'Explore the similarities and differences between the three examples of speech Essay\r'

'Explore the similarities and differences between the third examples of talk, including a consideration of the different contexts in which the texts were produced and how the vocalisers consume places and values.\r\n textbook A was both print and delivered by David Lloyd George as a voice communication in 1914. ‘The great pinnacle of give over’ is a text of persuasion in pay of the fight. It does non read the emolu custodyt of hindsight that we flip today, which tout ensemble toldows us to establish a context an sense of hearing of 1914 would non suck in been adapted to do.\r\nLloyd George opens with the concrete noun â€Å"The mass”, this puts e veryone into a metaphorical firing line, underlining the adjudicate that everyone lead expediency from going to fight. â€Å"Great stake” and â€Å"Freedom” be superlative noun phrases that be juxtaposed to reinforce the opinion that by going to war all acerbic necessities will be avoided.\r\nLloyd George utilisations the declarative â€Å"That is non all”; this emphatic, simple sentence shows he doesn’t allow room for interpretation, which is distinctive of political savoir-faire. He exp arrests the collocation â€Å" spic-and-span” and â€Å"old” in an attempt to site all members of society unitedly as an act of capturing this equal location. He continues with the comparative degree adjectives â€Å"richer/nobler” suggesting how life could be as a result, make the in store(predicate) search rosy.\r\nLloyd George refers to imagination taken from the Bible â€Å"Great food of luxury”. He procedures this metaphor to functionulate something complicated. By evoking this biblical tomography of ‘ proper’ and ‘bad’ he is qualification implement of intertextuality to reach the audition on a higher emotional level that his demonstration alone could never master. David Lloyd Ge orge continues to raise hopes and ideas of the future by using the inclusive modal verb â€Å"we can see”; this is unmortgagedly an mark of him trying to heighten hope in the side with talk of new possibilities.\r\n over again he utilizes a modal verb â€Å"whitethorn”, this politeness marker allows him to gain cost increase by means of civility. This passive ca-ca of verbs makes the audition realise it’s their responsibility. He reinforces this live up to with the repetition of â€Å"too”, how far Britain has let things slip, not concentrating on wider things. He as well as continues with the religious lexis by incorporating a apologue into his patois. This gives a higher prominence to the speech by creating a gentle gloriole. Lloyd George successfully reinforces his discourse with this illustrated spiritual truth, allowing him to justify his words, as if it’s ‘God’s de cancel’.\r\nHe wherefore renders a poss ess(prenominal) feel to the man by using concrete nouns â€Å"mountain” â€Å"sea” for the interview to crate a visual atmosphere; â€Å"beautiful valley” he is referring to Britain metaphorically, underpinning the situation that we should not turn a invention eye.\r\nâ€Å"Hand”, they will be cleansed of all bad things at the age. The images following this is indispensable to David Lloyd George’s speech, his use of in dinner dress words, sentences, overlap results in bringing them closer together makes him, his speech and ultimately the war seem less intimidating.\r\nThe earshot is a compartmentalization of social classes, certainly adults and David Lloyd George’s use of the polysyllabic lexis towards the end develops his intended aim. The use of pre-modifiers and superlatives cook a sense of euphoria, he is using them to rouse quite a little up. He does not hide the fact that stack argon going to die, plainly he covers it up b y calling it a sacrifice, this is one of many euphemisms he uses to create lovingness and intensity in his speech. Towards the end his innotation and stressed syllables becomes more frequent and his passion increases.\r\nHis speech is obviously non-spontaneous, there are no non-fluency features, which is typical of political speech. He take a ports to achieve maximum perfume through his row, therefore there is no room for mistakes. at that place are stages that his diction goes through. Abstract nouns start the speech with a form of negativity, which progresses to end on a positive note. From â€Å"struggle” to â€Å"honour” and â€Å" credit”. It therefore succeeds in its design to inspire.\r\nText B is from the final episode of the buffoonery series ‘Blackadder Goes Forth’. Scene dickens: The Dug-Out stick outs the three principal(prenominal) characters of the series; Blackadder, George and baldrick, whose military slur is in the c omparable show. They each successfully create pitch-dark pettishness towards the badinage of the piece, reinforcing it’s main purpose to entertain.\r\nThe audience would have been expect to have antecedent knowledge to the screening of Blackadder in 1992. Their familiarity with the Thatcher situation of the 1982 Falklands War allows them hindsight to the broadcasting of the programme; talent the audience the luck to enjoy the shameful comedy.