Grouping Texts Task:

Texts A, B, E and F all have an informal register. In text A, the informal register and the deictic referencing, “hello it’s just me.” “that thing,” “that book”, suggests that the people calling all have a good relationship with Katie, there is no need for them to explain themselves too deeply because they know she will understand. However the language used suggests that each person has a different relationship with Katie, which in turn affects the level of formality. For example, the lack of non-fluency features in message 4 implies that their relationship is much more serious or perhaps that the speaker is much more confident, compared to message 3 for example. Her ability to use the idiom, “I’m losing my marbles…” which would probably only be used in an informal situation, suggests that their relationship is friendly or that this speaker uses a lot of ‘sayings’ in their idiolect. Text B’s use of informal language is not surprising given the context, high frequency lexis is used as 3 year old “Sam” would not understand/have started learning much more difficult words. In fact only words with one or two syllables have been used in all of the dialogue, Sam uses “’cos” an abbreviation of ‘because’ perhaps as it would be easier to say/pronounce. The lexical choice is very ‘child-friendly’, words associated with the learning of a language such as family names “granddad,” “mummy,” “grandma” and day to day things like “house.” Again suggesting that the reason for the informal style of conversation is because simple words are easier to learn and pronounce and the mother has to accommodate her language to her child in order to communicate effectively without alienating Sam. Text E’s use of informal language could be due to the fact that they are an x-student, there is no longer any need to use hyper correct grammar since they are not in school. It may also suggest that the relationship between the student and teacher is relaxed, like the use of a nickname “bolivian ben.” The student was happy to use this “nickname” as they knew their teacher has a pragmatic understanding of when it was coined. However it is also possible that since they are “gap-yearing” they do not have enough time to re-read their email, for example the lack of capital letters, especially for their first person singular pronouns(i). Text F is an advertisement in a national newspaper, the use of bold yet scruffy graphology could be a means of standing out. Since it is a national newspaper it is possible that this advert would be situated between a formal article and perhaps an advertisement for a business or a beauty product. This juxtaposition would catch the reader’s eye. However the organisation, “The Samaritans” would not know this for sure and so their graphology and informal style has other purposes as well. One of these could tie in with the aim of the poster which is to find “…someone who’s patient + understanding…” The advert itself is almost the first test, the use of fillers such as “like” and “erm” make it difficult to read quickly so only people who got to the end can find out the job opportunity they are offering.

Texts A, D and G all use imperatives. Text A, messages on an answerphone, could use a direct way of stating something because of the context of the messages, for example there is not enough time to politely ask for something as answerphone messages should be short and concise. The imperative in message one, “get the drinks in while…” suggests that this person has a good relationship with ‘Katie’, the determiner before the noun (drinks) indicates that they probably had plans, “the drinks,” and so Katie will know which drinks to buy etc… There is no need to ask politely here or mitigate the imperative as it is highly likely that this friendship is a good one. However the use of imperative in message four seems to have a different meaning, the formality of the message and the lack of non-fluency features suggests that this message was said quickly and confidently. The imperative used, perhaps to assert power, “…put that book in your bag the minute you walk through the door.”  Could suggest that Katie has one of “Caio’s” books and needs to give it back, but we cannot be sure. Katie’s ‘mum’ uses an imperative, “give me a ring” an idiom which is a generic way of asking for someone to call you back, however it could be tied in with her own idiolect. Since text D is an advert the use of an imperative “Prove it.” seems to be a much more thought out use, whereas in text A it’s possible that these imperatives, especially that they were in natural speech, were not thought about. The imperative in this advert could be mimicking a possibly frequent conversation between a girlfriend/partner “her”, and boyfriend. Perhaps in their market research before the advert they found that many people’s girlfriends use this imperative “Prove it.” In a straight forward slightly aggressive way of asserting power. This imperative then seems to tie in with the intended audience which is probably men as it is about football, (a sport highly dominated by men- interest and playing.) It could also tie in with a language theory which states that men prefer to here imperatives as they are much clearer. However the fact that many of us would subconsciously make the assumption that “her” is a girlfriend and that this is an advert only for men could make this advert quite gender biased. Assuming that women will not watch football for example and that men must use “BT” to come up with a lie to tell their girlfriend does not give BT a good reputation. Text G could be classed as a weak inclusion since it uses mitigated imperatives, (perhaps to tie in with the intended audience which may be more sophisticated women) whereas the other texts in this group use much more straight forward imperatives. The imperatives are in the instructions on the packet which is not surprising, however the word choice is interesting for example “Draw the tights up…” The word choice softens the imperative and fits in with the luxury of the product, replacing it with a synonym; perhaps ‘pull’ stops the feeling of serenity which “Lite legs” has created.

