Daily Mail article - attitudes to accents - Tuesday 15th

My intended target audience will be 'The Daily Mail' readers who are interested in changing accents and dialects, and people who have prescriptive and descriptive views on the subject.


Is Received Pronunciation the only respectable accent?

Map of Great Britain and Ireland
showing results of a survey of
most favoured accents

For decades, controversy has filled the topic of conversation on regional dialects and accents defining who we are and our intelligence, with the country torn between believing that they are a part of our unique identity and a rich factor in our social and regional upbringing, adding a so called 'spice' or 'flavour' to the way our country's mode of talk operates, whereas many believe quite the opposite that strong regional accents have an undesired effect on the way we speak and effectively dampens the quality and eloquence of Received Pronunciation. However, in the scheme of things our country would seem pretty boring and dull if we all spoke in the same accent and dialect, don't you think?

Giles' matched guise technique found that Received Pronunciation is the most impressive and influential accent when imposing certain arguments, and that the brummie accent was the least desirable and imposing; however these arguments coming from a variety of accents and regional dialects were all the same, showing that, with the same concept of speech being heard from different accents, people still judge them differently on how convincing and appealing they are. Although the study was 40 years ago, the image to your right still shows results of brummie being the least favourable accents; showing that stereotypical judgment is still occurring today, and presumably in everyday life. Along with this, we frequently hear people saying that people cannot present on national television because of their accent being 'too strong' or 'not neutral enough'; is this the harsh truth, or are people actually discriminating?

Throughout the world and especially in our country, people are constantly trying, possibly when they move homes or cities or during university, to get along with people, many a time in which people from different regions of our land using different dialects and strong opposite accents occur - when this happens, do we have to hide our true prescriptive thoughts of other 'snotty' accents, or shall we actually enjoy experiencing other fascinating accents and become descriptive people? Shall we judge or explore? This can occur from a wide scale of accents deemed acceptable or unacceptable; so called posh people may make judgements on a strong regional accent like scouse, and then a scouse may judge a more standard pronunciation accent. Will our country ever truly get along, or will we just act as if we do?

If received pronunciation is considered to be the 'correct' accent to talk with, then why is it that only 2% of the population of England speak that way. That statistic along with many others show the wide cultural diversity our country has, we should be embracing it, not being hypocritical about it and make judgements on people purely because of their accent.

Studies show that over a few decades, 'the forms and norms of received pronunciation inevitably drift, it is influenced by the Southern British Speech Community', and this quote is backed up by analysts stating that the Queen has over the years been slowly trying to converge with the people, as her received pronunciation 'levels' have gradually dropped; so, this shows that RP may not be the wanted accent after all!

Accents and dialects findings from a class survey

                                                   Very   Fairly    Neither nor   Not very    Not at all
Received Pronunciation
Friendly                                       0         3           3                       6                1
Intelligent                                    10       4           0                       0                0
Trustworthy                                 1        6            6                       1                0
Brummie
Friendly                                      0         8            4                       2                0
Intelligent                                   0         0            2                       9                3
Trustworthy                                0         4            7                       2                1
Scouse
Friendly                                      0         7            4                       1                0
Intelligent                                   1        4            5                        4                  0
Trustworthy                                1        6            4                        2                 1


Resulting from our class findings, received pronunciation was deemed, by a considerable margin, the most intellectual sounding accent, with all 14 class members in favour of it sounding intelligent; this is a huge contrast compared to brummie, with not one student thinking it sounded intelligent - 9 thought it sounded unintelligent. The scouse accent seemed fairly neutral when asked about if it sounded intelligent; from these findings, a correlation may be made from how strong the accents are and less alike to RP, the more unintelligent it sounds.


The roles seem to reverse when consulted about the accents friendliness; nearly half the class deemed RP sounding unfriendly, compared to 8 people finding the brummie accent friendly, and 7 people finding the scouse accent of the same degree of friendliness. This could lead to a stereotype that people make - the more friendly a person/accent sounds, the less intelligent they are, and vice versa.
A slight anomalie is found in the scouse data, with just 1 person deeming it unfriendly; however, this could be because the person who casted that vote was originally from Liverpool, and therefore may have used inside information as they know what people from Liverpool are actually like.


