GAPP of Second piece

Genre: Personal account article

Audience:Females aged 15+

Purpose: To inform and to entertain

Publication:  'Pick me up' magazine

Style model for article piece

Style models analysis for article

Style model 1: ‘Paralysed overnight’ – Linda Hartley (taken from Pick Me Up magazine).

• ·        ‘Paralysed Overnight... A virus attacked Linda’s spinal cord’ – This article has a main heading (‘Paralysed Overnight’) and then a little strap line (‘A virus attacked Linda’s spinal cord’). This lives up to its genre because articles have main headings and strap lines. The main heading is short, and catching. The strap line is a summary of the story, but only a tiny snippet because it draws people into wanting to read further.
• 
  
• ·        ‘Cuddling up to my hubby Stephen, then 55, in bed, I needed a good sleep’ – Narrative, and descriptive, gives character of her husband in it. Sets the scene.
• 
  
• ·        ‘It was January 2008’ – use of time/when the event occurred. Gets readers’ interested because it is clear she is about to tell the story to them. Past tense is used.
• 
  
• ·        ‘I tried to rub it better’ – ‘I’ shows it is written in first person. This makes it more personal, which grasps the readers’ attention because it is a real life story being told from the person who it actually happened to point of view.
• 
  
• ·        ‘Within a few weeks, I couldn’t move my legs’ – Use of time scale, shows readers’ how severe it was. Also, the fact that she didn’t go straight into grave detail, it is quite a sudden event. This makes the readers’ shocked, and feel sympathy for her, which grabs more attention from the reader because it makes them want to read on, to find out what happened next.
• 
  
• ·        ‘I had countless tests’ – makes the readers’ feel more sympathy, and the word ‘countless’ gives imagery of the idea that there were so many that she lost count. Makes the readers’ feel sad.
• 
  
• ·        Within the text, there is a blue box with pink quotation marks around it picking out the line ‘Within just a few hours, I couldn’t move my legs at all’ – this is to capture readers attention when they first look at the page, so they can see that it is an interesting story. They would get this impression because the writer picked out a very vague line that the readers’ could ask themselves a lot of questions about such as ‘why couldn’t she?’ ‘what made them like that?’ and therefore want answers to those questions and so they read the article.
• 
  
• ·        ‘Devastated’ – This is an example of one of the abstract nouns used in this personal account article. These are very effective to use because it creates a scene/imagery for the readers’ because it can make them imagine the situation and feel what emotion is stated as well. It makes the readers’ feel sympathy.
• 
  
• ·        ‘ “I’m going to fundraise,” I told Stephen and my two children Tracy,29 and Adam,25.’  & ‘ “That’s great!” Tracy beamed’ – these are two examples of dialogue used in the piece. This shows the realism of the story, creates imagery again, and it is told like a fictional story. Also, the fact that she stated about her fundraising shows what she has been inspired to do despite how she is now/because of how she was effected. This is moving to the readers’ because she hasn’t let her disability pull her back, so she is seen as inspirational, and it also may inspire them to want to take up some fundraising in honour of her and her story (depends on the reader).
• 
  
• ·        ‘So far they’ve raised almost £4000, I’m very proud’ – Use of statistic, shows the amount able to raise, the fact that they have raised a good amount of money makes readers’ happy, and when she says about being proud it is use of emotion again and makes the readers’ feel like they should be proud of them too/that they agree that she should be proud of them.
• 
  
• ·        ‘Transverse myelitis isn’t getting in my way.’ – This is inspirational because it shows she will strive on through life, and makes the readers’ feel proud of her, and see her as a role model in life because she is brave. Also, this is the last sentence of the piece, and she hadn’t actually mentioned the name of the virus that she had until then, she had only described it before. This is effective because if people knew what that was, they would be shocked, putting a condition to its name always frightens people about the seriousness if it, and so the fact she left this until the end works very well. It shocks the reader, and the fact it has a complex/horrible sounding name, makes it sound better and has better impact rather than her typing something like ‘my sore back isn’t getting in my way’.
• 
  
• ·        Even though the piece isn’t funny, this piece is still effectively entertaining to the reader. This is because it creates emotion in the reader whilst they are reading it, and keeps them interested.
• ·        The article uses pictures; before she had the virus, when she was shown to be active, and after she had the virus where she was in a wheelchair at a fundraiser. These show determination, and inspiration. It also makes the readers’ want to read the article because it gives them that exact feel about it.
• 
  
• ·        Beneath the pictures, just after the final column of the article, is a fact file. This is a fact file of background information about her condition. It uses statistics and facts about the condition, and is separate text to the piece, and it is serious. It again creates emphasis on the condition, which even though she isn’t talking about herself anymore as such, makes them feel more sympathy now that they know more things about it. It also interests the reader in finding out about something they may not have known about before. 

First Draft of article attempt. (Please do not copy)

I felt that this draft is too personal, and I did not want to share it on a blog where practically anyone in the world could read it. It was an ok attempt, but needed lots of improvement and more focus on the genre, purpose and audience to make it more clear to the readers'. I have now improved the piece and completed a final draft of it which is a lot better than this first draft that I did in my opinion as I found a good style model, and I stuck better to the purpose, audience and genre than I did in my first draft. :) 

Style models analysis for persuasive text

Style model 1: ‘Renault’s sexist advert drives me absolutely mad’ by Elizabeth Day.

