the British Isles often leads people to discern that the languages predominant in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are homogenous and that one dialect (‘British English') is the most prevalent throughout, but even within a nation the size of England there is a great diversity of dialect both regionally and socially. Though these respective dialects can be categorised in vague groups such as ‘north' and ‘south' they do not adhere to any sharp boundaries or coincide with county/city lines. Instead, dialects are said to form a â€Å"dialect continuum†1 as they merge and alter near other cities or counties (i.e.: other dialects) so therefore one cannot define dialectal boundaries as they would be based on social fact, not linguistic. The most ubiquitous dialects within society (‘Geordie', ‘Cockney', Jock', etc.) often receive the most scrutiny for their variation to standardised English, and it is because of this that the speakers of r espective dialects are stereotyped with traits common to their culture. However, while it is true that some dialects represent certain social and political variants, this is predominantly due to geographical reasons and not because a dialect accurately represents one cohesive body of social genre. Also, the extent of Dialect Continuum means that dialects are often bandied together into broad categories (Geordie, Scot, etc.) meaning that certain dialects are often misinterpreted as others and therefore leads to people being attributed characteristics of a similar dialect. This reiterates the irrational social judgments by which dialects are often quantified as its speakers can be attributed to a dialectal collective that, while phonetically similar, may be wholly unrelated. An active example of this is in one particular study which showed â€Å"attitudinal responses were statistically significant between speakers of different dialectal groups in Great Britain in spite of the fact that respondents were inaccurate in the identification of the area from which the speakers came†. Indeed, the hypothesis that dialect is representative of one's background (which is linked intrinsically to social preconceptions) is accepted by the majority of sociolingustical commentators, the established view being that â€Å"accents and dialects have come to act as indicators not only of one's relationship to a locality but also of one's social class position† 3. The fundamental consensus of the ‘Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis' (formulated in the early 20th Century by prominent linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf) highlighting the striking difference between both languages themselves and their subsequent dialect derivatives, and that the surroundings and ideologies of a community are prominent in its form of speech. Therefore, one could discern that, if dialectal content necessitates the input of social background, judgments of dialects could be verified as the respective social traits of the speaker are evident in what they say and how it is said. In Britain, â€Å"people are often able to make instant and unconscious judgements about someone's class affiliation on the basis of their accent†4. Indeed, phonetic factors assume a primary role in highlighting ones social background. A 1972 survey undertaken by National Opinion Polls in England provides an example of how significant speech differences are associated with social class variety. Subjects, randomly chosen from the British public, were asked which factor (from eleven provided) was most indicative of a person's class. The most popular answer was ‘the way they speak' followed by ‘where they live'. This evidence highlights, albeit only to a certain degree, that speech mannerisms (governed primarily by one's dialect) are considered to be more indicative of one's social class than education, occupation or income5. This is highlighted primarily through the paradigms of ‘Subjective Inequality', which details the origins of linguistic prejudice in the public domain. Societies throughout the world credit characteristics such as intelligence, friendliness and status according to the traits of respective dialects, though these views are based not on linguistic merit – rather its emulation of the ‘received' or ‘standardised' variety of the language (the most revered British dialect utilised by various official establishments such as Government and the BBC). Thus, language is shown to proliferate social stereotypes, as it is one of the qualities (albeit highly unreliable) by which one is initially judged by those in the public domain. Despite the judgements of dialects categorizing the speaker with various socio-political elements, one should note that, from a purely linguistical standpoint, no regional dialect displays any signs of deficiency in its ability to convey information – social predispositions are therefore centred wholly on the idiosyncrasies and eccentricities of each respective dialect. This is a consensus supported by the majority of linguistic research (â€Å"there is nothing at all inherent in non-standard variety dialects that make them linguistically inferior†6). People will invariably draw conclusions upon one's persona regarding the characteristics of speech, not on its content. Indeed, due to the lack of linguistic discrepancy between the respective British dialects it is discernable that, aside from social factors, they are arbitrarily stigmatised. However, many maintain that this linguistic superficiality is perpetuated by the media; characters on television or radio that repr esent non-standardised dialects are often simply manifestations of traits commonly associated with their respective culture. Furthermore, some