Top Law Schools

i'll re-post after some serious editing. thanks everyone!

anyone?

Way too dense. Not enough focus. Narrow the scope to the reason you want to go to law school and how your experiences have shaped that opinion.

Your beginning needs to draw the reader in more. It's a little too confusing. Only someone fluent with all those languages would really get the nuances of what you're saying.

Also, not sure if a linguistic type PS is the way to go, seems a little risky, but i'm sure others will argue differently.

If you edit the OP and put two hard returns instead of one between each graf, I might be able to read it without my eyes burning.

philosoraptor wrote:If you edit the OP and put two hard returns instead of one between each graf, I might be able to read it without my eyes burning.

+1

quick scan makes me think you can cut a lot of unnecessary wordiness tho

sorry! and thanks for the suggestions so far! my original was 4 pages (for boalt and uf) and then i cut a few paragraphs out, but it doesn't flow quite as well...

3 - ink - now that i read it again, i agree that it lacks focus...back to the drawing board. any other suggestions?

Villa miseria. LOL. Now I know how to call detroit

.

Standard disclaimer that applies to all my PS posts: I'm not an undiplomatic editor IRL, but I think it's most helpful to look at PSes from the point of view of an overworked, mildly sarcastic adcomm.

Initial thoughts: Are you sure you want to take the following tack: (1) I went abroad, taught English, and have some experience studying other cultures; (2) I interacted with people who have a standard of living different from mine and live in a more volatile political climate; and (3) now I want to swoop to their rescue by studying "international human-rights law." Why should your experience, which is really not as unusual as you think it is, qualify you to aspire to this minuscule and ultracompetitive branch of law over the thousands of others who have showed sustained commitment to serving rather than observing? What you see rather than what you do is the heart of this PS, and it's not enough to convince me that it means anything more to you than "something I can use to get into LS."

So start by mulling that over -- and by grabbing your red pen to strike superfluous details (hint: they're all over the place) -- and I'll be back when I'm not rushing off to work.

Two things:
1. A lot of your sentences need to be shorter. This is something lawyers are known for being bad at, but now is not the time to show off the habit. ;) Break things apart instead of just lumping clause after clause together.

2. What details really add to this? Cut anything that doesn't. If Ana's having two children specifically is not relevant, don't mention that she had two children, that she's just "a mother" is good enough. That kind of thing. Also, a more specific application of this rule: Don't tag speech unless the tag actually is necessary to clarify something the words don't show.

As far as content, I'll leave that to other people who know this stuff better than I do. I do, however, like the Spanglidish part. It occurred that given that, it might make more sense to draw that thought back around to the conclusion and its application to law as another language, etc? Rather than talking about specific fields which does sound a little predictable and unrealistic given that you haven't yet actually studied the law and might end up wanting to do something else instead.

philosoraptor wrote:Standard disclaimer that applies to all my PS posts: I'm not an undiplomatic editor IRL, but I think it's most helpful to look at PSes from the point of view of an overworked, mildly sarcastic adcomm.

Initial thoughts: Are you sure you want to take the following tack: (1) I went abroad, taught English, and have some experience studying other cultures; (2) I interacted with people who have a standard of living different from mine and live in a more volatile political climate; and (3) now I want to swoop to their rescue by studying "international human-rights law." Why should your experience, which is really not as unusual as you think it is, qualify you to aspire to this minuscule and ultracompetitive branch of law over the thousands of others who have showed sustained commitment to serving rather than observing? What you see rather than what you do is the heart of this PS, and it's not enough to convince me that it means anything more to you than "something I can use to get into LS."

So start by mulling that over -- and by grabbing your red pen to strike superfluous details (hint: they're all over the place) -- and I'll be back when I'm not rushing off to work.

i sort of agree with this.

from the first read, it's evident that this story is told from a westerner's perspective, who isn't very familiar with south american countries or politics. i would be less descriptive about the people and their surroundings/living quarters and focus more on languag and its influence.

i'd also scrap the first para about your grandmother. it was nice, but it also comes off as a lazy way to engage the reader. the second para. is much more interesting and offers readers a legitimate introduction to your passion for linguistics.

SUCKS

bestusernameever wrote:SUCKS

3|ink wrote:

bestusernameever wrote:SUCKS

Honesty=not a troll

OK thanks everyone! I really appreciate your help! revision time...

bestusernameever wrote:

3|ink wrote:

bestusernameever wrote:SUCKS

Honesty=not a troll

yeah i think a different pic would have been appropriate......example:

jayn3 wrote:

bestusernameever wrote:

3|ink wrote:

bestusernameever wrote:SUCKS

Honesty=not a troll

yeah i think a different pic would have been appropriate......example:

Criticism accepted.