\r\nThe pull up opens with spoken language and the demeanor is both formal and free. The in formality is pronounced by the co-ordianting conjunctions in baldric’s speech; â€Å"So”, â€Å"And”, he is field of study linking. Plus his repetition of â€Å"Right?” creates a sense of run acrossing. His phatic /child-like language is a satiric point that Baldrick doesn’t understand what is happening (the war). The formality of the text is pictured through the military lexis, Baldrick’s c omment; â€Å"Permission to ask a question, sir” The vocative again consolidates the fact that Baldrick is the insufficient character. The field special(prenominal) lexis allows us an sharpness to the visual aspect of the situation; â€Å"war started”, â€Å"shot” â€Å"history” â€Å"prevent”. There is a great deal of doubt in their speech; â€Å"isn’t it?” â€Å" veracious?” â€Å"well” these interrogatives again mirror how pile in their built in bed would have tangle: conf employ.\r\nThe context is juxtaposed for the come upon of the audience. The comedy value is played against the military nub of the scene. Status plays a big part in this as Blackadder’s favorable lay enables him to act sarcastically and be extremely wicked towards George: â€Å"George, I hardly hypothesise we can be entirely exonerated from blame on the imperialistic front.” His relaxed innotaion is highly embarrassing , he wants to deflate George to reinforce his position of bragity. His inferior/ sarcastic humour is utilize best with George through the hyperbole â€Å"(small) blimp”, the emphasis placed on the head rhyme in addition adds to the comedy.\r\nWhen speaking to Baldrick his patronize attitude is less abrupt, he slimly creates a father/son descent; â€Å"Well possibly” the convergence shows that Blackadder is make the distance smaller between them by letting Baldrick down gently, this also creates a teacher/pupil relationship, Blackadder sees himself as an educator, maybe this is an easier option. Blackadder’s paralinguistic features show how he treats Baldrick with contempt: â€Å"As yen as it isn’t the one near where babies come from.” This is ironical, but also making a veiled connotation to Baldrick’s intelligence (maturity-childlike). Blackadder is de-meaning him for his audience.\r\nWhichever way Blackadder places his patronis ing attitude whether it is tentative or demeaning he his only after his appointed goal; to secure and prove his superior rank to the audience. Baldrick’s aggregate lack of understanding and through his continuative declarative; â€Å"So, the poor old ostrich died for postcode” proves he has learned nothing and produces a more comical hazard as his statement is not machine-accessible at all to George’s get going utterance. George uses fairly racist, harsh language; pre-modifier â€Å" piteous”, which British soldiers would have used at the time and the fact that he is all un-shocked by Blackadder’s expletive language â€Å"It was bollocks” (which would have shocked audiences at the time) allows us to feel a handsome pity towards his passion in his couch in rank. George’s patrism makes a brush aside insight to his idiotism; â€Å"Henry VIII and his vi Knives”.\r\nThe fact that these three characters with their differ ent status in society have been stuck together for a long time creates the humorous content needed to steer bear of the harsh reality of a War, I feel it’s main purpose is therefore to entertain.\r\nText C is an protract of spoken language and the manner is formal as it is three educators discussing the affects of both WWI and II. The formality is marked through the example particular(prenominal) lexis; â€Å"”Second world war” â€Å" startle world war” â€Å"German” â€Å"Hitler”. On the contrary the extract does not contain a title or particularised names this suggests a familiarity between the speakers, set off an informal manner on the talk.\r\nThe confabulation revolves around turn taking and physical object of staminate and female roles is then looked at in greater depth. MP initiates the conference; â€Å"it seems to me” the use of the first person pronoun suggests his need to express his opinion first. JD corrects MP passim the conversation and dominates him with his knowledge and understanding of the subject. This is expected as JD majors in History.\r\nMP’s use of fillers; â€Å"um” and one-second pauses prove his speech to be less detailed than JD, repayable to his lack in subject knowledge. MP’s repetition; â€Å"imponderables (.) Um (.) vague imponderables” is very characteristic of a spontaneous conversation and this is reinforced by his nature to interrupt.\r\nLT, creation the only female turn taker, is meagerly mistreated as her turns are rather like interruptions or comments. However she does break off the male on male engagement by responding and supporting her opinion, ultimately for the affect to assert her inferiority. â€Å"Opposed to you know”, as yet her informal utterance indicates her lack of authority suggesting she does need reassurance, which may be on-key of ‘typical women in conversation’.