Texts D, C, F and G all share a purpose which is to persuade. Text D uses humour to persuade the reader. The ambiguity in the pronoun “her” means that the audience has to engage in the advert to work out who “her” is. The intended audience, which would probably be men, means that when they work out that “her” is girlfriend/partner; familiar situations which they may have had would come to mind. Feelings of familiarity can make the audience feel like this advert is tailored for only them. Women may also find this advert entertaining, playing into gender stereotypes can be amusing as a vast majority would understand the message it is saying. Perhaps that men ‘cant’ talk to their partners whilst watching television for example. An interesting way in which Text F persuades the audience is by giving the ‘people in need’ a voice. The use of the intensifier “really” in the sentence: “If you can we really need you,” gives a strong sense of hopelessness and desperateness. They are ‘really’ asking for help. The capitol letters in the sentence, “IMAGINE HOW THEY FEEL,” targets your subconscious, the larger and bolder font means many people will absorb this information as ‘important’. The statement: “If you can we really need you.” directly addresses the reader and the third person pronoun could make the reader feel as though ‘we’ are the people who need help, which could make the audience feel guilty if they are declined to donate/apply for a position. Text G’s formal language suggests that this product is for older women.  The salient feature for persuading could be the lexical field of perhaps invention, which is used, it gives the product much more prestige, for example, “new concept,” “modern,” “technology,” “revolutionary,” They have managed to make “hosiery” different from the other products on the shelf which is a brilliant way of standing out and thus selling more products. The adjective “modern” could enable the seller to create trust between their product and the buyer, since the word modern is associated with science and money etc… 

Romantic Fiction

After a few minutes Daisy realised she had been re-reading the same sentence over and over. Just outside her window the pale blue sky and the green rolling hills beckoned her, and she sighed at the work she had been trying, unsuccessfully, to complete. She stared out the window at a tabby cat rolling playfully in the sun; stretching its paws forward and watching a bird hop from branch to branch in the cherry tree behind her house- too lazy to try and catch it. She rose from her desk, pulled on her boots and hopped down the stairs and headed for the back door. Once outside she inhaled deeply, Mr. Harvey was in his garden next door mowing the lawn: she adored the smell of freshly cut grass and a smile rose on her face as the heat of the sun washed over her. She hated that people spent so much time cooped up in their houses. After climbing over her back wall to escape onto the fields behind her house, her skirt caught on a bramble and she became agitated at the thorn clinging to her and trying to steal the pastel green thread from her clothing. On hearing a snuffling noise she turned her head to see a large chocolate Labrador at her feet, “Do you need help with that?” A tall man bent down to retrieve a tennis ball and the dog raced towards it almost tripping over itself with excitement when he threw the ball in the opposite direction. It was Mr. Harvey’s son: Jason. They had known each other for a few years now but he had never seemed interested in her, while she stayed at home with her mum and studied he went off to travel the world; he worked in orphanages and built wells for the local communities. After throwing the ball he massaged his wrist, “I messed up my back when I was in Africa; I offered to carry some bricks to build a school house and overestimated my own strength,” he chuckled at himself; two rows of white teeth shining in the sun. He stretched his arms out, she could see the outlines of his muscles under his shirt; she quickly darted her eyes away. “Could you?” she pointed to the tangled mess of thorns and fabric, “Ouch,” he mimicked her sarcastic tone and smiled again. He moved close to her, his soft hands brushed her arm as he started to deal with the mess she had made. “So how have you been Daisy? My father tells me you’re quite the poet.” As soon as her name passed his lips she felt her heart start to race; the thought of the Harvey’s discussing her at home excited her. “Um... Yeah, I guess: I like to write.” Her voice was much quieter than she had hoped for. He stood up to face her, “Done,” his tone was much deeper and he had a serious look on his face, The moment she realised she had been staring into his deep-blue mysterious eyes for longer than a usual encounter, she felt herself blush. He remained as cool and calm as normal. She gazed down at her skirt; he had removed the thorn without causing much damage, she couldn't help but think about her annoyance of his capability to talk to her without screwing up like she did. Her sandy hair had fallen in front of her face and she almost jumped when his hand delicately brushed it behind her ear and rested against the side of her face. She felt herself lean into his gentle touch: feeling his skin against hers. Her eyes began to close but he pulled away and she was swept back into reality by his barking dog dropping a ball at her feet.