Sociolinguists have propagated the theory that perceived linguistic inequality (namely those dialects that do not conform to standardised forms of pronunciation and syntax) is a consequence of social inequality as â€Å"language is one of the most important means by which social inequality is perpetuated from generation to generation†7.The language and style utilised within a society has an innate relationship with the geography, occupation and ideologies prevalent in the community – making dialectal prejudice easier to circulate as the social traits of a speaker are evident in his diction and style of conversation. This is again based upon the ‘Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis', maintaining that language (and thus dialect) structure is, to some extent, influenced by a society's surroundings which in turn affects the way the community perceives the world around it. In reality, dialect prejudice is apparent in every sector of society, from education to business, highlighted through the ‘matched-guise' experiments conducted by Strongman and Woozley in 1969. These experiments served to highlight the extent to which people are quantified on the basis of their dialect and consisted of groups of subjects listening to people reciting a passage to assess the perceived traits of prevalent ‘RP English', Yorkshire, Northern and Scottish dialects. The subjects were then asked to gauge certain attributes regarding each speaker (friendliness, intelligence, success, etc.). The results showed that several of the dialects emerged with stereotypical traits – despite the fact that linguistically, none of the speakers had recited the passage any better or worse than the others as each speaker had been the same person adopting a series of dialects. Table 1 – Results from W.P. Robinson ‘Language and Social Behaviour' (1972). RP English Intelligent, successful, not friendly. Yorkshire Dialects Perceived as†¦ Serious, kind-hearted, not intelligent. Scottish Dialects Friendly, good-natured. Northern Dialects Industrious, reliable, lower class. It is clear from this that society assumes characteristic inferences upon others based primarily on their dialects. In short, speech characteristics of a social stereotype inherit the stereotypes evaluation. Further evidence of this is seen from an experiment conducted in America to highlight the prejudice between public reception of prominent ethnic and native dialects. A single speaker was recorded and played to listening subjects saying the word ‘hello' in three dialects: Standard American English (SAE), Chicano English (ChE), and African American Vernacular English (AAVE). Variation in the tenseness of the vowel and pitch prominence on the first syllable of ‘hello' was enough to elicit a significantly accurate identification of the dialects by listeners. When the stimulus was expanded to include ‘Hello, I'm calling about the apartment you have advertised in the paper', in actual calls to landlords (who were obviously unaware of the experiment), the SAE speaker guise was given an appointment to see housing at roughly the seventy percent level. Both the AAVE and ChE guises were given appointments only about thirty percent of the time8. This underlines the universal presence of dialect prejudice, the latter dialects are shown be regarded in certain sectors as less prestigious than the former. There is a great deal of evidence to underline lack of knowledge that institutes these social judgements of dialectal variety. Firstly, the prominent linguist Edward Sapir maintained that dialect and culture are not always intrinsically associated and that many unrelated cultures can share very similar dialectal derivatives of the same language. An active example of this was prevalent in aboriginal America – the Athabaskan varieties are clearly unified despite the wide distribution of its people, from the hunting communities of Western Canada to the ritualised Southwest. The illogical stigmatisation of dialects highlighted in the stigma towards the employment of double negatives in certain dialects (an action that is derided as a sign of low social standing or poor intelligence). Whilst being both widely considered a standard linguistical construction in other languages (e.g.: French and Arabic) and prevalent in such classical literary works as Shakespeare and Chaucer, modern English encourages the marginalisation of its usage. Thus, it is evident yet again that perceptions regarding dialects are not founded upon established linguistic principles, the case in point highlighting that syntactical and grammatical constructs are more figurative in a dialects perception. This has in turn lead sociolinguists to conclude that dialects cannot be adversely regarded on account of grammatical inconsistencies, as â€Å"these features have no intrinsic consequences for our capacity to communicate or restrict the range of meanings we can express†9. Furthermore, the illogical parameters by which dialects are linguistically quantified are reiterated in the cultural paradox of ‘American' and ‘British' English. In England, dialects without a non-prevolic /r/ are given prestige and constitute an integral part of the ‘RP' dialect; those that do not share this trait are stigmatised and portrayed as belonging to a rural and/or uneducated populace. Conversely, in New York those containing a non-prevolic /r/ are socially marginalized whilst non-prevolic /r/ usage is commonplace in upper class society. In English towns such as Reading and Bristol this pattern is again reversed – serving to reiterate that value judgements regarding dialect are completely random (at least from a linguistic standpoint). As well as this, another