1 A/B - VERY IMPORTANT

Ok everyone,


JUST KEEP IN MIND - Whatever question comes up, you have to make sure you KEYWORD the questions (particularly 1B). Provided you have revised your case studies, there should be no worries as far as MATERIAL is concerned. However, make sure you look at exactly what the question is asking you, and word/signpost your paragraphs to distinctly answer the question.


So...does the question ask you about:


*People's ATTITUDES towards power/STD
*How power/situation CHANGES or ALTERS how people communicate
*The METHODS used to exert power over people.


Whatever the keyword is, make sure EVERY paragraph is worded to answer that specific question.


Later today I will be uploading some really useful texts/examples for LEGAL POWER so stayed tuned.


Nick

1B - Power - Courtroom paragraphs

I'm only giving you 2 example paragraphs for legal/courtroom transcripts. You'll have to research others alone.





Here is the imagined question:





'Using the stimulus as a starting point, discuss how legal power can be exerted through language use.'





So - imagine that the first 2 paragraphs have been answered in relation to the stimulus, here is what the next 2 COULD look like...









P3 - Within an extract from the murder case involving ex-athlete Oscar Pistorius, we studied an exchange between a defence barrister and a key witness. Within this exchange, power is exerted by the barrister when he attempts to undermine the witness and make them look less reliable. This is due to the fact that the barrister is probably attempting to defame the witness and prove reasonable doubt over the guilt of Pistorius. At first, 'D' demonstrates upwards convergence by saying to the witness 'let me explain to you what it means...when you testified'. here, the use of the imperative with the fronted verb 'let', along with the rather patronising verb 'explain' characterises the witness as unintelligent and lacking in legal know-how, which might cast doubt over her reliability in this context. Later, further unreliability is cast upon her when the barrister claims that she made 'no mention of the woman's screaming (1) no mention'. The use of repetition to draw attention to the negated common noun 'no mention', particularly when coupled with a planned unvoiced pause for effect, would accentuate the gap in the witness's version of events, despite her otherwise being trustworthy. This would be classed by Goffman as a 'face threatening act'. However, a different aspect of face presents itself later in the extract when the barrister protects the negative face of the witness, presumably to encourage compliance from her. We can see this firstly when the barrister repeatedly uses the imperative phrase 'hear me out', which undermines his opwn ego and makes it appear as if he is asking the witness' permission to continue, despite being in a position of power relative to her. He later follows an extremely long sentence with 'and I apologise for that'. here, the use of the first person singular pronoun and dynamic present tense verb 'I apologise' show that the barrister is deliberately attempting to pander to the negative face needs of the witness so that she will feel more inclined to talk and comply with his wishes.





P4 - In a similar courtroom extract, we examined data where a man named 'Mr Neil' was being interrogated by a barrister having got into a dispute with a neighbour after an incident with a car. Within the extract, we see the barrister attempting to distance himself from the witness in order to elevate his position of power. An example of this, near the start of the extract, is when the barrister uses low frequency lexis such as the noun 'incident', adverb 'previously' and noun 'grudge' to make him sound more educated than the defendant. The barrister subtly mocks the reliability of the defendant by repeating elements of his own words such as 'you can't remember whether [the police] came to see you?'. Here, the contraction 'can't' and dynamic verb 'remember', which would have been said in an incredulous tone, paints a picture of the defendant as unreliable and fanciful, probably causing the jury to discount his evidence. In a similar way to how the barrister in text A appealed to the negative face needs of his witness to encourage compliance, this barrister in this text uses a similar technique by using downwards convergence to speak to him more on his level. On the surface, he appears to sympathise with the defendant, saying, '...the reason there is ill feeling...is that you believe Mr Peterson shopped you to the police.' here, the use of the abstract noun reason, connoting understanding, and the colloquial past participle verb 'shopped' imply that the barrister is attempting to encourage the defendant to cooperate with him as he has started to see things from his point of view. This would make it far more likely that the defendant will say something which will incriminate him.

1B - Additional transcripts for power/situation

Above is an example of an interviewer interviewing someone who does not have English and a first language. how do they show power? How do they adapt language to the situation?



Above is a transcript about a baby's delivery. How is power shown? How is language adapted to situation?



Pharmacist



Savile

1B - Comments and theories on political correctness (WIDER KNOWLEDGE)

David Crystal


*political correctness is 'hardline linguistic orthodoxy'


*In the 1990s, anyone who used politically incorrect language 'risked severe condemnation by PC activists.