Language and Gender

Dominance Theory: In “mixed-sex conversations” men are much more likely to interrupt than women do. This is backed up by an old study consisting of a small sample of recordings by Zimmerman and West. They found that in 11 conversations between men and women, men interrupted significantly more than that of women. However, it is important to recognise that this was a rather small-scale study which may have been a product of its time (1975). It would not be safe to generalise the findings to other people. This could be supported by Geoffrey Beattie who found that, after recording conversations, men and women interrupt as much as each other (men 34.1, women 33.8)- the difference here being too slight to be notable. Zimmerman and west concluded that interruptions are a sign of dominance; they don’t want to listen any longer and have the ability to speak over someone, which lead Beattie to ask: "Why do interruptions necessarily reflect dominance? Can interruptions not arise from other sources? Do some interruptions not reflect interest and involvement?" 

Deborah Tannen and difference: Deborah Tannen explains men and women's language use as being extremely different. She pin-pointed 6 main areas: 

• Status vs. Support.
• Independence vs Intimacy.
• Advice vs Understanding.
• Information v. Feeling.
• Orders vs. Proposals.
• Conflict vs. Compromise.

Status vs support: Men live in a world whereby conversations are seen as ways of gaining authority/status. Meaning that throughout conversations they must not let others ‘dominate’them. Whereas women use conversations as support; ways to share ideas.

Advice vs understanding: Deborah Tannen explains the ways in which men and women react to complaints. Suggesting that men see it as an opportunity to ‘correct’ the situation, whereas woman are usually seeking an understanding- “When my mother tells my father she doesn't feel well, he invariably offers to take her to the doctor. Invariably, she is disappointed with his reaction. Like many men, he is focused on what he can do, whereas she wants sympathy.”

Orders v proposals: Woman are less likely to tell someone what to do (order) and instead hedge their point or use indirect ways to get what they want: “could we…” “should we…” etc. Men prefer to use imperatives for a direct approach. 

Robin Lakoff published many assumptions of women's language and how they use language. Among the list are many ways which seem to have a negative spin on the way in which women talk; a language which seems to create ‘timid’ people who perhaps are ‘unsure of themselves’. For example:

• Use indirect commands and requests: Like, “My, isn't it cold in here!” Which is actually a request for the closing of a window for example.
• That women do not have a sense of humour and do not understand jokes. Meaning they find it difficult to tell jokes correctly.
• Hedge more; “sort of”, “kind of” etc…
• Use question intonation in declarative statements: So when stating something, women raise the pitch of their voice at the end of the sentence suggesting that they are unsure of themselves.

http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/gender.htm#tannen

Overview: Fairclough’s unequal encounter,   status of both participants, power asymmetry.

Para 1

·         Barrister seems to have most of the power- due to role in court: instrumental power. Leads the encounter, asks questions. Non fluency features. Asks leading questions.

·         Long questions; status allows him to explain himself. Also the conventions of a court room.

·         Questions the witness as if he is the one on trial. Suggesting he wants to ‘blame’ something on Mr Neil- changes how he speaks to him.

·         Partly rehearsed speech? “you put two and two together Mr Neil and you made five…” Very structured in comparison with Mr Neil’s answers. Time to prepare. Mr Neil has no real time- however he may have decided what things he would like to answer/not answer etc…

Para 2

·         Mr Neil influential power- make himself look ‘good’/innocent to the judge: Overlaps, answers quickly, probably thought question was over, ‘no time to waste’; suggesting that he knows what he wants to say- doesn't need to think about his answer.

·         Short answers. Lower power than Barrister.

·         The two long pauses, as if Mr Neil is thinking how he wishes to proceed. The pause before, “no it’s not right.”

·         Seems to gain power throughout, starts off with fillers etc… Suggesting he is guilty? Unsure of what he is going to say/phrase it. However, about halfway through he starts to gain confidence perhaps? “[laughing quietly] that’s not true no”.  The addition of “no” at the end of many of his sentences seems to suggest that he is completely sure in what he is saying. Leaving nothing for the barrister to twist.

Although the barrister has instrumental power from his job in the court room, Mr Neil uses his influential power to try and stop the barrister from portraying him as ‘guilty’ to the judge. This unequal encounter displays the power asymmetry between participants in the courtroom due to the status of the speakers.