• The piece starts with a rhetorical question ‘what do you look for when you’re buying a car’. The use of the rhetorical question here is getting readers thinking from an early stage (straight away) which gets them immediately involved, and makes them want to keep on reading.
• ‘Erotic props’ describing the modern use of women in adverts. It is dramatic, so that it emphasizes the point of sexual objectification. This is effective on the reader because it makes them think about it, perhaps realize/be persuaded.
•  ‘Not a lot to ask.’ Snappy, simple sentence. Creates humor as it creates the atmosphere of sarcasm.
•  ‘But then Blurred Lines, a feelgood pop song with a catchy bass-line by American R&B singer Robin Thicke’ Relates to recent events which back up her point of women being presented as objects. It is effective because it shows that there is not just one thing doing it, makes more of a big deal about her point.
• ‘Like fleshy, mannequins’ Use of a simile here. It’s negative connotation and would make the reader think of the extent to which women may be being exploited to the world.
•  ‘blows smoke in her face so that she coughs. If Charles Saatchi had done that to Nigella Lawson at a restaurant table, some people would see it as abuse’ – A comparison to other situations to emphasize the point of it being out of order. Extreme emphasis on disrespect. Makes reader realize it’s a serious issue.
• ‘anonymous “good girl”’ – Adjective reflecting the non-importance of a person. Shows women are seen as nothing/disrespected.
• ‘What a guy’ – This is use of humor through sarcasm (derogatory). It is a simple sentence, snappy, and emphasizes. By making the piece humorous, the readers are more likely to agree because it entertains them.
• ‘You’ – uses direct address to the audience, which makes the readers more involved, but it kind of segregates the reader from the writer in some respect so it is both a good thing and a bad thing.
• ‘They’re demeaning’ – This is s declarative (forced opinion). This is effective because it is stating opinion as if it is fact, therefore the readers are more likely to agree because it’s put in a more direct, ‘this is how it is’ sort of way.

Style model 2: ‘The problem with education? Children aren’t feral enough’ by George Monbiot.

• ‘The 10-year-old Londoners I took to Wales were proof that a week in the countryside is worth three months in a classroom’ – The strap line. This is a characteristic that shows it is a comment article, I will be using the same in mine, to make sure it matches genre and is laid out in a professional way. The strap line has to grab the readers’ attention as well as the main title, and it is usually some sort of minor idea on what the text is written about/focusing on.
•  ‘What is the best way to knacker a child’s education?’ – The text begins with a rhetorical question. The effect is that it immediately captures the readers’ attention, immediately involves them, makes them think and want to read on to perhaps find out what the ‘answer’ is.
• ‘Force him or her to spend too long in the classroom.’ – Declarative (abrupt way of stating opinion). Shows the piece is going to be opinionated, quite serious, not very humorous. Exaggerating that it’s against the children’s will through use of the verb ‘force’. This is also the answer to his rhetorical question. But the effect on the reader is that the verb ‘force’ makes the way education is delivered to seem cruel.
•  ‘Teenage girls taken on a three-week canoeing trip in the United States remained, even 18 months later, more determined, more prepared to speak out, and show leadership, and more inclined to challenge conventional notions of femininity.’ – Monbiot only focuses on the positives after projects promoting ‘less time in the classroom’ and would persuade the readers’ due to overload of positive feedback. It also shows own knowledge to back his point, which proves to the readers’ he is reliable in a sense that he seems to know what he is talking about.
•   ‘Last week I saw the evidence myself. With the adventure learning charity WideHorizons, I spent two days taking a group of 10-year-olds from a deprived borough in London rockpooling, and roaming the woods in mid-Wales.’ – This is effective in persuading the reader because he used an adverbial phrase to confirm he has seen evidence for himself. Also, the fact he named the charity he helped with verified this because if the fact he saw for himself was fake, he wouldn’t of been able to provide it effectively.
•  ‘never been to the countryside before and had never seen the sea’ – The repetition of ‘never’ makes the readers’ feel sympathy towards the children, therefore persuades them to agree with the point of getting children out of classrooms is important.
• ‘In the woods the next day we paddled in a stream... We foster and reward a narrow set of skills’ – These two mini paragraphs are a heart warming account of his findings when he went out with the 10-year-olds. This helps persuade the readers’ because not only is it more evidence/personal experience, but he describes it in detail using details such as emotions (abstract nouns), and he does it in such a way that the reader would see that as more valuable than sitting in a classroom 24/7 therefore, makes them more likely to agree with the point.
•   ‘ “I must tell him. It’s not something he will have heard before”’ – use of dialogue backs him up even further because it is more evidence that he was there.
•  ‘In 2011 the current government published a white paper proposing “action to get more children learning outdoors, removing barriers and increasing schools’ abilities to teach outdoors’ – This is an effective counter argument as it has proof of it being true because it states a year and who and where published. Using a counter argument is effective because it proves to the reader that you’re not being bias, and shows that you are thinking from both sides. It enforces your own argument too because you can prove the positive/negative point wrong with your own point of view.
• ‘95% of all outdoor education centres have had their entire local-authority funding cut.’ – Statistical proof, backs up argument because it’s fact, shows knowledge = more believable.
•  ‘Children are being treated like geese in a foie gras farm’ – Here Monbiot uses a simile to describe how children are being treated. This is effective imagery because it is negative, and makes the readers’ relate the image of geese being treated badly, with the children (association)‘Cannot escape’ – gives picture of trapped, and having no choice, effect is readers’ sympathy towards children/feeling of wanting to support getting them out of the classroom more often.
• ‘Why shouldn’t’ – Direct. Pragmatics in a sense that it is declaring there is no reason why they shouldn’t/readers’ struggle to come up with why they shouldn’t leading to their agreement.
• Ends with a rhetorical question like at the start; ‘What kind of government would deprive children of this experience?’ The intransitive verb ‘deprive’ is effective because it is an exaggeration, it emphasizes on the negativity. Also, it is a rhetorical question so it makes the people think. The question is compelling and effective. Due to the fact it doesn’t allow people to forget the effects on treatment of the children, it doesn’t really give the readers’ a choice in whether they think that a government should or shouldn’t ‘deprive children’ because surely anyone wouldn’t wish that, so it ends with agreement. 

Analysis of two articles 

Using language terminology when possible, comment on the techniques used which help the texts achieve their purpose(s) and to influence the audience.

In this essay, I will be focusing in depth and detail on how the language techniques used by the writers of two different texts help them to be successful in terms of achieving their purpose(s) and achieving how they are implying/would like to influence their target audiences. 