*'the word black...was felt to be so sensitive that some banned its use in all possible contexts.'


*'Critics of PC believe that a search for a 'caring' lexicon is pointless, as long as inequalities do not change'


*those who aim to establish PC 'argue that the use of language itself helps to perpetuate these inequalities.


*'Political correctness has become one of the most contentious issues in the US socio-political scne in recent years. '


*People often approach PC with 'aggressiveness which creates antagonism'.


Laurie Penny - Writing for the News Statesman


*“what has come to be called ‘political correctness’ used to be known as good manners and was considered part of being a decent human being. The term now is employed to write of any speech that is uncomfortably socially conscious, culturally sensitive or just plain ‘left wing’”


A new guide given to midwives in the NHS


Recently, Donnelly (2018) in The Telegraph newspaper reported that midwives should “avoid the use of the phrase ‘big baby’ in case it makes women anxious, and not to talk about ‘foetal distress’. Instead, larger infants should be described as “healthy” while foetal distress should be described as “changes in the baby’s heart rate pattern,”


Deborah Cameron


*“[PC] pushes to the limit established belief about what a language is, or ideally should be and therefore it causes considerable anxiety.”

*"Getting rid of this mystification does not magically produce consensus, but it clears the ground for more focused arguments about what (and whose) restrictions on our linguistic practice were are or are not willing to accept."

1B - Situation - Racist ad 1970s

1B - Situation - Sexist shoe ad 1960s

1B - Situation - Sexist Navy advert 1940s

1B - Situation - Weight gain ad 1950s

1B - Situation - Sexist Advert 1950s

1A - FULL EXAMPLE RESPONSE

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE SPEECH QUESTION BUT IT IS TAKEN FROM A DIFFERENT SPEC - DO NOT GET CONFUSED BY THE FACT THAT THE COMPONENT HAS A DIFFERENT NAME...

http://resource.download.wjec.co.uk.s3.amazonaws.com/vtc/2015-16/15-16_50/eduqas/component1/sectionA/component1-sectionA-sample-question.docx

Here is a response I wrote to show you what can be done...

This took just under half an hour IN TOTAL - I wanted to prove it could be done. You have almost twice as long to write yours. It could do with one or two more PGs ideally and stronger/more frequent connections, but it is certainly a strong effort.

Read it, and allow this to inform your structure for section A.

"Text A is a transcript between a famous ex-footballer and his mother, which I imagine would be partially pre-scripted as it is for TV broadcast. Within the exchange, we see both parties using spoken language techniques to identify family members and to recount memories which are relevant to the celebrity’s career, often over-explaining, which shows that this has been partially set up for the entertainment of the viewing audience.

It is clear that the two speakers have been instructed to ensure that they clarify certain aspects of their family life for the purpose of the viewers, visible where M says ‘my favourite picture of your father’. The emphatic stress placed on the noun ‘father’, and the determiner ‘your’ sound unnatural as it would be clear that Barnes would already know who is in the picture, but she is clarifying it for the viewers. We see a similar example when she says ‘you used to play a lot of football there’. The use of the second person pronoun ‘you’ and the phrasal verb ‘used to’ is again an odd inclusion as Barnes would already have this recollection. This seems to have a secondary purpose to inform the viewers of the origins of Barnes’ footballing career. This is dissimilar to text B where F actually refers to C’s mother as ‘little Norma’ – the proper noun reflecting a shared understanding only between family members.

The fact that JB is famous as a footballer is reflected in the edited subject matter of the exchange in Text A, with M focussing on Barnes’ footballing as a child and her declaration that he ‘had a good place coz [he] could run up and down’. The verb ‘run’ and adverbial phrase ‘up and down’ shows that he was an active and athletic child and hints that he was always destined to become a sportsman. Barnes also reflect how different life was for him compared to children living in the UK as he mentions ‘we had eighty mangos in the garden’. The enumerator ‘eighty’ and relatively low-frequency plural noun ‘mangos’ shows that Barnes lived in exotic surroundings, and this would seem odd or alien to the majority of BBC1 viewers who would have grown up in a much colder climate. This is similar to Text B where F focusses on the rural lifestyle he and his siblings enjoyed as children, and the trouble this got them into.