The barristers role in the court room means that he able to ask closed/leading questions, “…isn't that right?” and spend a long time structuring his points, whereas the witnesses language, is constrained due to his lack of power and the ‘time limit’ in which he must speak within. The barrister’s instrumental power could also suggest why Mr Neil decides not to challenge the barrister’s arguments and instead replies with short answers. An affordance of the barrister’s job is that he is able to plan what he is going to say. The barristers use of the intensifier “so” to modify “many” lowers Mr. Neil's status since it is highly likely that this was said in a patronizing tone. The barrister is probably using this modifier to portray to the audience (the judge and/or jury) that Mr Neil is in fact ‘troublesome’, perhaps to nullify Mr. Neil's testimony in order to protect his client. However this ‘mocking’ tone is not questioned/corrected by the judge, who holds the most power in the room, which could suggest that it may have not come across as ‘un professional’ or that the judge is in agreement with the fact that Mr. Neil is one for being involved with the police regularly. 

Language + Power: Theory

Erving Goffman: “The presentation of self in everyday life.”

Goffman observed that face had to do with the ‘positive social value’ that we like to maintain in social interactions. Linguistic studies of face focus on the way in which we use language to acknowledge the fact that people have face ‘needs’. 

Brown and Levinson’s model (1987) claims to provide a universal account of how face-work operates. Suggests there are 2 distinct types of face ‘positive’ and ‘negative’. Positive face reflects our desire to be accepted and liked by others. Negative face reflects our wish to have the freedom to do what we want and to have independence.

Face threatening acts (FTA’s): insults, expressions of disapproval which can harm the addressee’s positive face. Requests can also be face-threatening.

If some actions might be interpreted as a threat to another’s face, the speaker can say something to lessen the possible threat- face saving act (FSA). 

On and off record:

• On record: “give me a pen,” “Lend me your pen,” Mitigating devices to soften the demands: ‘would you,’ ‘please,’ etc…

• Off record: “Uh, I forgot my pen,” “Hemm, I forgot where I put my pen.” These statements can be ignored. 

Grouping Task:

Texts A, E, F and D all share either a primary or secondary purpose to instruct. Texts A and E are the back of a product, instructing how to use them, A being watermelon seeds and E being the back of a moisturiser for children. Strong inclusions A, E and D all use imperatives to give clear and concise information in a manner which is quick to read. For example, text A uses imperatives throughout like, ““Sow in thoroughly warmed soil”, “Cover with 1” of fine soil,” and “Keep evenly moist.” The use of imperative here instructs without confusing the reader with long winded explanations, and also as a means of saving space as the text has to fit on the back of the seed packet. Text D is the information on an ID photo card for the train. The use of imperative in this text coincides with the formal register of the information, for example, “produce it for inspection,” and “Show this Photocard when you buy a Season Ticket or Travelcard.” Which suggests a sense of importance and informs the reader of problems which may arise if you do not use the card correctly, for example, “It must not be used by any other person.” The information here has been crafted in a way which instructs with no confusion. Weak inclusion F is a charity leaflet its primary purpose being to persuade and its secondary purpose being to inform. The instructions in the poster are mitigated as they are telling the reader how to give to their charity and want to avoid making the audience feel forced to “donate”. For example, “Donate your clothes,” and “pop them into the cardboard collection bin...” These imperatives are softened by the word choices. The word donate could give the reader a sense of power, if they donated their unwanted clothing it is their choice, and they are contributing to a good cause. Whereas a synonym of donate, such as give, could make the reader feel as though they are being told what to do, which could make them less inclined to give generously which is one of the many purposes of the leaflet . And the word choice of “pop” is very friendly and creates personality as opposed to a synonym such as “put”, which could seem too ‘forceful’ for example. Text E shares this ‘gentle’ way of instructing, “Use as often as required…” this imperative does not come across as commanding, again it gives the reader the power in the situation, as they decide how often they use the cream. This coincides with the lexical field of serenity, words such as “gently,” “softens,” “nourishes,” “soft,” “sensitive,” “supple,” all are used to create a calm feel. So the imperatives must match the way in which the producer wanted to sell their product, a cream for children with “sensitive skin”. The intended audience here would be parents and so the word choices are important as they must work with the secondary purpose which is to persuade people to buy the product.