   The first text I will be analysing is called ‘Halloween costumes – what not to wear’ by Rhiannon Cosslett. The text has a strap line at the top which reads; ‘Bye bye pagan roots, hello a world of fancy dress stress. Here’s how to get it right by avoiding blackface and Slutoween’. The use of a strap line makes the purpose clear that it is a persuasive text because persuasive texts use strap lines to specify what they will be speaking about and promote a specific, key point. In this strap line, Cosslett uses neologism in using ‘Slutoween’. This is blending of the words ‘Slut’ and ‘Halloween’ and would draw the reader’s attention into finding out what point she is trying to make. The ‘Here’s how to get it right’ also clarifies a second purpose being advice, due to the use of the word ‘how’.

Firstly, ‘E-number quaffing, eggy neighbour-bothering, and fatuous readymade Miley Cyrus costume wearing, a trend for which we can only blame those pesky Americans. So, what to wear?’ This sets the tone of the text for the reader through Cosslett stating the bouts of modern Halloween night in a relatively humorous way. This is to grasp the audience’s attention and interest throughout the text which brings me onto its third purpose which is to entertain. The use of the inclusive pronoun ‘we’ interacts with the readers because she is stating them and her combined ‘as one’. She includes the reader’s further through using the rhetorical question ‘what to wear?’. This question makes them look back on their personal experiences of Halloween and is effective in gaining their interest.

Furthermore, Cosslett shows the purpose of advice through the use of imperative sentences such as, ‘Forget your mum cutting holes in a sheet’ and ‘don’t bother with those plastic witches’ hats with the fake green hair attached’. This persuades the reader more because it seems more implied/forceful and a ‘must’ due to Cosslett being direct through using verbs at the beginning of the sentence in order to make them imperative. She has also used the pronoun ‘your’ which makes it sound more direct, as if she is speaking to the reader.
  At the end of this paragraph, it says; ‘That is so 90s, babes’. This is an extremely informal use of lexis. This is because of the ‘90s’ written in statistic rather than word, and the use of slang; ‘babes’. Cossletts intention here probably was to make the readers feel relaxed and comfortable as well as being entertained by her wittiness through using the slang. It also gives a hint of her target audience, which I think is probably teenagers and young adults because of her use of slang to ‘get down with the kids’ as such.

Throughout the most of the piece, Cosslett uses subheadings such as ‘Know how soon is too soon’. The use of subheadings clarifies certain sections of writing, and is further evidence into proving that one of the purposes of this text is to advice because advisory texts structure involves the use of subheadings in most cases. Cosslett puts these subheadings in bold font so that they are salient. These capture attention of the readers due to the fact that they are salient. Also, not only are the subheadings Cosslett uses declaratives, but she also uses imperative subheadings such as ‘Don’t disrespect other people’s cultures’ and used an interrogative subheading; ‘Dress your baby up, they’re too young to be embarrassed so who cares?’ . This is effective because it gets the readers involved, and the point is a clearly obvious one, which may be seen as a general point of view. This would mean the readers will be more likely to agree, which makes this piece relatively successful in use of persuasive techniques.

In addition to this, she uses a lot of exclamatory sentences; ‘Look! It’s a baby! Dressed up as a lobster! In a pot! For the entertainment of adult!’. This captures attention of the reader’s because it is rather sudden, and it is direct at the beginning by using ‘Look!’ because it makes them wonder. It is also quite clever because it is open to interpretations. This is because it is hard to tell whether she is using sarcasm in terms of pragmatics or whether she isn’t.  

Cosslett’s use of humour is exceptionally emphasised at the beginning of the text under the subheading ‘Don’t disrespect other people’s cultures’; ‘Can’t you just put down that native American headdress? (I can see you. Put. It. Down.)’. Here, she uses an interrogative sentence which is effective because it begins with a imperative beginning and is quite humorous in terms of what object she chooses to highlight. However, the most effective part of this quote is the part in the brackets. This is because it is extremely imperative, and it is emphasised on imperativeness through it being segregated out into several minor sentences. This is another way that she emphasises her humour using the minor sentences because it makes it sound like she is actually talking to you. Therefore, it is more direct, and uses colloquial lexis. The purpose of persuasion is successful here because she is using a mix up of imperatives and interrogatives making the reader think they’ve got a choice, when they haven’t in terms of what she is asking them about/to do.

The use of pronouns is wide in this piece. This is because Cosslett ranges between ‘you’ related pronouns, ‘we’, and ‘I’ related pronouns. The ‘you’ related pronouns I understand that she has used to be direct towards the reader’s. She uses ‘we’ once or twice. This is an inclusive pronoun which is very effective especially when used in persuasive text. But, the most used pronouns in which Cosslett uses are ones relating to ‘I’ such as ‘I’ , ‘Mine’ , ‘I’m’ and ‘I’ll’. This emphasises on the purpose of persuasion because it makes the piece very opinionated and related to herself. Also, most of her sentences are complex, but she uses simple or compound sentences occasionally. This is varied sentence structure which interests reader’s, and works well in persuasive texts as well.

Finally, Cosslett uses the technique of cohension near the end. This is effective because she is using her own experiences to back up her points, which is extremely successful in persuasive texts because it makes what she is saying more reliable. Also, in the very last mini paragraph she states; ‘Freedom lies in having options’. This is an emotive use of lexis, and I feel that it is very powerful and meaningful and would get the reader’s thinking. It is also a declarative, so even if it is her opinion, it is stated as fact which is effective in persuasive text because people think it’s a fact.

In conclusion, Cosslett used a variety of very successful techniques to live up to her purposes and influence her audience in the direction she was pointing towards. I think that her piece was relatively successful because she used a clear discourse which was needed for her purposes, however it did have quite a few drawbacks that kept it from being any better. The main issue with this piece is that there was no register as such. Cosslett’s piece was not very appropriate to achieving its purposes because she only used second person throughout the entire piece (words such as ‘you’). This is ineffective in persuasive texts because it is not inclusive. By using the word ‘we’ makes it a lot more powerful. The context is also inappropriate because it focuses on size zero models being a negative influence on teenage girls; ‘You should not be influenced to diet just because,... Don’t pay attention to it’. By doing this, Cosslett is creating a distance between herself and the reader’s which is ineffective because it will allow them to develop a separate opinion rather than agree with her own.