An element of humour is introduced in the text where the two speakers discuss how inappropriate the father’s gifts of a ‘woolly bath robe’ and a ‘big sweater’ were for their ‘hundred degree’ climate. The premodifying adjectives ‘big’ and ‘woolly’, juxtaposed with the enumerator ‘hundred’ shows how ill-thought-out the gifts were and categorise him as a rather dim individual, thus entertaining the audience.

Barnes attempts to add context to his arrival in the UK by claiming, ‘some of us who were deserted (2) stayed longer.’ It is clear that Barnes delivers this accusation with a humourous tone due to the massively hyperbolic past participle verb ‘deserted’ which is followed by an unvoiced timed pause for comic effect. The use of paralinguistic features by the mother ‘[laughs]’ shows that this is taken in good humour and is merely an inclusion to show how JB ended up being here for so long.

It is clear that the exchange has been edited to appear spontaneous and emotive. In a more formal situation, we might expect that there would be lots of interrogatives and more obvious adjacency pairs, but these are lacking from this exchange, except for later in he transcript when M asks ‘you remember much about him? (his grandfather). Here, the elliptical interrogative containing the adverb ‘much’ is used to chow that JB has gaps in his family memory which the show will help to fill. Throughout the exchange, we see lots of playful and relaxed interruptions by both speakers. Whilst this could be seen as a struggle for power in other situations, here it merely reflects their close relationship as family members. However, in terms of Fairclough’s features of dominance, JB is allowed to speak more, perhaps reflecting the wishes of the directors who would want to hear his insight on matters as the subject of the show. This is different to Text B where F allows C to interrupt him in order to keep her interest in the conversation.

A purpose to inform the viewers that Barnes’ family is perhaps far more prestigious than they might expect is fulfilled through the inclusion of a description of JB’s grandfather, Frank Hill. M’s assertion that ‘he was like an indoor kinda guy’ creates a humourous tone through the mixed formality of the hedge ‘kinda’ to mimic Barnes’ earlier comment about himself. The colloquial noun phrase ‘indoor kinda guy’ proves that Frank Hill was studious and intelligent. The importance of him as a figure is represented by the mention of a ‘bust of Frank’. The concrete noun ‘bust’ connotes he must have been a figure of some repute. JB’s backchanneling during this section, ‘mmm’ and ‘yes’ implies that he is impressed and proud to hear about this significant member of his family who was ‘Chairman of the National Heritage Trust’ – the compound noun ‘chairman’ signifying his huge importance, thus entertaining the audience.

Text B is an exchange between a small child and an older family member in which we see the older family member allow the child to dominate the conversation in order to keep her interested in the exchange. The child leads the conversation by asking directed questions, resulting in adjacency pairs presenting themselves. In addition to this, the uncle attempts to use this opportunity to instruct and warn the child, without much success.

An attempt to ensure the conversation runs smoothly is eveident from F. As C is only 9 years old, she is not familiar with the rules of conversation and so does not realise that she needs to be more specific with her questioning. This is reflected by F’s more simplified interrogative of, ‘what you want to hear then?’. The simplified verb ‘hear’ and adverb ‘then’ show that he wants to be more precise about the memories C would like him to divulge. C also shows that, due to her age, she is prone to interrupt F, meaning that F has to accommodate her so as not to upset her. We can see this on line 7 when when Freddy says, ‘well I said I’m a bit tired //but I//’ and is interrupted. Although he has just started an additional clause, the child interrupts him mid sentence with an interrogative, ‘//why// why were you tired uncle Freddy?’ This demonstrates that the child unintentionally flouts Grice’s maxim of quantity by interrupting after she has asked a direct question. This is dissimilar to text A where the exchange can be viewed as more of a battle for dominance.

A voice of encouragement from F regarding C’s ability to learn to ride a bike is visible through F’s use of prosodic features such as strtching out the verb ‘ri::::de’ and adverb ‘alri:::ght’. This is arguably done to make the process of learning to ride the bike sound more appealing and to encourage C to stick at it in order to reep the rewards of learning a new skill.

In a similar respect, we see F attempting to incorporate sub-purposes into the exchange when he warns C what nearly happened to her mother one time stating, ‘if I han’t a-caught her her she’d a-ran straight into the pit.’ From the conditional conjunction ‘if’ and adverb’straight’, it is clear that F is trying to exaggerate the risk faced by C’s mother in order to encourage the child to be more careful herself. However, it is evident that the child lacks the understanding of the situation and merely back-channels with the paralinguistic ‘{laughs}’, proving that she does not full realise the magnitude of the danger.