Texts B and C are both transcripts of either partly rehearsed or spontaneous speech, text B is an interview between a news presenter and president Obama, and text C is a conversation between friends. Different speech features are used in order to suit the context in which the conversations are taking place. Text B has a much more formal register than that of C and the transcript could be mistaken for writing due to the lack of non-fluency features like fillers and false starts. The formality of the two transcripts could be displayed by how the individuals address one another. Text C uses the second person pronoun “you” when referring to one another whereas Obama and the interviewer use each other’s names. This could also suggest power; usually the conventions of an interview mean that the interviewer, the one asking the questions, is the “dominant speaker”. However in this case, due to Obamas status, he is the one who leads the interview. The greeting at the beginning: “Mr.President, thank you for doing this,” differences from usual interviews where the interviewee may thank the interviewer for their time for example. This may be because of Obamas status, the news channel he appeared on here is sophisticated and the content of the interview is complex and important. Obama will be used to speaking under these circumstances and therefore has many skills when speaking to a vast audience. Whereas text C’s audience is only the two participants in the conversation who are most likely friends. This is suggested by the anaphoric referencing to earlier conversations suggesting that the two participants talk often. As well as Sally asking John, “so how's your new job going?” which, at a first glance, could be phatic talk however she then asks more meaningful questions about his job “so you've got to deal with all the moaning and complaining…” suggesting Sally cares about Johns feelings.

Texts A and B both contain specialised lexis. Text A is the back of a packet of seeds and contains words such as “fusarium wilt”, “anthracnose”, “sow” and “seedlings”. These words are specialised to the lexical field of gardening meaning the intended audience would be ‘keen gardeners’ who are familiar with these plant diseases, it also suggests that the intended audience is people who perhaps grow water melons annually as water melons would not be the easiest plant to grow and so the manufacturer is able to use complex gardening jargon on the back of their product as its highly likely that only people with a pragmatic understanding of the product would buy the seeds. At first glance text B, a transcript for an interview with president Obama, seems to appeal to a wide audience, however the use of political jargon such as, “the Senate”, “the Speaker” or “Republican” suggests that the intended audience is people who have knowledge of the subject. This could suggest that this particular audience is very narrow. Even though text B is for the news, the communication is very specific, speaking only about recent political events and avoiding any type of phatic talk, using specialised lexis such as “the bill” which would only be understood with a pragmatic understanding of the context in which this specialised lexis is being used.

Grouping by the Genre to Persuade:

Texts A, B, C and E all share either a primary or secondary purpose to persuade. Strong inclusions, A and B, are advertisements belonging to an organisation promoting specific issues; A which is smoking and B badger culling. Text E is also a strong inclusion: a blurb to a fiction book, its purpose being to persuade the audience to buy said book. All the texts use features which directly address the audience. The use of the second person pronoun in text E, “Enter-if you can bear it-the…” adds a personal touch to the blurb of the book inviting you in, which contrasts with the previous description of the book which is simply to inform . The use of a mitigated imperative here, which is softened with the embedded clause: “…if you can bear it...” makes it almost a challenge for the reader to ‘enter’ the book. This persuades well because instead of the reader feeling forced to read the book, they may feel it is their ‘choice’ and that they haven’t been persuaded at all, which possibly increases the likelihood of people buying this book. The second person pronoun in text A, “Every time you smoke your blood gets...” works effectively with the use of graphology to create a bigger impact, of perhaps horror or shock, as it is implying that ‘your’ blood will get ‘thick and dirty’ just like the disturbing image they have used. This suggests that their primary audience is people who already smoke as well as the secondary audience of putting people off who have not yet tried smoking. Text B uses the imperative: “Don’t shoot!” as the main feature of the advertisement, this possibly is used to play with the readers emotions, implying the badger is asking you not to shoot making you feel responsible and guilty especially as it is an exclamatory sentence, which could lead you to make links with similar situations, for example, innocent civilians in war situations. The entire leaflet works effectively with this first bold message. The lexical field of war has been used, for example, words such as “kill zones”, “survive” and “shoot”, end up making the badgers on the right/innocent side in this ‘war against badgers’. The bold orthography in this sentence attracts the eye to the word “shoot”. This could give the reader a sense of power, implying that they have this ‘metaphorical gun’ where they have the choice to do right or wrong. The audience for this leaflet is everyday people; it would be posted through doors where the household has no subscription, for example, to the RSPCA, meaning the bold orthography also works as a means of making sure that they pick up this leaflet as opposed to throwing it away. Weak inclusion C has a secondary purpose to persuade. It is packaging for ‘lush’ where it is promoting recycling. Its primary purpose being to inform, giving facts about the dangers of littering, for example, “Plastic waste kills up to 1000,000 sea mammals and countless fish every year…”. However, the fact that the packaging is based entirely around spreading an environmentally friendly message, including graphology such as well-known logos like the recycling symbol, is a means of persuading the audience to buy the product. Lush is well known for being environmentally friendly and many people would shop there being well aware of this fact. This means that the information about plastic waste would actually persuade the audience to buy the product.