By defining the word ‘Arabizi’ at the beginning, Villelabeitia establishes to the reader a brief, yet a concise idea of what Villelabeitia argues upon in his essay. From the variety of devices and techniques Villelabeitia uses, he succeeds in creating a strong, solid academic essay. “’When I came back from university in Canada I realized that everybody was mixing English and Arabic. It is so prevalent. It wasn’t like that five years ago,’ said Dalia Alkury.”, unlike Fordham’s “Bombs and Botox in Beirut: How Do You Cope with Living in Lebanon? Get a Nose Job”, Villelabeitia manages to provide readers with a variety of experiences to support his claim on how common ‘Arabizi’ is.
Although Fordham provides readers with readers with a common image on the Lebanese population, she…show more content… Though capturing in tension in her introductory sentences, the author loses at building the stress throughout the essay as she fails to use the topics of invention. The reader can only determine to what extent do Lebanese people party, and even the answer for the extremity of their partying is overly generalized. Instead of giving the reader an extensive explanation on her claim, Fordham throws to the reader a variety of unexplained examples. “Some are less charitable in their assessment of the mindset. 'It's sick,' said a Lebanese friend bluntly. 'They don't think about civilians dying, they just party, party, party.' The World Press Photo picture of the year prize in 2006 was given to an image of young beautiful Lebanese women, driving through a bombsite as if on a sightseeing tour, wrinkling their (perfect) noses. Other Lebanese friends said that in 2006, they heard people moan that the war had 'ruined their summer'.” In this example, Fordham provides the reader with the intensity of the issue, but fails to explain what lead up to the issue and how extreme is the situation in comparison to other countries and