This voice of warning continues later on when F uses an example of a bridge washing away due to the actions of his brother Gerald. Because of their building up of a dam, he claims that someone said, ‘father gotta pay’. The elision ‘gotta’ and the overly formal proper noun ‘father’ hints at a situation full of tension due to the blame placed on the children, and the apparent lack of closeness in the relationship between the children and their father. F appears to think that the message has got through to C this time due to his willingness to stop talking and once more use prosodic features to respond with an elongated ‘ye::::s’ after C back-channels with the statement, ‘in big trouble’. The colloquial idiom containing the premodifying adjective ‘big’ shows that she has begun to take some of these warning seriously. However, her final declarative ‘but they had their fun’, containing the conditional conjunction ‘but’ and abstract noun ‘fun’ shows that she is still far more interested in whether or not the children enjoyed themselves than taking any sort of moral message from the anecdote.

It is clear that F is keen to use aspects of his local dialect when speaking to C, such as his use of dialect nouns such as ‘picle’ and ‘hoss’. It could be argued that his is a slightly irresponsible way to communicate with a child who apparently does not share the same dialect, as this would often be described as a potential use of downwards divergence in other contexts. However, it is possible here that this is simply a reflection of the relaxed communication between two family members, and may be used by F to simply introduce her to some words which are part of her family’s culture, and which she may wish to use in the future herself. This would be supported by Peter Trudgill who claims that is it our duty to attempt to preserves dialects, both new and old. We do not see similar dialect words being used in Text A, despite the family originating from Jamaica where the dialect is probably far more strong. This is likely because of the audience of the broadcast who may struggle to understand if a strong dialect were used, to the director has probably requested a rather standard use of English.

A final moral lesson about the perils of gambling is attempted by F when he recounts another anecdote where he hyperbolically exclaims, ‘I said to them can’t you see that police car’ in response to seeing his fiends playing the card game Newmarket for money. The rather incredulous sounding interrogative tone, particularly in reference to the contraction ‘can’t’, dynamic verb ‘see’ and noun phrase ‘police car’ shows that he is trying to persuade his young niece to adopt a negative stance towards gambling from an early age, something which she finaly seems to accept with the exclamative ‘more trouble’, the intensifier and abstract noun connoting that she ha finally learned a lesson. This is dissimilar to text A where the communication from the parent in recounting anecdotes is done for the entertainment of the viewers rather than to inform the child."

1B - MORE EXAMPLE PGS

Imagine your source material is the Maxine Peake article.

here's how you could attempt this...

Within her audition, Peake has clearly encountered some strongly prescriptivist and small-minded attitudes towards regional accents. We can see this when the director says, 'Martha’s been to university, she’s educated.' The proper noun RADA and adjective 'educated' imply a strong correlation for this individual between education and rationality. Dennis Freeborn would describe this as the 'incorrectness view': the belief that better educated people actually use language in a more inherently correct way. This is a view he refutes himself, claiming that prestige for SE is merely down to fashion rather than scientific superiority of SE. Peake's own descriptivist stance can be seen when she says, 'I go ‘I’ve been to Rada and I still talk like this.' The past participle adverb 'still' and present participle verb 'talking', imply that she is proud of her regional variation and has been able to keep it even when surrounded by those speaking SE for a long time. There is also an implication that she has been able to Code Switch during her time in RADA as she must have encountered situation where she had to 'lose' her regional accent in order to converge with those around her

1B - CASE STUDY AND EXAMPLE PGS

Remember this case study?

Discuss the idea that a person’s language may be affected by their dialect. In your answer you should discuss concepts and issues and issues relevant to language study. You should use your own supporting examples as well as from Text A, below.

Text A is from a travel book called Notes from a Small Island by Bill Bryson, written in 1995

The author has just arrived in Barnstaple, Devon.  The author is American.

I went into the bus station and found two women sitting in an office beyond an open door, talking together in that quaint 'Oi be drinkin zoider' accent of this part of the world.

   I asked them about buses to Minehead, about 30 miles to the east along the coast.  They looked at me as if I'd asked for connections to Tierra del Fuego.

