Iniciaremos este "desfile" de cartas con dos
ejemplos de dos lectores que – basándose en una misma noticia – escriben
para desaprobar los contenidos. Cabe destacar que aunque el
mensaje de ambas cartas es semejante en lo que respecta a su contenido, la
relación autor-lector no es la misma.
Formal letter
El autor de esta primera carta (formal
letter) utiliza una redacción impersonal y trata a su lector con una
aparente muestra de respeto imponiendo cierta distancia:
Dear Sir,
I read your article in Friday's
Buenos Aires Times with amazement. I'm afraid that if, as your article
would seem to suggest, you are seriously proposing that the bullock and
human muscle power be re-introduced as farming methods, the proposal cannot
be given any serious consideration.
There can be no doubt that
bullocks do in fact permit savings in fuel and fertiliser, as well as being
non-pollutant, cheap and contributing to soil quality.
However, it would surely not be
called progress to force men to return to back-breaking labour, nor would
anyone these days be prepared to undertake this kind of work. And I also have strong reservations
as to the bullock's productivity in comparison with that of a tractor.
I fear that your proposal can only
lead to hard work, poor productivity and more imports, a
situation I fail to see any advantage in.
I remain,
Yours faithfully,
Milton Rainier
Burgos 1830
1425 Buenos Aires
(5411) 4821-3618
Informal letter
El autor de esta segunda carta (informal
letter) es mucho más directo, abierto y franco que el anterior y es
evidente que se dirige a un público diferente:
Dear Sir,
When I read your article the
other day I was horrified. Are you seriously suggesting we
should start farming with bullocks and human muscle power again? With all
respect, you must be out of your tiny mind.
Yes, I`m sure we'd save on
fuel and fertilisers, and sure that bullocks are cheap and good for the
soil and don`t pollute either, but do you really think you can make people
do back-breaking work again and call that progress? And, anyway, who do you
think you'd find these days willing to do work like that? Not me, for
one!
I'd like to know, too, just how
productive a bullock is. How many fields can it plough in a day? Not half
as many as a tractor. I bet!
Apparently you'd be quite happy
to send us back to the fields, but to produce less so we'd have to import
more? What's the sense in all that?
Yours faithfully,
Carlo Pontino
Belgrano 125
3115 Santa Fe
(5411) 3811-2509
¿Has observado la gran diferencia entre ambas
cartas? Interesante, ¿verdad? Y ahora nos dedicaremos al último
ejemplo:
Putting something right
La semana pasada, la autora de esta
carta fue a la inauguración de una discoteca en su ciudad. Al día
siguiente, en un diario local leyó una reseña descalificadora acerca
de la discoteca. Expresando "las cosas tal como son", en su carta defiende
al flamante local y explica
sus puntos de vista:
Dear Sir,
I am writing to disagree with the opinions expressed by
Rosie Gossiper in her
review of the FireWall disco.
I do not think Ms Gossiper gave FireWall a fair chance. She must have got
there too early. When my friends and I arrived, the place was bursting with
an enthusiastic crowd of dancers, all enjoying the lively atmosphere.
Ms Gossiper complains about the music. She cannot have stayed long, or she
would have heard the biggest hits from Europe and North and South America.
They probably played just a few slow numbers before the dancers got warmed
up.
Ms Gossiper also objects to the cost of refreshments. Admittedly this is high,
but entrance charges are reasonable. You can have an enjoyable night out for
less than the price of a trip to the cinema.
Altogether I think Ms Gossiper's report was unfair. She should not discourage
people from trying FireWall for themselves. My friends and I can
thoroughly recommend it, as we would have told her if she had spoken to us.
Yours faithfully,
Mirtha Muller
Reston 4215
Virginia, VA 31425
200-811-2509
Para las dos actividades de esta unidad
utilizaremos un titular imaginario de un periódico y dos cartas imaginarias
(una descalificadora y otra aprobatoria) comentando el articulo que acompaña
al titular.
GOVT.
GIVES GO-AHEAD TO NUCLEAR PLANT [Gobierno
autoriza continuidad de planta nuclear]
Lee atentamente la primera carta e intenta
completarla adecuadamente con las palabras del menú.
Dear Sir,
It was with the
dismay that I read yesterday of the Government decision to
go
with the construction of a nuclear power
plant. I can
see this
decision as a great step backwards for mankind. Nowhere in the world
anyone been able to guarantee the safety of nuclear plants
or find an
adequate method of disposing of nuclear waste. Yet the Government seems to be
willing to
its population to such risks.
I
to say on behalf of my children and myself that we cannot accept this
decision and we have no choice
to register a strong protest against this
decision. We
hope that others will join us in this protest so that
sufficient pressure is put on the Government to make
think again and
wisely change their minds.
Ahora lee atentamente la segunda carta e intenta
completarla adecuadamente con las palabras del menú.
Dear Sir,
Congratulations! Congratulations to your newspaper for your hard-fought
campaign and congratulations to the Government
its decision to adopt nuclear power.
This is one of the most sensible decisions this Government has
.
Now at
we can look
forward
a guaranteed
supply of cheap energy with no worries about what happens the
day coal and gas run out.
delighted I am
that people's unfounded and emotional fears have been
overcome,
our industry can
look forward to a secure energy supply and
that the man
the street won't
have to tolerate any restrictions on his personal consumption.