example of social perception strongly influencing the respective status' of dialects was conducted in New York by Labov, who examined shop assistant speech patterns in three differing department stores of high, medium and low repute. The procedure was then to ask several clerks a question regarding the department (e.g.: ‘where are the woman's shoes?') with two possible occurrences of non-prevolic /r/, to test the hypothesis that non-prevolic /r/ usage correlates with social class. Table 2 – Results of the Labov's Survey, taken from P. Trudgill (1983). High-ranking Store 38% used no non-prevolic /r/. Medium-ranking Store 49% used no non-prevolic /r/. Low-ranking Store 83% used no non-prevolic /r/. Thus Labov discerned that, to a certain extent, his hypothesis was verified: those dialects that do not frequently use non-prevolic /r/ are usually of a lower class. Also, this experiment demonstrated the paradigm that dialects are socially affected; the fact that this dialectal trait is marginalized is due to its affiliation with lower classes, reinforcing the fact that views on dialect are socially governed10. The communal view of certain dialects is not determined arbitrarily; they have as much to do with personal opinions regarding the dialect as the social and cultural values of the respective community. Certain dialects are given more prestige and status than others, which leads to some being more favourably evaluated than others (some are considered ‘good' or ‘attractive' whilst others are regarded as ‘slovenly' or ‘bad' in comparison). Dialects judgements are again propagated through the media, the frequent usage of ‘RP' English in official reports and programs responsible for the high level prestige attributed to those that utilise it. Judgements about dialects are therefore based on social connotations as opposed to any inherent linguistic properties. In short, it is the speaker that is judged, rather than the speech. This consensus is reiterated by Giles and Sassoon11, who cite consistent findings of subjects evaluating anonymous speakers with more standardised dialects more favourably for such characteristics as intelligence, success and confidence. In Britain the middle class is associated with not only its widespread representation of the standard dialect (‘RP' or ‘Estuary English') but also speaking with in a formal, articulate style than more common or marginal dialects (‘Cockney' and ‘Indian English' respectively). However, whilst many linguists conclude that social judgments are the parameter that separates dialects, the linguist Brown12 proposed the notion that perhaps there was a linguistic discrepancy between the standardised and stigmatised dialects in society. Brown contrasted the speech characteristics of upper and lower social class French Canadian speakers of varying dialects reading a pre-set passage and discovered, relative to the lower class dialects, the upper class subjects were considered as more articulate and had a better range of intonation and diction. From this, one could discern that there is an argument to support the idea that dialects are not wholly based on social judgment and that dialects utilised by the upper classes are generally more articulate and a more accurate representation of standardised diction (widely considered the quintessential form of a language). Nevertheless, there is a great deal that negates the validity of this information; firstly, as the subjects were reading prepared material and not speaking freely they could have been judged partly on their reading ability – not their dialectal traits. Secondly, it is difficult for subjects to not be affected by their personal views with respect to certain dialects, as neutrality can be hard to maintain in the artificial environment in which the is experiment was set (which could also be considered an adverse factor in itself). Though some experiments have shown that dialects are, in certain respects, revered on a purely phonetic level, analysis of large amounts of data seemed to group together paired opposites which pointed to competence, personal integrity, and social attractiveness constructs in the evaluation of speaker voices. A great deal of subsequent research in this field confirmed that these constructs were regularly at work, and, more interestingly, that standardised (or â€Å"RP English†) speakers were most often judged highest on the competence dimension while nonstandard (or regionally and/or ethically distinct speakers) were rated higher for the integrity and attractiveness dimensions13. Irrespective of social background, we can see that dialects can be judged (albeit very rarely) solely upon the speaker's representation of a particular dialect. In summary, the views surrounding many of today's modern dialects are primarily based upon out-moded stereotypes of the culture that said dialects represent. Though linguists have proved that language is influenced by predominant factors within a community (surroundings, ideologies, etc.) it does not justify dialectal prejudice as the information upon which these are founded are often erroneous and generalised. There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that no dialect is linguistically inferior to any other as they all possess the capacity to convey information effectively (if they did not, they would have been discarded or adapted by its community, making their very presence today confirmation enough of their abilities). Limiting the social and occupational possibilities of a certain group of people through dialect prejudice (albeit for many a machiavellian-esque social stigma), simply preserves social asymmetries and propagates tension between differing cultural factions.