   'Oh, you won't be gittin to Moinhead this toim of year, you won't be,' said one.

   'No buses to Moinhead arter firrrst of Octobaaarrr,' chimed in the second one.

   'What about Lynton and Lynmouth?'

   They snorted at my naivety.  This was England.  This was 1994.

   'Porlock?'

   Snort.

   'Dunster?'

   Snort.

   The best they could suggest was that I take a bus to Bideford and see if I could catch another bus on from there.  'They may be runnin the Scarrrlet Loin out of Bideforrrrrd, they may be, oi they may, they may - but can't be sartin.'

   'Will there be more people like you there?' I wanted to say but didn't.  The only other option they could suggest was a bus to Westward Ho! But there didn't seem much point since I couldn't go anywhere else from there and anyway I couldn't face spending the night in an ejaculation, as it were.  I thanked them and departed.

Well here are some VERY DETAILED example paragraphs to show you how to go about answering it....

Ok...

Here is the sort of PGs you could write...



'Bryson appears to find the Devon accent both endearing and irritating within the extract. Firstly, he describes their way of talking using the low-frequency adjective 'quaint' implying that he values its traditional element. However, he then goes on to describe it as an 'Oi be drinkin zoider' accent. Firstly, the non standards spelling of the first person pronoun 'oi' denotes a lack of intelligence, whereas the elided 'g' on the present participle verb 'drinking' implies sloppiness. Jean Aitchison may identify this attitude through the 'Damp Spoon' metaphor, where people believe non-standard variations happen due to laziness. Additionally, the fact he associates their accent with the common noun 'zoider' (cider) implies that Bryson holds quite extreme prescriptivist views, and associates non-standard English with unsavoury social pactices such as excessive drinking. John Honey would argue that it is important to teach young people to rid themselves of these sort of accents for this very reason, otherwise we are 'doing them a disservice'.





Notice how I'm still using lots of terms. I've managed to squeeze in a couple of theories here, but one per paragraph should be more than enough. Also, I've managed to get quite a lot of analysis out of just one quote. You may need more quotes if your analysis is not so in-depth.



here's another PG...



In response to Bryson, we can see that the locals diverge away from Bryson's more standard use of English, possibly as they take pride in their regional individuality. We can see this through the extremely exaggerated prnunications of the proper nouns Minehead and October in the phrase, 'No buses to Moinhead arter firrrst of Octobaaarrr,' It appears the locals sense they have a sense of instrumental power as they know the bus routes but are making their advice difficult for an outsider to understand. In particular, the ommitted 'f' from the adverb 'after' seems to be used deliberately to confuse the American. Later, they use the proper noun phrase 'Scarrrlet Loin' which is not only pronounce in a regional way, but also requires local and pragmatic understanding for it to make sense. Bryson's response is to dehumanise them by describing their speech using the nun 'snort'. Dennis Freeborn would describe Bryson's attitude as 'The Ugliness View' as he seems to have allowed his prejudices about the Devon accent to influence his view of them as pig-like animals.


Again, lots of terms. More quotes used this time, and theory included at the end.

1B - STD/NSTD theories

Prescriptivism

A attitude towards language which states that there is a correct form (Standard English), which should be adhered to. If individuals do not, they should be corrected.



Descriptivism

An attitude towards language in which thinkers accept that change and variation are natural parts of language and that STANDARD English should merely be seen as a useful tool rather than a strict rule system.



Norman Tebbit - Politican - 1980s (Not a theorist but a useful prescriptivist quote)

Said - 'If you allow standards to slip to the stage where good English is no better than bad English, where people turn up filthy…at school…all those things tend to cause people to have no standards at all, and once you lose standards then there’s no imperative to stay out of crime.'



Donald MacKinnon

Identified - these attitudes which people have towards language:

Language use as correct or incorrect
Language use as pleasant or ugly
Language examples as socially acceptable or unacceptable
Language examples as morally acceptable or unacceptable
Language examples as appropriate or inappropriate in their context



Norman Fairclough

Came up with - CONVERSATIONALISATION - the belief that standards of written writing have slipped as people have become exposed more and more to spoken forms and technologies.



Dennis Freeborn

Identified - these attitudes which people have towards language:

The Incorrectness view - Non-Standard uses of language are incorrect. He refutes this, saying that prestige for Standard English comes through historical fashion rather than anything technical.