This information links to Giles' matched guise technique around 40 years ago, where his investigation resulted in similar findings; students listened to different accents and judged which sounded the most convincing when expressing arguments. RP was deemed the most commanding, with brummie the least convincing, showing that the same judging and feelings about accents still occur in our modern era.

Giles' matched guise technique research

Giles matched guise technique

The matched guise test is a sociolinguistic experimental technique used to determine the views and feelings of people towards a certain dialect or accent.

The experiment revolves around a procedure of a variety of different students, acting as ‘judges’, listening to what they believe are different people’s accents and dialects (social and regional), and then evaluating their personal qualities solely based on their voice.       

However, they do not know that the ‘different people’ is just a single person speaking in the different accents heard. The test was executed by the listeners not able to see the speaker, therefore allowing them not to know it was the same person. This focuses on the findings that the judges solely judge the person by their accent, as the way of speaking and everything else is the same bar the accent. The topic talked about in the different accents were arguments against capital punishment – the arguments were completely identical; this allowed Giles to understand how persuasive the listeners found the speakers, despite the fact each argument was identical.

Findings

The students listening concluded that Received Pronunciation was the most impressive and influential, and the Brummie accent was the least imposing and convincing.

The information found from this technique closely matches similar research done in recent times; in 2014 a survey found that the Brummie accent was the least attractive, showing similar results are found over 40 years on.

Limitations

The judges may eventually understand midway through the recording that the ‘different speakers’ are only in fact the single person. This may lead to their results being untrue and therefore unreliable.

https://quizlet.com/5883513/english-accents-and-dialects-flash-cards/

Jennifer Lawrence analysis

What are the important contextual features of this text?

The context of this text is Jennifer Lawrence's straight talking approach to respond to the news that Sony had (what was) private information leaked, consequent to a hacking scandal. The main 'talking point' and controversial issue following the leak of private information was the revealing of the wages of actors in a film that Jennifer Lawrence was a star in. The problem was that Jennifer Lawrence, contrary to her leading role, and the other female actors were found to have earned considerably less than their male counterparts, understandably causing dispute, and a reply from Jennifer Lawrence on her Facebook page, possibly an unexpected one. The reply was fuelled by the shocking pay difference of the males and females involved, and from the post it is clear to see that the men seemingly earned a substantial amount compared to the females starring in the film; she was particularly unimpressed with this news, occasionally swearing and overall having a seemingly angry tone to the text.

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

In contrast to the 'deficit' model of Robin Lakoff, stating in a round about manner that males and females talk differently ("male language is the norm, female language is deficient"), Jennifer Lawrence uses features of both male and female language. When talking about hopefully not angering anyone, where she uses the phrase "piss anyone off" which could actually be classed as a male aspect of language, she uses the expression "fingers crossed". This could be interpreted to be used to show she has feelings for her fans and anyone reading her thoughts, relating to the stereotype that women are more emotional, or this could be used as a type of empty adjective to soften her phrase of 'pissing anyone off'. The reader may interpret this in either of those ways as it is quite possible that she wants to make sure no one is greatly offended by what she may say, or the reader may think of this as slight sarcasm as she seems understandably angry at the scenario. When using so called feminine language, she uses emotional language, such as not wanting to come across as being "spoiled", and an "adorable" way to show her opinion, backing up Lakoff's idea that women use more compassionate and empathetic language. She also backs up Lakoff's theory that men try to dominate conversations by stating that the males in the film were "fierce" when negotiating. Stating that women would be classed as a "brat" when negotiating shows that there is still a slight gender inequality in modern day.
Apart from phases in the text where she uses sophisticated and calm language associated with female's vocabulary, the reader would assume that, if they didn't know who wrote the piece, this was a male post due to the angered tone and strong language used which is less frequently associated with female language compared to males, such as "I fucking forgot", and the stern phrase "Fuck that". The use of the word "fucking" in the first example acts as an intensifier, and a word that is generally, according to Lakoff, a male propensity of language. This has an impact on the reader as they may be more surprised to see this language coming from a female, although they may understand because of the context. This backs up Deborah Cameron's view that men and women do not use language differently

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

I agree with her conclusion, as her overall point to it is that men can use their dominant stature, relating to Lakoff's dominance model, to get what they want and are not questioned over that, possibly even applauded for it, compared to women who may not take that approach and may even be worried about coming across rude when trying to negotiate a better deal, like Jennifer Lawrence in this case, and if they do they come across as "spoiled brats".