The final text I will be analysing is called ‘A man’s perspective on why engagement rings are a joke’ by Tauriq Moosa. The title already suggests it’s going to be very opinionated and possibly sexist through using ‘A man’s perspective’. Also, it’s stating it as if it is every man’s opinion. 

This text have a strap line too, which reads; ‘ ‘A diamond is forever’ is genius marketing with no basis in relationship reality. My love isn’t proportional to a ring size’. This is opinionated, and quite powerful because Moosa uses emotive lexis by saying his ‘love isn’t proportional to a ring size’ which I believe most male reader’s would agree with, however I believe this text is mainly aimed at women because he is trying to make a point against them. This is because most women these days tend to agree with the purpose of engagement rings, whereas most men don’t really see the point in them, especially when you’d give each other wedding rings not very long after.

Firstly, Moosa starts his text stating; ‘Most of us are adult enough to know magic doesn’t exist’. This suggests that his text target audience is adults. This starting sentence is effective because by using the inclusive pronoun ‘us’ it immediately grasps the audience, and gets them involved in the text. 

Also, ‘fat rings are fairy-tale items which somehow “secure” another persons love, one step away from a “happily ever after”’. This is a clever technique that Moosa has used because by using the words in inverted commas, it creates a tone that it is a stupid concept and that he is being sarcastic. This affects the reader by making them think about how stupid it sounds. Also, it is a powerful way of persuasion because sarcasm can be humorous, especially when describing the expensive rings as ‘fat rings’.

Moosa uses the technique of metaphorical language to express his opinions; ‘We’ve turned into zombies, hungry for all things red and supposedly lovely dovey’. This is a powerful use of emotive lexis in a creative way. It captures the audience’s attention because it may be a concept that they were never opened up to before because it is a relatively unique metaphor. It is humorous so it entertains the reader, and it is also a declarative because it says ‘We’re’ at the beginning, which shows that there is no choice in the matter. This is stating opinion as if it’s fact and through basic psychology, it makes the reader believe it is an actual fact. This makes them more likely to agree, and therefore make Moosa more successful in his language techniques.

‘Engagement rings – specifically expensive diamond ones – are often prime examples of this unthinking mindset’. This uses ‘-‘ which represent mini pauses/links between sentences. This is effective because it slightly varies the sentence structure to look like 3 sentences, so that it doesn’t look like a massive piece of rambling. It keeps the readers interested because when reading, in their minds they can imagine how it would be being said to them if it was in real life. ‘Unthinking’ puts more emphasis on the fact that the readers may not have noticed what he has, which persuades them even more into agreeing with him.

Furthermore, Moosa uses factual evidence to back up his points; ‘large diamond mines were discovered here in South Africa around 1870, ... They would need to create a demand via (the illusion of) scarcity and pretend worth’. This is a powerful way to live up to his purpose of persuasion because he has knowledge. When there is knowledge involved in a persuasive argument, it increases the probability that the reader’s will be persuaded because it reassures people that the writer (in this case, Moosa) is in the know about it all and have done their research. As well as this, ‘the illusion of’ makes the reader’s read between the lines of what he is saying and realise where Moosa is coming from with his point of view due to thorough explanation of his point through using actual facts.

Then, Moosa continues to emphasise on the pointlessness of these rings; ‘convincing women to expect love in the form of a shiny stone’. Here, alliteration is used; ‘shiny stone’. The fact that a diamond is described just a pathetic ‘shiny stone’ emphasises pointlessness, and worthlessness to the reader which persuades them to agree, because of the description he has provided. 

     Moreover, Moosa uses even more evidence to back up his points; ‘And guess what? The prices keep going up, as if we are really loving more and deeper these days. ... engagement ring cost $5,200. If you think that’s bad, consider that nearly 12% of US couples spend more than $8,000 for an engagement ring’. The rhetorical question makes the reader’s automatically interested in what he is about to say, and gets them interacted with the piece again. The use of the inclusive pronoun, ‘we’, means that the reader is getting involved, and gives the sense to the reader that the writer and themselves are all on the same level or ‘all as one’. This gives a united feel, and some sort of connection between the writer (Moosa) and the reader’s, and because it says ‘we’ it makes the reader think “Oh I should think like that too then I guess”. Therefore they will be easier to persuade. In addition to this, he uses sarcasm near the end to create a little bit of light entertainment, whilst also stating factual statistics. Again, by using factual statistics, Moosa is gaining the trust of the reader in believing those statistics to be true (which they probably most likely are). Not only this, but Moosa specifically chose particularly shocking facts. This was to shock the reader into agreeing with his points about it being overrated, and make the reader’s more clear with where he is coming from with his ideas.

Near the end of the text, Moosa states; ‘Pointing to tradition means pointing to the mistreatment of different races and sexes, human sacrifices and so on.’ This is a declarative, and is stating his views/interpretations of life upon his readers as facts. This is effective because it makes them think about it, and because of the information provided here, makes Moosa sound like a very intelligent person who would know about that sort of thing. Also, it emphasises, and possibly exaggerates on the point a bit to make it more dramatic in order to persuade the reader to agree.

Finally, the last sentence of the text; ‘If you need a ring to prove your love, it’s not your lack of having a ring that’s the problem.’ This is a declarative because it just states a point. I feel this is a really powerful way to finish because it leaves the reader’s thinking, and it makes them feel like they should agree with Moosa because here he is basically saying that if you don’t agree with him, then you have a problem and obviously people wouldn’t want to have any problems/things wrong with themselves. It is a genuinely quite an open way of finishing which makes the reader’s think they’ve got a choice, when in reality, he isn’t really giving them a choice of disagreeing with him.

In conclusion, I think that this text has been really effective, and really well written and fit to its purposes and audience targets by Moosa. This is because he has been really efficient, and clearly taken time to think about how he can subtly psychologically manipulate people into agreeing with him through many persuasive techniques such as using plenty of declaratives and factual evidence. Moosa’s use of emotive lexis, and repetition of points also helped because it would have made it stick into the reader’s minds. I believe that he was particularly clever in the use of rhetorical questions because he didn’t really use any until near the end; ‘Why can’t a beautiful home be a symbol? Why can’t long-term investments be a symbol? Indeed, would it not be more impressive to show off a house than a finger rock?’ This chain of rhetorical questions would get the reader thinking consistently. The repetition is effective because it gets the reader thinking of other “why can’t something else be a symbol?” which means that the persuasion is working. Also, the description ‘finger rock’ is quite a humorous way to describe the ring, and makes it seem like a silly thing to own, which points the reader’s even more towards the point. But, what makes this overall successful, is the amount of involvement of the reader’s and the register use is incredible.