The Ugliness view - Non-Standard language forms are UGLY. He identifies that this seems to be based in peoples' social prejudices.

The Impreciseness view - Some accents are seen as lazy or sloppy by society.

Note - these are not HIS view. They are attitudes he identifies in OTHERS.



Peter Trudgill - Descriptivist

Said - 'English speakers should be encouraged to be more tolerant towards the dialects of others, and to feel free to use and preserve their own dialects if they wish'

Said - 'Traditional Dialects and Modern Dialects of England are part of our linguistic environment, and should be protected, just as our physical environment should be protected'

Believes - It is important for cultures to use STD English as a tool and means of communication, but also to preserve and values regional variations/become more tolerant.

John Honey - More towards Presciptivist, but not too far

Said - 'There is a simplistic argument which says...we should change society to accommodate the characteristics of the child. Those who use this argument to deny children access to any awareness of the implications of speaking with one accent rather than another are doing them an obvious disservice.'

Said - 'So long as accents persist, they will be made the excuse for some people to discriminate against others and belittle them'

Believes - While accents and dialects are important, it is bsolutely necessary to have a standard, and everybody should be taught the importance of using it. It is unrealistic to ever think regional accents will be given prestige in the 'real world' so people need to be honest with young people and get them to learn to speak/write properly.

Jean Aitchison

Identified - these ways of explaining how people see non-standard English:

The Damp Spoon metaphor - A PRESCRIPTIVIST attitude that some member of society have. NSTD English occurs because of LAZINESS.

The Crumbling Castle metaphor - Another PRESCRIPTIVIST attitude. English was once perfect but is slowly being chipped away at by people using NSTD English.

The Infectious Disease metaphor - Again, PRESCRIPTIVIST. NSTD English can be caught and spread like a disease. This is quite worrying as it links quite closely with attitudes to class/race too.

Key Terms

Convergence - Changing your way of communication to make it more like those around you. Can be done subconsciously or subconsciously.

Divergence - Changing your way of communication to set yourself apart from those around you.

Code Switching - The ability to use different levels of formality, dialect or standard English in different contexts or social situations, so that you can 'fit in' with multiple people.

Prestige - The significance or importance which society gives to a form of English. SE has lots of prestige, for example.

Overt Prestige - When a language form has lots of prestige that is agreed upon by the variety of people.

Covert Prestige - When a language form has prestige but in a more local, precise or unspoken way - such as using a broad scouse accent at a football match.

SE - Standard English abbreviation.

Received Pronunciation/RP - The proper pronunciation of SE - like the Queen's accent.

Howard Giles/Accommodation Theory - The idea that there will always be some degree of movement within conversation in order to make the communication more clearly understood. Incorporates idea like divergence/convergence/code switching etc.

1B - Answering a STD/NSTD question

So, it's been a while since we've looked at this. Does that mean we stress about it? No!

There's a reason we do non-standard in year 1: it's simple!

Provided you can follow these bullet points to guide your analysis, you should have no problem:

*Expect a short source. This will usually be a transcript of people talking or a short extract from an article where someone gives their opinions about standard or non-standard English.

*You need to find 2 paragraph's worth of stuff to analyse from within this source.

*If it is a transcript, simply identify what is going on with regards to STD/NSTD.

*Are they talking in standard? If so, give examples and analyse using terms. Explain why this is happening.

*Are they talking in non-standard? If so, give examples and analyse using terms. Explain why this is happening.

*Can you identify anything like convergence, divergence, code switching? If so, point it out and explain why it is happening.

*If it is an article or extract, simply identify the attitudes you can identify from the speaker's point of view. Eg, are they prescriptivist or descriptivist? Analyse examples of evidence. Do their views conform to any of the theories you have studied (damp spoon, crumbling castle etc)? Again, analyse the text to show where this can be seen.

*Then, be prepared to talk about 3-4 other case studies where standard/non-standard English is important.

*As I have explained, I will email a lot of stuff out to you tomorrow. However, you can begin to research this by thinking about your own experiences of using NSTD english, and discussing the various descriptivist or prescriptivist attitudes you have encountered along the way.

I will add theories and email out case studied tomorrow-

Nick

1B - Guidance

Remember, whatever topics come up in the 'Language Issues' section, you just have to be very formulaic about how you answer it.

You will be given a source which will be quite short that you have to analyse for about 2 paragraphs, then you have to write about 5-7 paragraphs on your wider reading or case studies.