Accent and dialect article

Are dialects changing?

Incredibly, the United Kingdom has so many different accents and dialects although the area of the UK is so small compared to other countries where you wouldn't quite be able to distinguish different accents and dialects. With people roaming the country when a new job approaches or going to university, many people are constantly leaving their original area of living and encountering new places - so do their accents, along with their dialect which they use unconsciously, and suddenly people have a strong idea of where you originate from. This is an effect of geographical dialect, whereas social dialect wouldn't have as much as an effect due to the fact that no matter where you come from, your social dialect is due to your class and how you were brought up, for instance a man from Glasgow and a woman from Devon may have similar social dialects, but their geographical dialect and their accents will be clearly and hugely different from each others.

With people constantly moving nationally and internationally, people are hearing different dialects from different regions and countries, and this can then influence people to start to use the dialect they come across, passing onto friends and family and that's it - the simple process of dialects being passed on to other regions. Understanding these different dialects allow geographically and culturally diverse people gain an understanding of one another, and can possibly create a fusion between multiple dialects, hence the fact that dialects are changing. Feeling that you fit in is essential in this modern era, and using different dialectal colloquial language helps people to have that feeling. The Geordie accent and dialect is popular, and this liking is influenced by aspects such as social media and television, with popular show Geordie Shore and tv presenting pair Ant and Dec in the forefront of this as both of these examples are tv regulars of popular shows. Due to their popularity (and popularity and status being required in our era) people decide to use their dialect to feel on the same level of credibility as they have.

However, there is the argument that dialects are not changing as fast as many researchers say, as people have an idiolect, created by their upbringing and dialect from their area they have grew up in, and want to keep that with them for the rest of their lives as a tool to show they are unique, and have not used any other dialects they have came in contact with in their lifetimes.

Transcript Analysis

1. What do you notice about the use of proper nouns and/or pronouns in referring to people and events concerned?

From the transcript, the barrister addresses the defendant all of the time as Mr Neil, "so many times Mr Neil", and the witness as Mr Peterson, "this grudge on Mr Peterson". From this, we can interpret that he speaks in a very formal manner by using proper nouns, which he needs to because of his very important job. He may also refer to the defendant as Mr Neil to apply pressure to him, but it also links with how formal he needs to be, therefore he should address him in the correct way. On the other hand, Mr Neil uses pronouns, referring to the police as "em", which is a feature of spoken language as, if it was a written text it would be 'them'. The text reader may notice the difference in formality that the two people speak with.

2. What parts of the dialogue seem prepared or part of court room conventions and which seem spontaneous?

For the majority of the speech, the barrister seems to have planned what he is saying such as his opening few lines which seem like typical courtroom conventions, apart from the time where he responds to the defendants answer of his question, where micro pauses then occur, again a feature of spoken text, "the rear of your car (.) now (.)". This suggests that he may either be thinking of a reply, or purposely hesitating to again pressurise the defendant. Mr Neil however seems to speak spontaneously hen questioned about the gate incident, where pauses occur, whereas he answers almost immediately every time when questioned about the police and his uninsured driving; this may persuade the text reader to think that he has pre-planned his answers when questioned about the police incidents with a swift reply of a number of "no" 's.

3. Who seems to have the most power in the dialogue and why?  

From the transcript, it is clear to see that the barrister has the most authority in the dialogue, as he is asking the questions frequently, always pressurising Mr Neil into giving answers, "is that right? What happened to the gate?" This technique of one question after another heavily applies the pressure to the defendant, and this eventually causes Mr Neil to have a 2.5 second pause and reply with a "no" and nothing else, again causing the barrister to keep on questioning him. The text reader will not be surprised by this, as it is the normality for barristers to ask multiple questions to apply the defendant to reveal the truth. After a stint of latched talk with the speech flowing, and the defendant nanswering more swiftly, the barrister eventually criticises the defendant by saying, in as lightly informal manner, that he misunderstood Mr Peterson, who is a witness, "You put two and two together Mr Neil and made 5". Perhaps this was slightly informal for a barrister in a way to speak like that in court, but it is effective as it may frustrate and anger the defendant, eventually persuading him to reveal the truth.

