English 101 University of South Carolina Columbia The Woods Discussion In the Word document attached below you will find all the instructions for this assi

English 101 University of South Carolina Columbia The Woods Discussion In the Word document attached below you will find all the instructions for this assignment which is not that long but it can be tedious as you have to read all the instructions carefully and apply all of them to the paper of course. This is the most important grade for me at this course and it will determine whether I pass it or not, so that is how important this assignment is for me. I need a high quality work.

Your paraphrases must be:

new words in new word order
accurate in meaning, with no ideas that aren’t in the original passage
clear and smooth to read
correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling

In addition, each paraphrase should end with an in-text citation of the source author’s last name. Since these are electronic sources, there are no page numbers—just skip that.

Length: roughly 125-150 words total. Each of your paraphrases may be a similar length to the original passage or somewhat shorter. Remember, you don’t have to account for every single detailed bit of information in the original passage.You do need to express the ideas accurately.

I will also attach 3 documents to the tutor that starts working with me in this question, basically in those documents you will find lessons and samples of my English 101 teacher on paraphrasing so that you can be able to know in what exact way she wants the paraphrasing and therefore the paper to be done. English 101, Spring 2020
Paper 3 Assignment: Paraphrasing
Assignment: Choose any 4 of the source passages starting on page 2, and write a
paraphrase for each one that you choose. You can choose any combination of the
source passages for these free-standing paraphrases. Your paraphrases must be:




new words in new word order
accurate in meaning, with no ideas that aren’t in the original passage
clear and smooth to read
correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling
In addition, each paraphrase should end with an in-text citation of the source author’s last
name. Since these are electronic sources, there are no page numbers—just skip that.
To be clear, we’re not doing an essay incorporating source material, just an exercise focused on
writing good free-standing paraphrases. There will not be a need for a Works Cited.
Please don’t attempt this assignment until you’ve worked through the instruction and
practice exercises in the three documents about paraphrasing on Blackboard.
Length: roughly 125-150 words total. Each of your paraphrases may be a similar length to the
original passage or somewhat shorter. Remember, you don’t have to account for every single
detailed bit of information in the original passage. You do need to express the ideas accurately.
Due: Friday, April 24, at the end of your day, on Blackboard. Higher-quality work a bit
late is preferred over work that is rushed and sloppy. We’re not doing a separate draft, but if
students have difficulty I’ll allow revision.
Paper Format:




Double space
Type the usual heading with your name, etc.
Title for your paper: Paper 3
In your document, above each of your paraphrases, please type the word Passage and
the number of the passage you’re paraphrasing.* Do not retype the source passage
itself.
Example: Imagine that one of your source passages comes from the article on dogs and human
health that I used for examples in our paraphrase unit on Blackboard. For your reference,
following is a passage about dogs and people from that article:
Original passage:
2
Over time the relationship has gotten closer and closer. . . . Some would relate
that to advancements in industrialization and technology. We live in a high-tech,
low-touch world and people have a longing for a bond with nature.
(That’s just for your reference here; don’t retype the original passage in your assignment.)
For a paraphrase of that passage in your Paper 3 assignment you might write:
Passage 2
Dogs and people have bonded more and more over many centuries, and that
bonding is a way for people to connect with nature in our modern technologydriven culture (McMahan).
That’s all you have to do for each of your 4 passages. Remember, the citation should contain
the author’s name, NOT a person referred to in the article.
Grading: Based on the bullet-point criteria above under “Assignment.” I will post a rubric,
similar to the Short Paper 1 rubric.
Points: Up to 80 (16 percent of final grade).
Topic:
How did dogs develop from wolves?
Source text for Passages 1-3, adapted for clarity, from Smithsonian magazine website
Author: Brian Handwerk
Vocabulary, just in case:
hypothesis: tentative explanation to be tested
domesticate (as in animals): to tame
Vocabulary, just in caseocabvocabulary721376
Passage 1:
3
One hypothesis holds that early humans somehow captured wolf pups, kept them as pets, and
gradually domesticated them. But research director Brian Hare of Duke University says,
“Anyone who has spent time with wild wolves would see how unlikely it was that we somehow
tamed them in a way that led to domestication. The first domesticated animal was a large
carnivore, who would have been a competitor for food.”
Passage 2:
Hare adds that most wolves would have been fearful and aggressive towards humans—because
that’s the way most wolves behave. But some would have been friendlier, which may have given
them access to human hunter-gatherer foodstuffs.
Passage 3:
Hare notes that the physical changes that appeared in dogs over time, including splotchy coats,
curly tails, and floppy ears, follow a pattern of a process known as self-domestication. It’s what
happens when the friendliest animals of a species somehow gain an advantage.
Topic:
The Supreme Court case, Loving v. Virginia, that legalized interracial marriage
There are passages from two sources about this topic.
Context: The passages below are about the Supreme Court ruling in 1967 that struck down state
laws against interracial marriage. The case started when Mildred Jeter, a woman of
African American and Native American descent, married Richard Loving, a white man.
They lived in Virginia but went to Washington, D.C. to get married because interracial
marriage had been made legal there. They went home to Virginia, and about a month
later they were arrested. Later they filed a lawsuit in Virginia that eventually went to the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Source for Passages 4-5
“Loving v. Virginia”
Encyclopedia Britannica online
Author: Brian Duignan [I did not deliberately seek out articles with lots of Brians; it just
happened that way]
Passage 4:
4
In July 1958, police entered the Lovings’ bedroom in the early morning hours and arrested them
for having violated the state’s ban on interracial marriage. The Lovings pleaded guilty to having
violated the laws of Virginia, which prohibited a “white” person and a “colored” person from
leaving the state to be married and returning to live as man and wife.
Passage 5:
The law specified that punishment for violation was confinement in the state penitentiary for one
to five years. The judge sentenced the Lovings to one year in jail but suspended the sentence on
the condition that the couple leave the state immediately and not return as man and wife for a
period of 25 years.
Source for Passages 6-7
“Loving and the History of Anti-Miscegenation Laws in Virginia and Washington”
New York Public Library website
Author: Candice Frederick
Vocabulary:
miscegenation: intimate relationship between people of different races (marriage, living
together, childbearing, etc.). For synonyms you could use combinations of the words
interracial, between races, another race, marriage, intimate relations, personal relations,
mingling, intermingling, or other phrasing you think of.
annulment: canceling out a marriage to say it was never real
Passage 6:
In states with anti-miscegenation laws, Negroes and Caucasians who married interracially could
face serious penalties, including forced annulment. Biracial partners who got engaged could also
face tougher repercussions such as imprisonment.
Passage 7:
After the Lovings were ordered to leave Virginia, they established themselves in the District of
Columbia [Washington, D.C.] for four years. But after a unanimous decision on June 12, 1967,
the Supreme Court overturned the couple’s convictions by dismissing Virginia’s AntiMiscegenation policy.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Submit a Comment