Paragraph Re-Draft

In the transcript, the barrister uses proper nouns frequently, referring to others by name. An example of this language is: 'according to you Mr Neil (.) this ill feeling (.) this grudge on Mr peterson's'. The use of proper nouns over pronouns such as 'him', or 'his', serve to portray the barrister in a more formal and intimidating light. To accentuate this representation, the barrister repeats the proper nouns on multiple occasions. Doing this, particularly referring to Mr Neil by his name serves to create a sense of tension between the two, as well as putting Mr Neil under more pressure to answer satisfactorily. This is of particular importance because the transcript takes place in a courtroom during a case. This means that this sense of pressure would be more potent and important due to the relevancy of the context. It is also presumable that the audience of this transcript (the judge, jury and anyone sitting in on the case), would understand the scene and feel the effects of this pressure and tension first-hand.

Hospital Text PEE Paragraph Homework

Write 3 PEE paragraphs in response to the hospital car park text. Analyse how the text uses language to create meanings and representations.

In the text, a commanding and authoritative tone is used. This makes the clear the importance of the text, indicating that it must be followed. An example of this is 'Do not park in this car park unless you agree to the Terms and Conditions in full.' The imperative phrase 'do not' makes it very clear that the request should be obeyed, and that consequences will follow should you choose to avoid doing so. Another phrase used to similar effect is: 'Vehicles must not park in a time controlled zone beyond the permissible period.' As in the first phrase, the imperative 'must not' is very commanding and would likely ensure that the reader takes it more seriously. On the whole, this mass-inclusion of imperative and authoritative phrases serves to provide the text with a seriousness befitting of it's purpose, which is achieved to good effect.

As well as 'bossy' imperative phrases, the text does use several softer and more persuasive phrases, some of which include mitigated imperatives. One such phrase is: 'Permitted vehicles, please display your permits at all times and park in designated parking areas applicable to your permit.' The inclusion of the word 'please' makes the phrase seem almost optional. However, the reader knows that if they do not comply, they will face the parking charge detailed at the bottom of the text, making it, for all intensive purposes, an out-and-out imperative. Another mitigated imperative is: 'By failing to comply with the above terms of use you agree to pay a Parking Charge Notice of £60.' The use of the term 'you agree to' does little to hide the warning that if you breach the terms, you will be forced to pay the fine.

The inclusion of short, simple sentences such as: 'Controlled parking area.' show, in simple terms, the overall concept of the car park, telling the reader immediately that it is such an area, allowing them, without reading the whole of the text, to infer that it is a car park which you will have to pay to use. The next sentence is equally concise: 'This car park area is monitored 24 hours a day.' This too, conveys the sentiment & message of the parking company in a simple and easy to digest way. This use of short, simple sentences serves to deliver important information to the reader in an efficient way as possible.

 

Language & Occupation Research Task - Veterinary Surgeon

The special lexis used by vets covers many individual topics.
The topics we are covering include:

• Diseases, Illnesses and Symptoms
• Animal Anatomy
• Equipment 
• Names of Procedures

Diseases, Illnesses and Symptoms

In Dogs:
Parvo (Parvovirus Infection)
an infectious disease, most commonly found in dogs. It attacks the immune system of the dog, eventually killing the dog.
Lyme Disease
an infectious disease, caused by bacteria transmitted through ticks, it can spread to humans.
Demodicosis
also known as 'demodectic mange', this disease is caused by a build-up of mites on the dogs fur

In Cats:
Feline Infectious Peritonitis
an incurable, fatal disease in cats that takes over white blood cells causing a deadly inflammatory reaction.
Feline Immunodeficiency Virus
a lentivirus that affects up to 2.5% - 4.4% of cats worldwide, it is not typically fatal.

Veterinary Procedures

Sialoadenectomy
The surgical excision of the salivary gland

Hypophysectomy
The removal of the pituitary gland, usually used to treat tumors.

Laminectomy
The surgical removal of the lamina; the part of the vertebra that covers your spinal canal. This surgery can be used to relieve pressure on the spinal column and connected nerves.

How does your occupational group communicate with members of the public who are customers or clients?

When talking to their clients, veterinary surgeons tend not to dumb down their specialist language, as it is important that the clients understand what exactly is happening to their pets. Despite this, they may also offer the client a more 'basic' explanation. In some cases, especially when informing an owner that their pet may have to be put down, they might talk to the client slowly and with empathy.

Describe the occupational register of this group, with examples.
In the workplace, vets would be likely to talk professionally, especially when in medical or surgery situations, where they would use the correct terms for the situation. However, perhaps when consoling a customer, they may use more personal, passionate terms.