Compared to the barrister, Mr Neil seems to have very little power in the transcript, as the barrister is choosing what questions he wants the defendant to answer, not allowing Mr Neil to have a larger say in the court room; the text reader will understand this and even possibly empathise with the defendant as they realise that his power of saying what he wants is limited due to his needs to answer the questions asked of him in court.

The text doesn't seem unusual to me, as i believe it is very conventional of what should be expected in a court room; constant questioning from the barrister; occasional hesitant replies from a nervous defendant (Mr Neil in this case).

Commentary on controversial issue

I chose the death penalty as my controversial issue, which I myself have a view on.
The character of the first blogger, Jonathan, comes across as a more sophisticated man with strong moral views, against the death penalty. He starts off in a formal manner with 'firstly', showing he knows how to begin a piece of writing, compared to the second character Brodus who starts off seemingly in an angry manner with a rhetorical sentence. Furthermore, the use of the shock statistics that Jonathan instantly uses is a feature that would grip the reader almost immediately, possibly then favouring his side of the argument. A man who isn't religious but was brought up by a sophisticated family and private school, it is clear to see as Jonathan uses a formal language and way of writing, and includes good vocabulary and ways of putting his ideas across to the reader in a persuasive, informative manner, such as the use of rhetoric questions and vocabulary such as the death penalty being hailed as 'absurd', furtherly emphasising his clear thoughts on the issue. It is clear to identify the primary purpose of the text as Jon is really trying to persuade and inform the readers, who I would believe to be people of the same social class or age as he is, to take his side of the argument and make them understand the stupidity and cruelty that Jon thinks the death penalty carries.

Alongside talking of the preposterousness of the death penalty, he includes the effects it has on the people designated to the killing of the criminals, which scientifically does have effects such as PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), which again could influence the reader to take his side of the argument. From this, the reader gains an understanding that he is a man who puts as much effort and passion into his posts due to the fact he thoroughly researches into the issue. Ending with a slight conclusion adds to the already established points that he is a sophisticated and formal writer. He also uses educated facts to help convey his point of view, 'Or the killing is against the Hippocratic Oath to preserve a life?' This suggests that he is well educated and has made sure he gets enough facts to help prove his point. 
This is a very different approach to the one Brodus took on trying to convey his message, by using direct address when addressing the fact that offenders can not re-offend when they are on death row, 'this could help stop them attacking people in your life.' This is effective as it makes people think of the possible dangers of when a convicted murderer is out of prison and how easily they could re-offend, pushing them to think that the death penalty effectively protects their family. The use of direct address here 'attacking people in your life' acts as a point of threat to the reader, in such a way that the reader's loved ones are possibly at risk of an attack as a direct result of the criminals release from prison. 

The second blogger, Brodus, is a young proud American who takes pride in the fact that their country is one of few who still use the death penalty in this modern era. He is a well known blogger in America for the strong points of view he expresses. The views in this blog are a slight similarity of my views of the death penalty, the view that proven murderers should not have the right to live if they have taken away someone else's life, but my views are not as strong and abrupt as his. Using the phrase 'It is in everyone's right mind to believe that the person guilty should pay the price and consequently lose his or her life' From saying this it makes readers feel they are idiots if they don't feel the same due to the phrase 'everyone's right mind'. His primary purpose of the blog is to, like Jonathan, persuade his readers to concur with his reasons. 

Although the blog is written in continuous prose, this piece of writing doesn't include the level of grammar and vocabulary of which Jonathan uses, showing the difference of academic writing ability of the two men. Compared to the formal and moral stance that Jonathan has, Brodus comes across as a man who doesn't care what others think of his views, as he puts his points across in a seemingly angered manner, constantly stating that murderers on death row deserve what is coming to them and do not deserve to live any more. Different readers may take this in different ways; similar men and women like him (especially Americans) may feel passionate about the controversial views he displays in the blog, whereas people in the same category of people as Jonathan -  more sophisticated, possibly higher class - may feel that his points are totally deplorable, and do not take into account Human Rights. 