This formula will never change so, provided you know theories, and provided you revise lots of case studies you should be fine.

You should have a heck of a lot of case studies for power already in your folders. These include, the police transcript, two courtroom transcripts, two schoolroom transcripts, the JS police interview, the King's speech extract various different adverts we have looked at, as well as many of the Section A transcripts we have looked at in recent weeks such as the Pharmacy/Monty Python transcripts. You really should not be struggling for material here.

Stay tuned.

Nick

1B - Theories (a reminder)

All of the theories below should be revised, so that they can be applied to a variety of different texts in your Section B essay.


Norman Fairclough:


Said - "Every use of language is a use of power. Every use of discourse is a negotiation of power."


Came up with - Features of dominance: Who leads? Set topic? Interrupts? Comments on what is said? Talks most?


Came up with the concept - Symmetrical and Asymmentrical conversations. Most conversation are ASYMMETRICAL


Came up with - Influential and Instrumental power


Paul Grice:


Came up with - Graice's Maxims (which, if flouted, will disrupt a conversation) Quality, Quantity, Manner, Relation.


Flouting these maxims can either be a sign that a person is losing power or asserting power depending on the context.


Erving Goffman:


Came up with - Politeness/Face theory


Said - "Face is the image that we present of ourselves to others"


Said - "Face is a persona we present in convesation. It changes from situation to situation."


Said - "Face is maintained by the AUDIENCE not the speaker. This is achieved by the LISTNER accepting the face presented to them by the SPEAKER, and generally being sensitive towards them."


Brown and Levinson:


Came up with - Positive and Negative Face


Said - "We meet the face needs of others through positive and negative politeness.


Came up with - Face threatening acts


Sinclair and Coulthard (Classroom Discourse):

Came up with - Three types of Teacher Talk: Informative (The capital of France is Paris.), Elicitation (What is the Capital of France?), Directive (I want you to mark the Capital of France on your maps). If the teacher does not use a variety, it could display limited power/effectiveness in their teaching.


Came up with - Exchange Structure Theory: Move 1 (Initiation/Ask Question), Move 2 (Response), Move 3 (Feedback or Evaluative Comment) - If this is not happening, it could be an indication the teacher is losing power/ being interrupted.


Came up with - Two Part Exchange model - (Similar to adjacency pairs really) - Question/Answer, Inform/Acknowledge, Intro/Greeting. If this is not happening, could reflect a breakdown in power.


Robin Lakoff (Language and Woman's Place)


Observed - Women generally display patterns of speech: Use empty adjectives, use hedges, speak less, apologise more frequently, use super-polite language, avoid swearing, use tag-questions, use hyper-correct grammar, use indirect requests. Generally appear weaker than men.


O'Barr and Atkins (Courtroom Discourse)


Updated Lakoff's observations - by studying courtroom transcripts.


Observed - What Lakoff saw as 'Women's Talk' is actually just how EVERYONE talks when in a position of less power. Lakoff only observed this in women as she did not study women in powerful positions.

REMINDER ABOUT THE MOCK AFTER EASTER

Here's a reminder of when the mock IS, and what the mock is ON.


Thursday 25th April at 9am in our normal room.


The exam is 2 hours long.


Spend about 1hr 10 minutes on section A - 35 mins per text, aiming to write 12 paragraphs
Spend about 50 minutes on section B - aiming to write about 6-7 paragraphs


In section A, you should look at the post about BLAGRS (if you have struggled with the speech question in the past), and you must ensure you make a good handful of connections between the texts.


For section B, you must revise all of your POWER, STD/NSTD and SITUATION theories and case studies. I will put a lot of stuff on here to help you.


Nick

1A - BLAGRS

A handy little technique to remember things to look out for in the SPEECH section (Section 1A) - just in case any of you are struggling.

Look for the following things...

Before - (Spontaneous, Pre-Scripted, Motives, Setting - How is this reflected?)


Lexis - (Make sure you analyse lexical choices and why they are important)


Audience - (What is the audience for this speech encounter, what are their needs/ how are they met?)


Grammar - (How is formality, complexity, fluency, tone important?)


Relationships/Roles - (What is the relationship between speakers/what are their roles? How is this shown?)


Specific spoken language features - (How do non-fluency, pragmatics, prosodics, power etc show themselves to be important here?)