GAP for second piece 

Name of piece: The Christmas Present

Purpose: To entertain and to teach (learn from a moral)

Audience: Young children (about 0 – 5) and their parents (must appeal to the parent for them to want to read it to their child).

Genre: A Children’s picture book story

Topic: About a Christmas present a girl gets on Christmas day and the story of the journey to find a replacement toy for the one her mother originally gave her.

Moral: Appreciate and be grateful for what you have/are given 

My second piece first draft (Please do not copy any of this, I will hunt you down).

The Christmas present By Georgina Bengeyfield

One Christmas morning a girl got a toy,
“What’s that?” she said. “Isn’t that for a boy?”.
So, she threw the toy and cried with dismay,
“Mummy, you’ve ruined my Christmas day!”.
The mother worried, grabbed the toy by the top,
“Don’t worry dear, we’ll go back to the shop”.

They zoomed along in a bright red car,
The girl hoped it wasn’t too far.
Looking through the misty window,
they were getting nearer, not long to go.

The snow was glistening, crunched as they tread,
their way to the shop, snowflakes land on her head.
The shop door creaked open, as they walked on through,
a voice echoed “Hello, how may I help you?”

“We would like something girly” The mother replied,
“You’ve come to the right place, over there!” he cried.
The shop was very old, had every type of toy,
something for a girl, or something for a boy. 

There was so much choice, she couldn’t believe her eyes,
toys of every colour, shape and size.

The mother said, “Darling have you found something you like?”,
“How about this flowery, purple and pink bike?”
The girl  tried riding round the store,
but tumbled off the seat and fell onto the floor.
She cried “Oh no! That simply won’t do!
it’s got a broken wheel, silly you!”

The mother helped the girl stand,
they continued looking round the shop, holding each other’s hand.

The girl found a mysterious looking box on the end of the shelf,
Could it be the ideal thing for herself?
She opened the box, and peered inside,
a mixture of many plastic animals she spied.
“Oh no! That simply won’t do!
there are too many, I only wanted a few!”

From the other end of the shop,
the girl heard a huge squelchy pop.
“What’s that?” She did squeal,
her mother said “Why don’t you have a feel?”
Squelch! Squelch! Squelch!
“Oh no! That simply won’t do!
it’s really slimy and gross, ew!”

The mother sighed, grabbed the girls hand,
“Hurry up darling, I’ve got a roast dinner planned”.

 Her mother was panicking about the time,
she was surprised the girl didn’t like the slime.
“Look at this colourful, beautiful dress!
would you like to have this then yes?!”
The girl cried, “Oh no! That simply won’t do!
that wouldn’t fit me if I grew!”

 What is it the girl wants? Do you know?
Is it this shiny trumpet she can blow?

Her mother found a fluffy, white sheep,
she knew it would be something the girl would keep.
Her mother squeezed the toy, “Moo! Moo!” it said,
“This would be nice for you to cuddle in bed”.
But, the girl cried, “Oh no! That simply won’t do!
sheep go ‘Baa’ and cows go ‘Moo’!”

The girl dragged her mother across the shop,
her mother arms began to flop.
“Come on my dear, you’re taking too long”

The girl simply couldn’t choose,
there were so many toys she could use.
She suddenly noticed something hidden,
it was big, blue, and looked like it could be ridden.
It was a sledge. Exactly the same as her mother had bought her,
she took a moment, and pondered “er...”


“Oh... Yes! That will do!
I finally found what I want mummy, woo!”
The mothers face lit up with joy,
“Finally, we found you your perfect toy!”

For the rest of the day, they sledged through the snow,
the girl didn’t complain not at all, not once though.
“Mummy, it’s just like Santa’s sleigh!
I really love this Christmas day”.

Style models for my persuasive text I wrote were; 

• http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/07/education-children-not-feral-enough
• http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/21/renault-weather-duchess-of-cambridge

Noted analysis of first final draft (Persuasive text)  (need to add some more).

Notes on some analysis of my own piece (linked to style model) – positive elements

·          DISCOURSE ‘Our education; we’re doomed’ ‘An insight to the student mind; we need to be heard claims Georgina Bengeyfield, A-level student from Bristol’ This proves that I have stuck to the style of the my piece because comment articles have a title and a strap line. My style models both have titles and strap lines too. For example, in the piece about Renault, the title is ‘Renault’s sexist advert drives me absolutely mad’ and strap line is ‘The car company’s efforts to sell its products demean all of us’

·         LEXIS ‘Therefore, a fall grades at a percentage as low as 0.4% is actually a difference for 2918 students’ I used factual evidence to back up the points I was making, just like George Monbiot did in his text, The problem with education? Children aren’t feral enough (one of my style models); ‘. It also helps achieve my purpose because by using facts and statistics, it makes the readers believe I am more knowledgeable in the subject I am talking about, and therefore will be easier to persuade to agree with my points.

·         LEXIS ‘Do you want to see students’ lives going to waste because of these radical decisions?’ Started my conclusion with rhetorical question just like Monbiot did in his piece (my style model). I used it because it recaptures the reader’s attention, and makes them think.

·         LEXIS/GRAMMAR ‘Together, let’s end this immoral, dissolute running of the system. Together, let’s deliver justice to these innocent, hard-working teenagers. Together, let’s take a stand. ‘Here I used the power of three (triadic structure) to help persuade my reader’s. This is successful in achieving my purpose of persuading because it helps express my points clearly, and increases the chances of them remembering my point because it is three memorable sentences as they have the same beginning so it will stick in their head. I also used the words ‘Together let’s’ at the beginning of each bit. This is effective because ‘Together’ is an inclusive pronoun which makes the reader’s and me (the writer) united as one, and that we are all together in this, so it includes them more. ‘let’s’ suggests something HAS to be done, and WILL be done regardless of what their original opinion is, so they may agree anyway. This is also known as anaphora.