Controversial issue class task

Subject - Death penalty

Sites used for research - http://listverse.com/2013/06/01/5-arguments-for-and-against-the-death-penalty/,
First blogger - Jonathan - 71
Second blogger - Brodus - 28

Blog 1 - against the death penalty

Firstly, I shall start things off by stating that a few people have been wrongly accused of murder (which does happen frequently in the courts), and subsequently have been wrongly killed due to the death penalty! Many more around (150) men and women have been again wrongly accused of murder and sentenced to be on death row for a ling period of time, helpless as they are the only ones which know they are on the brink of being innocently killed! Luckily these got away and were eventually found not guilty, but still it is inexplicable that anyone can go through the terror of knowing they they could be killed any minute of any day, be it they are innocent or not. The death penalty still takes away our most basic human right - the right to live. This absurd way of getting retribution of criminals takes away the most basic human right, and is against almost every religion that exists. What if the people forced to carry out a killing, such as doctors using the lethal injection, are religious? Or the killing is against the hippocratic oath to preserve a life? As much as it is unjust for the victim of the death penalty, the people who give the consequent punishment to kill the offender are also scarred for life, knowing they have also ended someone's life. You may be thinking that is not true, but i have evidence of this, as my wife's closest friend was once part of the firing squad, and is now totally ashamed of his actions and hasn't had a job in 35 years.
In addition to these points, I believe it is a cop out for the offenders; in the bigger picture, prison for life is more of a punishment than instant death, which many including myself believe is an easy way out for offenders which commit the most horrendous crimes. Furthermore, it hasn't proven that it dissuades people to commit similar crimes! Thousands of people in the USA (which uses the death penalty) are murdered every year, showing that the death penalty has very little if not no influence - it is absolutely pointless!
To make myself as clear as i can be, the death penalty is totally unnacceptable, is against moral and human rights and should never end someones life for an action they have committed.

Blog 2 - for the death penalty

If a person has wrongly took away someone's right to live, and have deprived friends and family of a person they care for, then why should that offender have a right to live? It is in everyone's right mind to believe that the person guilty should pay the price and consequently lose his or her life because of the terrible offence they have committed. Friends and family of the victim then have closure that the person who committed the crime has paid the price - many relatives of victims of murders usually never even get closure of who committed the crime, so with the death penalty, they are fully put to rest that justice has been done. Another point is that similar criminals are fully aware of what potentially awaits them if they murder someone, therefore they have a huge warning of the consequences; logic obviously says that these criminals would stop carrying out offences; this could help stop them attacking people in your life.
Many people against the death penalty would say that it is cruel, but isn't that what the guilty offenders deserve? Imagine if it was your family member or close friend who was killed, and the murderer was found guilty. Would you want him or her to live an easy lie in prison, not learning from what they have done and not getting full retribution? Or would you prefer that they end up on death row, being scared that any day cold be the day their life ends, and they end up eventually being killed? I'm sure every sane human being has the same answer, as that is the punishment that they fully deserve.
How could any American be ashamed at the fact that our fantastic country still uses the death penalty and we are among other 'controversial countries' who also still use it? I just don't get it. Frequently on the news, you see many offenders for different crimes coming out of prison and re-offending. This is the case with many convicted murderers, many of which don't actually face life imprisonment, get released and commit the same crime again; with the death penalty, everyone is reassured that these horrific animals are not able to be released again and potentially commit another crime.

Online Articles evaluation

 The Telegraph - Refugee crisis: Many migrants falsely claim to be Syrians, Germany says as EU tries to ease tensions

The Independent - Refugee crisis: Where are all these people coming from and why?

Subject - Refugee crisis

Firstly, both articles use a strapline to engage the audience right away. Although this is a similarity, the independent uses a sufficiently longer strapline, "Refugees have been seeking safe haven in the West for years. Recently, however, something has changed. Thousands have become millions, as nation after nation succumbs to anarchy and fanaticism. Introducing a unique week-long series examining the causes of the current crisis, Patrick Cockburn focuses on the increasingly uninhabitable region of fear and hatred which is driving this alarming exodus"; the reader may think this is a good thing as it is more informative from the start, whereas some viewers may not like the long length of it, preferring the short strapline that the telegraph offers as it is straight to the point and more condensed "A market in fake Syrian passports proliferates in Turkey as EU tries to improve relations between Serbia and Croatia". This direct approach instantly gives the reader the information they want, and subsequently answers the independents headline!
The telegraph also uses more multi modal texts, using more videos and pictures to furtherly engage the audience, compared to the independent just using a minority of pictures, with their main focus of the broadsheet is the text that is contained.