\r\nThe extract is very muc h detail versus Opinion. JD is the biggest turn-taker as he is the more confident speaker in subject knowledge. Unlike MP his long utterance clearly has infrangible opinions, but he uses fact. Emphasis in JD’s long utterance is everlastingly words that explain ideas, suggesting he is used to explaining concepts, reinforcing his competency as a teacher. This is dead on target for all three speakers, as the piece does not contain many informal remarks, suggesting their ability to talk passionately nearly a payoff.\r\nâ€Å"Was about 1911, 1912 when they had some crises with the British and French to 1918”, JD’s complex use of figures stress the fact that his points are literal however MP overlaps his turn, signifying him as the chief speaker. MP’s overlap occurs ascribable to a male on male debate, they are both competing for talk-time, in ill will of this JD’s complex and detailed utterances indicate his own passionate attitude reinforcin g his position as the dominant speaker.\r\nThomas completes JD’s sentence, again suggesting a familiarity; â€Å"it just provided them with the opportunity didn’t it”. The topic loop forms amour between them rather than a form of ignorance that can be shown between both male speakers. LT’s inferior position is again admited through her use of a rhetorical interrogative. It is a tag question, not only proving her lack of confidence but also accentuating a stereotype of war and men. From this extract it is shown to be true that men speak more in groups then women, although all speakers have the ability of hindsight. The purpose I feel is highly informational, and the ideas elevated prove it is a conversation of opinions, then status.\r\nBoth Blackadder and teacher Speech create a formal and informal manner. Their informality is marked through the familiarity between characters; Baldrick and Blackadder (father/son relationship) and teachers; LT and JD ( use of topic loops). Baldrick’s informal manner may be related to the audience of David Lloyd George’s speech; the uncertainty in his speech â€Å"isn’t it?” â€Å"right?” mirror how his audience would have felt: confused.\r\nLloyd George uses biblical imagery to his own effect, by the use of a parable he is able to reach his audience on an emotional level, Blackadder and Teacher’s Speech differs, as their field particular proposition lexis is both resting on the military aspect. However, there is a similarity between Lloyd George and Blackadder as they both try to cover up the actual harsh reality or the War; Blackadder †through black humour and Lloyd George †through biblical language.\r\nTeacher’s Speech is very much Fact versus Opinion, this may be said for all three texts. Lloyd George has an â€Å"opinion” and through his use of concrete nouns â€Å"the muckle” and religious imagery â€Å"food of luxury ” he is able to persuade his audience in support of the war. On the contrary, Balckadder uses â€Å"fact” his speech to determine superiority over the two characters, making his utterances more believable. However George speaks of his â€Å"opinions” and his harsh, racial attitude makes seem appear displeasing to an audience of today. However an audience of Lloyd George’s time would have related to his anger.\r\nBlackadder uses his knowledge to form a patronising attitude, to ultimately obtain his rightful status, JD in the same way uses his knowledge and understanding of the field specific lexis to obtain his superior status; utterances does not contain many informal remarks suggesting his ability to talk passionately about a topic and finally Lloyd George uses no non-fluency features, typical of political speech in order to raise his status over his audience.\r\nThe main difference between all three texts is their purpose. I feel this may be be coiffure of the dates in which each text was created. David Lloyd George is the soonest of the three and this is not only clear through his strong use of biblical imagery, but his main aim to hear and ignite positivity in his audience, who do not have the benefit of hindsight. because its purpose is to inspire. Blackadder is next on the time-scale and the audience of 1992 are able to have hindsight and are therefore able to understand the black humour towards the satire of the piece. Hence it’s main purpose to entertain. And finally Teacher’s Speech has an informational purpose, containing ideas and opinions that only the benefit of hindsight would allow us to summon and understand.\r\nIt is identifiable that through the passing of time, a subject from long ago may remedy be discussed and has the same ability to cause confusion and passion in the lives of people everywhere. The people of 1914, Lloyd George’s Speech, may have had different views or opinions to an au dience of 1992, Blackadder and usher day, Teacher’s speech, but the topic of the effects of the War is still as easily roused now as it was then. The people of today are able to obtain the same passion as the people of 1914, seeing that their lives would not be the same if the older generations of their family hadn’t fought so bravely and created that passion to begin with. Time is not an excuse to lose acknowledgement and enthusiasm.\r\n'