·         LEXIS ‘Of course, Michael Gove has done some pretty decent things in his time as education secretary such as increasing the options and provision for children with special needs and improving schools immensely through Ofsted initiatives. But this is no match up to the number of preposterous decisions he has followed through.’ Here is an example of one of the counter arguments I used in my piece. The use of counter arguments is effective because you show that you are non-bias but in a way that doesn’t defeat your own personal argument whether that be for, or against. This persuades readers to agree more because the positive things I used about Gove’s decisions were much less exaggerated on than those that are negative.

·         GRAMMAR/LEXIS I used many declaratives such as ‘Sign an online petition to help these young people have a voice and be heard.’ I did this because using declaratives makes the action more forced, yet not feel like it was forced because it is simply a statement.

·         GRAMMAR I wrote my piece from a personal experience point of view being that I am a student, and I am writing about the struggle of my own generation; ‘I believe it is a relatively good system, and much less stressful than exams in linear structure’. My style model by Monbiot also used personal experience point of view to argue his point; ‘I spent two days taking a group of 10-year-olds from a deprived borough in London rockpooling’

·         LEXIS ‘Do you even contemplate who’s being affected? No. You don’t.’ I use many interrogatives (which are rhetorical) and answered a few of them as does one of my style models; ‘What is the best way to knacker a child’s education? Force him or her to spend too long in the classroom’ These are effective because they keep the reader’s interest. Also, by answering them is an abrupt way of stating the opinion, which makes the purpose clear to the reader (to persuade) and helps exaggerate on the point.

·         GRAMMAR I used varied sentence structure from complex; ‘Probably at least 80% of us now don’t even bother researching what’s happening about education, or even care because of how confusing and stressful it is when he keeps changing the decisions he makes every two seconds.’  to sentence structure such as minor; ‘No.’ My style models also do this. For example, in the Renault one, there are varieties of complex; ‘As proof of its conscience, it quickly produced a similar ad featuring semi-naked men, thereby completely misunderstanding the entire concept of sexism’ to simple such as ‘What a guy’. The variety of sentence structure is important because it not only keeps the readers wanting to read on, but it also creates deep effect on the reader. If, you use a complex sentence then use a minor or simple sentence after it can create dramatic impacts on your readers, or it can emphasise your point, which helps achieve the purpose of persuasion.

·         LEXIS I used alliteration a few times ‘drastic decision’ this is effective because it stays in the reader’s heads which means they consider the point being made.

·         LEXIS I used formal register alike the one of my style models by Monbiot because it creates the sense of authority, and seriousness, which draws the readers in because they are curious about what is serious about the matter, or what you have to say. They also take you more seriously because you’re not just joking about.

·         PRAGMATICS Used statement about irony; ‘I don’t know about you but the irony never ceases to astonish me’. This is slightly entertaining, yet clear so the audience would agree because they see the point too due to evidence being stated above.

·         LEXIS Used lexis such as ‘immensely’ to help emphasise on my points. By using particular words, they have bigger impact on readers through how complex it is, and how exaggerated it is. 

Essay on analysis of three texts

How is language used in the texts to persuade readers?

In persuasive texts, there is a vast variety of different techniques that can be used. These can be either subtle, or direct. Subtle ways of persuasion include pragmatic ways of getting ideas across for example, using “would you mind” at the beginning of the sentence is expecting the answer “yes” when you ask them it. A direct way is when it is more abrupt. For example using words such as “do not”. These are used in everyday life. However, when it comes down to professional persuasive texts, way of persuading people is not as simple. In comment articles in newspapers for example, people emphasise their own opinions in a subtle, clever, and powerful way. The art of persuasive text is very broad as there are so many different types of ways of perceiving it. Whether it be humorous, serious, or personal, all of those people are trying to do the same thing; simply change the way people view a certain topic, or the way that they act. In this essay, I will be analysing the persuasive language and techniques from three different comment articles from the Guardian newspaper and comparing the pieces to see which I believe is the most effective.

The article I will first be looking at is called “Brownies swap god for gobbledygook by a journalist named Victoria Coren. The context of this piece of text is that the Brownies organisation recently made a decision to remove a reference to “God” in the pledge made by their members and Coren expresses her opinions on this. This response is written in the humorous tone of persuasive writing.  

Firstly, the title is eye catching and makes it sound interesting because of her use of neologism with the word “gobbledygook”. This attracts readers because it makes them suspicious as to what the text is relating to, and what sort of opinion it is of the situation in hand. Also, it shows an element of hilarity through the use of such a silly neologic word, which would invite people whom enjoy comedy texts to read. It would possibly make them ponder what is meant by the word “gobbledygook”. So, it makes the reader want to read further into it. 

        Immediately from the beginning of the article Coren has already got her readers involved by asking; ‘Which words or phrases would make your top five list of the worst linguistic horrors in modern English?’ This is effective on the readers because she has used the interrogative technique of rhetorical questions to really grasp the readers interest in what she will be writing about and to get their minds active. Coren then follows on from the question listing her own answer to the rhetorical question (referring to her opinion of the word “chillax”); ‘I know for certain that people say “chill” to mean “relax”, having heard it with my own ears (which still shiver occasionally of their own accord, like two spaniels remembering a car crash), which is very nearly as bad’ Here, Coren uses personification when describing how much she doesn’t like the sound of the word. She then follows it on with the simile ‘like two spaniels remembering a car crash’. The technique she is using here is used to emphasise her point of her hatred for slang and it is effective because it is very expressed and opinionated. This also tells the reader that the text is going to be humorous due to the humorous tone created in this list. 

Furthermore, this humorous tone of writing continues throughout this piece of text; ‘I should be relieved that... for all the little girls all over the country, is not “I promise I’ll chillax over a glass of poo, or maybe a swift hald, which would be totes amazeballs”’ Sarcasm is used here to create a humorous line. The sarcasm works well here because it backs up her previous point very well in the same sort of tone, and it really exaggerates on what she hates about modern day language. This sentence is more of a complex sentence because it involves more than two clauses. This creates an emphatic impact. Coren uses slang such as “amazeballs” and “totes” to make the reader aware of how ridiculous it sounds. This is persuasive because it may make the reader think “why do I say that? It’s so stupid”. 