Sources

http://www.petmd.com/veterinaryterms

Jennifer Lawrence - Why Do I Make Less Than My Male Co-Stars?

What are the important contextual features of this text?

The context of this piece is as follows:
Following a hacking scandal, Sony had a lot of sensitive information leaked. This included the respective wages earned by each of the actors that starred in a certain film. It was subsequently revealed that the female stars, notably Jennifer Lawrence (of 'Hunger Games' fame) were being paid substantially less than their male counterparts. This led to Lawrence herself posting an update to Facebook detailing her thoughts on the matter. The entire scenario was accentuated by the multitude of recent claims of a 'gender pay gap', making it one of the most hotly debated discussions concerning gender equality in recent years.

Comment on the 'male' and 'female' language features in this text. What is their effect on the reader?

In direct opposition to Robin Lakoff's 'Deficit' model of gendered speech, Lawrence uses aspects of what would be considered both 'male' and 'female' speech.
In terms of 'female' language features, Lawrence uses the brunt of them at the start of her article. For example, she can be seen to use Emotional language such as 'excited'. She also uses several 'empty adjectives' like 'adorable', albeit slightly ironically or sardonically. Due to the very slight presence of this 'female' speech, it has very little effect on the reader, since they don't really get the chance to process or interpret it before it is gone. However, after that she abandons all of the so-say 'female sensibilities' and descends into what would be heavily considered 'male' linguistic territory.
 Examples of this can be found in her noticeably 'direct' manner of speech. This is shown through the use of imperatives/directives. She also features swearing heavily in her text, a feature Lakoff would interpret as being indicative of 'male' speech tendencies. She also speaks with what could be interpreted as a more 'dominant' tone, a staple of Lakoff's theory of Deficit. The inclusion of these 'male' linguistic features gives the piece a very commanding and serious tone, and makes it really stand out, when you remember from who the text is coming.

Do you agree with her conclusion? Justify your answer making reference to the language and gender theories we have looked at in class.

In terms of language, she makes a good point. It is indeed the case that when men are forceful or even aggressive in their efforts to achieve something, it often works, and they are often praised for it, whereas these attributes are seen as detrimental when used by a woman.

While I in no way subscribe to the belief that women should be paid less for the same work, I do not agree with the conclusion to which Jennifer Lawrence has arrived. While, on the face of it, it may indeed seem that Jennifer Lawrence (recently named Hollywood's highest paid actress) was paid about half of what her male co-stars earned, that conclusion has been reached due to distorted figure taken out of context.
For her role in American Hustle Lawrence received $1.25 million, plus $250,000 in deferred compensation, as well as seven points in profit participation.
If you take the information at face value, it could seem outrageous that her male co-stars Christian Bale, and Bradley Cooper received $2.5 million each, with nine points.
However this is not the truth. While Jennifer Lawrence worked for 19 days for her $1.25 million, Bale & Cooper worked at least 45 days each for their double in pay.
When broken down, Lawrence actually earned $65 thousand per day of work, whereas Bale & Cooper both earned $55 thousand per day, meaning that in fact, Lawrence earned more for her time worked.
As has been demonstrated, it is easy enough to distort these figures to make it appear as if Lawrence was being criminally underpaid for her role, in comparison to her co-stars, that simply isn't the case.
In a revelation of, perhaps, cruel irony, for her starring role in the film Passengers, Lawrence was paid an estimated $5 million to £7 million more than her male co-star, Chris Pratt.
With such high figures being thrown around, the entire situation does beg the question:
'Aren't all stars, male, female, or whatever, absurdly overpaid?'

Article - How Are Dialects Changing?

Just What is 'Bidialectalism', and Just How Does it Affect You?

A dialect is a variety of language spoken by a particular group of the language's speakers. This includes the usage of slang and the accent with which the speaker talks. Dialects are often regional, however, there are also dialects specific to certain social circles called a 'sociolect'. Another type of dialect is the form of a language spoken by a particular ethnic group in the language, this is an 'ethnolect'.

Everybody, despite what they might believe, is part of a dialect. Be it regional, social or ethnic, everybody can relate to being part of a dialect. As such, it is easy for everybody to relate to the idea of a set dialect that can be easily noticed or recognised. Some people may find solace in being part of such a distinguished group of people, so it may alarm them that dialects are changing over time. Don't believe me? I don't blame you, it seems almost hard to believe that something as well established as say, the cockney dialect, could be changing over time. Linguists (those who study language) have noticed this, and there are many examples and theories to explain this change.