As the piece continues, Coren gets even more into her opinion by asking rhetorical questions but in an anaphoric way; ‘was there really no better alternative? Could they not have looked for something like “higher power”, which alcoholics anonymous allows so cleverly to stand, in the minds of atheists, for cycles of nature, the universe, time, society, or anything that helps a person to realise they are part of something bigger than themselves and behave with accordant responsibility?’ I feel that this paragraph is particularly effective. This is because the sentence is very complex, yet it is very cleverly done. She used short snappy wording ‘universe, time, society’ and many rhetorical questions in a row which may leave the reader feeling interrogated. This is exactly what she is trying to do. The pragmatics of her technique she has used here is to interrogate the reader to get them thinking about what she is thinking, therefore persuading them to think the same way and make them realise certain concepts. ‘was there really no better alternative’ persuades the reader to agree with her point, that she is making that there is other alternatives but they don’t realise. The readers would be persuaded to agree to this by the word “really” used as it emphasises that word due to its position in the sentence. 

Coren uses a lot of emphasis on her points and I think that’s what makes her a good writer of persuasive texts, along with her humorous charisma of course. In one of the final paragraphs she states “Although, I repeat, it doesn’t mean anything at all, it certainly carries a suggestion of something utterly individualistic. It’s the language of the X Factor. It feels stubborn, self important and faintly aggressive’. The phrase ‘I repeat’ followed by ‘it doesn’t mean anything at all’ in italics has a grave effect on the reader.  This is through intense emphasis of her point through not only repeating it, but mentioning that she is repeating it which makes it kind of pushy. Also, the italics make her point stay out beyond anything else because nothing else is in italics. This means the readers think that the point she is making must be more valid and important. Coren uses adjectives such as ‘stubborn’ and ‘aggressive’ to emphasise on the bad influence of the X Factor, and how the slang used on that programme influences youngsters and the way people behave. People may agree with this as it is described in such a way that most people would agree with it anyway. 

In addition to this, Coren makes a reference to her very own experiences; ‘ Every time I messed about in class because I didn’t like geography. Every time I pulled my friend Danielle’s hair because I was jealous of her Barbie collection. Every time I claimed my brother hit me. True to him? No. True to my own believe that he was being mean and should be nicer to me? Oh yes.’ In this quote, I have noticed that Coren has used the triadic structure (otherwise known as the power of three) by repeating “every time” in three consecutive sentences. This is effective because it puts huge prominence on the point she is making about being ‘true to yourself’ and how self centred it seems to be. Not only does she use this clever technique, but she also uses an imperative and very abrupt way of answering her rhetorical question for the readers before they could even think of an answer by using the simple sentence ‘No.’ Also, the fact that she uses a personal experience makes it a whole lot more persuasive because it is personal to her, and a real experience that actually happened.  

Finally, Coren uses the technique of counter argument and followed by discredit; ‘Perhaps I misunderstand the phrase. Perhaps it is not a way of promoting self-centredness to a moral position. If I am misunderstanding, though, it’s because of the loose, weedy incomprehensibility of the term’. The counter argument is the part which is for the point she is arguing against. So she makes the point of misunderstanding. Coren emphasises on this by repeating the word “Perhaps” twice imposing that she is trying to make a point that she actually believes she isn’t misunderstanding – irony. She then batters it into the ground through her analytical way of describing the term of what the Brownies policy is saying by using adjectives such as “weedy” and “loose”. Overall, I think Coren’s way of persuading is very interesting because it is not all that pushy, she uses many subtle techniques by taking advantage of using the humorous “way-in” and I think it works very well for her.

The second text I will be looking at is a text of my own that I found called “The problem with education? Children aren’t feral enough” by a journalist named George Monbiot. This is about his opinions of why education is a problem relating to his experience of taking 10 year old Londoners’ to Wales to prove that ‘a week in the countryside is worth three months in a classroom’.  This is a personal comment article, and more controversial than humorous when compared to Coren’s article on Brownies promise. 

First of all, similarly to Coren’s way of starting, Monbiot also begins with a rhetorical question; ‘What’s the best way to knacker a child’s education?’ In the same way that Coren got her readers interested in her writing through this technique, so would Monbiot. Monbiot also follows the question with a response just like Coren did, except in a different way. Instead of listing an answer using comedic language to entertain the readers, Monbiot is a lot more serious of the matter; ‘Force him or her to spend too long in a classroom’. This is a more abrupt way of answering and shows the reader that the article is going to be very opinionated and not of the humorous tone. He says it as if he is telling the readers to do it, and exaggerating in a sense that he is implying that it is against the childrens’ will through the verb “force”. It is a compound sentence because there is only one clause. 

Instead of presenting his ideas in a exceptionally personal, and non-relaxed format, Monbiot not only talks of his experience, but also uses scientific/researchers evidence to back up his arguments; ‘ Fieldwork in the countryside, a British study finds, improves long-term memory.’ , ‘Teenage girls taken on a three-week canoeing trip in the US remained, even 18 months later, more determined, more prepared to speak out and show leadership, and more inclined to challenge conventional notions of femininity.’, ‘The Wilderness Foundation UK, which takes troubled teenagers into the mountains, found that their self-control, self-awareness and behaviour all improved.’. These quotes all show the evidence in which Monbiot provides throughout his entire article. This is very powerful to the reader because it shows that Monbiot seems very knowledgeable about the subject he is talking about, therefore the readers are more likely to end up agreeing, or follow his points better due to the fact that they feel they could trust him in a sense that he is speaking the truth when stating these factual pieces of evidence. Monbiot also only focuses on the positives of what has happened on all of these projects promoting “less time in the classroom” therefore of course it would persuade people to agree due to all of the positive effects it appears to be having compared with negative effects.

 In addition to this, he mentions his own experience alongside these factual points; ‘Last week I saw the evidence myself. With the adventure learning charity WideHorizons...Many had never been to the countryside before and had never seen the sea’. This persuades the reader to agree with him because of the adverbial phrase confirming he personally saw the evidence. Now, normally this may not be enough to persuade them because he might of been lying, but the fact that he mentioned what charity he was working with, shows that he mustn’t of been lying otherwise he wouldn’t of been able to provide that information effectively. The repetition of the word ‘never’ puts emphasis on the sad fact he is pointing out, and makes the readers feel sympathy for the kids who have not been given these opportunities. This makes them agree with his point more because if they agreed, it would mean agreeing for the children to get more experiences like these. This is different to Coren’s way of persuading because she uses non-evidential, and more daft experiences in her article and so as a result, are not as effective as Monbiot’s. 

Finally, he reinforces his opinion through things that people are doing wrong as proven in his previous points through evidence he has either collected himself or found from others; ‘Instead of being encouraged to observe and explore and think and develop, children are being treated like geese in a foie gras farm.’ Monbiot alike Coren, uses a simile here referring to the treatment of someone. He follows on to say; ‘Confined to the classroom, stuffed with rules and facts, dragooned into endless texts; there could scarcely be a better formula for ensuring that they become bored and disaffected’.  Monbiot is comparing the treatment of children to the horrible, ghastly conditions in which animals who are being slaughtered go through. This shows the reader that what the children are going through is intense. He uses the abstract noun “dragooned” to express the extent of which children are put through and how tough and unfair it is on them due to them being of such a young age.  

I find his final paragraph particularly effective; ‘literally, in the natural world: surely by these means you discover more about yourself and the world around you than you do during three months in a classroom. What kind of government would deprive children of this experience?’ I found this compelling, and extremely effective for his persuasion of getting his point across to the reader because again, he repeats the same fact as he did at the beginning about ‘spending three months in a classroom’ which emphasises the point even more, and shows that he won’t allow the reader to forget about it. But the thing that really makes this piece of persuasive text effective is something that is different to how Coren ended her text. Where Coren ended on a summary styled basis, Monbiot has ended on a rhetorical question; ‘What kind of government would deprive children of this experience?’ This is extremely interactive, it gets the readers very involved, and not only for the duration of reading this article, but because the question was at the end, it would stay in their heads making them try and figure out what their answer would be to that question. The pragmatics of this question from Monbiot is that he would like to get the readers to agree with his idea of the government being “evil” to not extend pupils learning as much as they could outside of classrooms. He even uses the intransitive verb “deprive” which emphasises on negativity being formed in the readers’ minds about that particular subject. 

Overall, I believe that out of the two texts I have analysed so far, Monbiot’s argument about children’s treatment when it comes down to education is by far the most powerful and effective text. I believe this because he has used many stronger supported points than Coren has, and I found his more interesting due to his use of language and subtle persuasion, and his deep personal experiences.

My third and final text I will be analysing is a response article arguing against the open letter in which was originally formed on a blog by Sinead O’Connor about how outraged she is by Miley’s behaviour, and debating about whether Miley should use her “sex appeal” in her “wrecking ball” recent video. This response article is by a journalist named Melissa Bradshaw and the text is quite similar to Monbiot’s in that it is quite serious about a really recent controversial issue that has been on-going for quite a while.

 Firstly, unlike the previous journalists using rhetorical questions as a starting point, she uses the technique of counter argument followed by discredit but in a very manipulated,  clever way; ‘ Sinead O’Connor’s open letter to Miley Cyrus isn’t entirely helpful to women. While O’Connor’s warnings about young artists being exploited by the music industry should be taken seriously, the implication is that naked, or other sexual images of women inevitably entails the woman being the victim. Why should this be the case?... There would be no celebration of the immense power of sexuality’. This quote shows that Bradshaw has made her point, but controversed it making a point about how ineffective the letter would be due to reasons in which the women being sexually exploited are under no control of. She also used a rhetorical question of “why should this be the case?”. Due to her starting on a point of her own, this really gets the reader thinking but in the direction of which she is thinking herself because she mentioned it before she asked the question. It really gets the reader interested and involved.

 Bradshaw explains an extremely valid point and digs deep to explain points of which no one may have ever considered before; ‘Similar rhetoric to that of the No More Page Three campaign. A quote on its website for example, states that the page 3 image is “a sex object” and then immediately with no other nuance, relates this to “300,000 women being sexually assaulted and 60,000 raped each year”. Perhaps you can already see the problem here. It is not women’s bodies or images of them that cause the exploitation of women or violence against women. The perpetrators are to blame’. This is powerful because Bradshaw has used evidence of statistics and quotes to back up her points which persuades the reader because they are real facts – similar to how Monbiot persuades his readers. The simple sentence “The perpetrators are to blame” is very direct, and shows she is not considering other points of view by using a direct tone of the word “are” to make her opinion seem like a fact. She suggests it’s the people that produce these images, people who direct these videos are to blame for creating such horrific content. 

Personally, I don’t find this text very effective at all because after reading into it thoroughly many times, I feel that it is a bit too boring. I feel that it is boring because it speaks of no personal experience, and it isn’t very entertaining. This wouldn’t persuade the reader as well as Coren and Monbiot because I think they would give up reading half way through. Not many similes or metaphors are used, and it is quite basic; I think it could have been written better in a way that she uses more rhetorical questions and more persuasive, empowering techniques to keep the readers interest.

In conclusion, I think that Monbiot’s text about educations effect on children was the most powerful and successful persuasive text out of these three texts. I think this because he has used many varied techniques of persuasion. For example, he used rhetorical questions, and he used personal evidence/facts to back up his points. It was more interesting to read because it was more intimate from the journalist and involved more emotion. I didn’t feel Coren was very effective because at times I felt she was trying too hard to be funny. I also felt that it was too much humour in one go for the reader to actually take her seriously. As for Bradshaw, she really lacked in qualities in which made Monbiot so effective in his writing. His use of metaphors, similies, rhetorical questions, power of three etc all paid off because the piece is extremely enticing and the way he did it in a subtle way is even more effective because the reader is not aware that their minds are being persuaded as such because it is in a less direct technique.