One explanation of such a change is the existence of 'bidialectalism', the ability to speak with two accents or dialects. Researchers have found this transient dialectal tendency to be most prominent among the middle classes, who often mingle with wide ranges of people and backgrounds, and are effectively influenced by those they live around. For example, growing up in London, and then moving to Newcastle has been known to cause people to fuse the two accents, creating a hybrid, or speak the two entirely separately.

Researchers at the University of Newcastle have come to the conclusion that bidialectalism is almost always performed by the subconscious part of the brain. They say that this is due to the subconscious desire to adapt to your surroundings whenever you are put into a new environment. As such, if you pay attention, you may find yourself changing your accent slightly when talking to people from other regions, with other dialects.

This even occurs to me! When visiting my mother's family in the northern-midlands, I find myself adding slight aspects of their regional accent into my own. This has resulted, for me, in a rather neutral dialect, which is neither here-nor-there. However, researchers say that bidialectalism is a phenomenon mostly reserved for the middle-class. They say this not due to some biological difference between the classes, but do back it up rather convincingly. They say that the upper classes are less likely to experience this due to the fact that they, for the most part, do not possess particularly noticeable regional accents, instead choosing to speak a variety of received pronunciation. They say that people in the working class generally possess stronger regional accents, and as they are less likely to move around the country, they are usually surrounded by people with the same dialect as them, causing no need to change.

The research these linguists are conducting has even reached the point where they feel able to 'forecast' the future potential changes in certain dialects. For example, Dr. Hall of the University of Newcastle believes that within the next 30 years, the North-East accent very well may have become a part of a general 'Northern' accent. This is what is known as 'Dialectal Dilution'.

That said, I see nothing to worry about when it comes to bidialectalism. Everything evolves and changes over time, mostly for the better, so why should language and dialect be any different? I for one, look forward to seeing how both my own, and general dialects change in the years to come.

TED Talk Notes

Talk #1: Murray Gell-Mann - The Ancestor of Language
https://www.ted.com/talks/murray_gell_mann_on_the_ancestor_of_language#t-16309

Topic: Distant relationships between human languages

Notes:
The theory of common ancestry,  when it comes to language, is not a widely believed theory among linguists
The talker believes that language goes beyond this theoretical 'common ancestor', before things such as cave paintings, which he believes could not have been created without modern language.

Talk #2: Erin McKean: Go Ahead, Make Up New Words
https://www.ted.com/talks/erin_mckean_go_ahead_make_up_new_words#t-397119

Topic: Creation of new words, Specifically in the English Language.

Notes:
The speaker talks about the fact that people are discouraged from creating new words, and how this is contradictory to how we are usually taught to be (meaning, creative, inventive etc). She implores the listener to embrace new words, and even take a hand in creating some.

She then goes on to talk about the different ways new words can be created:
The first, is 'borrowing' words from other languages and adopting them directly into our own. She cites the word 'ninja' from Japanese as an example for this.
Another method by which new words can be formed is by 'Compounding' Which is combining to pre-existing words to form a new word. She uses the words "Heartbroken", "Bookworm" and "Sandcastle" to demonstrate a compound.
The next way detailed in the video is called 'Functional Shift'. This is where the meaning of a word is adapted to fit a different situation/context. An example used for this is: the word 'commercial' while originally being an adjective, has become a noun in modern American English.
The final way she shares on how to create new words is 'Blending'. This, similarly to compounding, is a way of combining two words, however blending does so more vigorously. Examples of blending include: "Brunch" and "Motel"

Talk #3: Daniel H. Cohen: For Argument's Sake
https://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_h_cohen_for_argument_s_sake#t-28019

Topic: Why Do We Argue?

Notes:
The speaker explores the concept of academic argument, why we argue, and what effect losing an argument has.
He states three 'models' of academic argument
Argument as War
Argument as Proof
Argument as Performance
He says that, of the three, the dominant is 'Argument as War'. He says that it shapes how we talk and think about arguments, as well as how we conduct our own arguments.
The talker points out that when we talk about arguments, we often use militaristic terms. He states that: "We want 'strong' arguments, 'killer' arguments."

The speaker suggests that this 'adversarial' way of addressing argument is 'deforming' the way we think about argument. He says it makes us value tactics over substance, that it magnifies the 'us vs them' aspect, and that the only foreseeable outcomes are 'glorious victory', or 'abject defeat'.
He says that this way of thinking removes the concepts of Deliberation, Negotiation, Compromise and Collaboration from arguing.
He finishes by saying that arguments run through this way of thinking never really 'get anywhere'. More often than not, they end in stalemate, or backtracking or proverbial 'dead-ends'.