This links in with the amount of text the independent uses compared to the telegraph, which the majority of their content is short facts and quotes from people with views on the crisis. The telegraph may think that people will want to read their content as it is short, snappy and to the point, giving straight up facts about the crisis in an organised manner, compared to the style the independent uses, which is to give their reader a well documented and literate read with much more information, with a staggering amount of paragraphs compared to the telegraph. Facts given by the telegraph are in the form of pie charts, bar charts and fancy maps, whereas the independent has a more formal approach by implementing their given facts and points of view in standard paragraph form, with just the one image of facts to show. Some would argue that the independent is a better newspaper due to the fact that it purely has more content in the form of standard paragraphs; this may differ from the general person looking for news as the telegraph is straight to the point.

The independent give a more relaxed view on the refugees fleeing, as it frequently uses emotive language in context to the wars and why the refugees are fleeing, "The very length of these wars means immense and irreversible destruction of all means". The phrase 'irreversible destruction' implies that the war is having a huge effect on the land the refugees are fleeing from, giving no option for them to leave and never return. In comparison to this, the telegraph just present the facts and where the Syrians and others (who have claimed a fake Syrian passport) are heading, not using any features such as emotive language to captivate the reader.

Poems relating to English langauge

Six O'Clock News - by Tom Leonard

This poem uses regional dialect to convey that people judge people and discriminate (not allow to talk in their regional accent on national news) because of an accent they have and the region they come from. The spellings of the words used show the effect that accent has on the language we speak. The poem also explains that people may tend to disbelieve what people say or even disregard what they think if they have a strong regional accent or if they use regional dialect.


Issues of language - Gajanan Mishra

This poem is based around the fact that learning different languages is a real challenge, especially learning the English language. This can relate to the next poem...

English pronunciation -

This poem relates to how different words with exactly the same spelling or ending of the word e.g. tear (from an eye) and tear (rip your trousers) are pronounced, which shows the sheer difficulty of anyone learning the English language such as foreigners or young children.


My poem -

People ask why the English language is so difficult
so let me tell you why.
Words said so differently,
yet have the same spelling incidentally.

Tear and tear, steak and streak
How can newcomers cope?
With the language frequently changing
there is so much false hope.

How the English language is changing over time

How the English language is changing over time

Unsurprisingly, the English language is being revolutionized from what it originally was, with the increasingly frequent formality of younger generations having access to technology and social media, which seems has made a substantial influence on the growth of slang and informal language being a recurrent factor in their day to day vocabulary.

With the world of technology advancing and an increasing number of people using social media and instant messaging, a growing patois seems to be looming over users, brainwashing them into using this new language brimming with slang and non-formal English. With the teenage generation being the guilty party everyone seems to be blaming for what some people are calling a 'catastrophe' because of the decline of how the English language is valued, over 85% of parents of teenage social media users claim that it seems their children use a completely different language when on the online world, consequently feeling bewildered at the language used.

Many slang words such as 'bae' and acronyms such as 'ICYMI' (in case you missed it) are unheard of for the older generations, whereas other acronyms such as 'yolo' and 'lol' have been heard of, suggesting that the use of these are really sweeping over Britain because of instant messaging and social media sites, as adults have even come across certain acronyms.

Even football pundits speaking on television or the whole world to see have been guilty of falling into a trap of using non-standard English. Jamie Redknapp has previously used the word literally a number of times, for example, "he had to cut back inside on to his left, because he literally doesn't have a right foot". For a man who isn't classed as the younger generation anymore, and the fact that he appears on tv to a wide audience frequently indicates that he should know what standard English to use, but the world of social media (which a lot of celebrities use) and the advancing world of technology has impacted on him.

Spoken text in written text

From findings over the past few days, I was able to find numerous companies that use slogans with spoken elements included in them.

One example is a McDonalds slogan, " i'm lovin' it ". Firstly, this shows that they are confident in their products, as they presume that people will be thinking the same as their slogan that they are "lovin' it". The feature of leaving out the g at the end of what should be 'loving' adds a spoken element; McDonalds may have included this to sound like a customer who is talking to their friends, saying that they are enjoying the food.

Burger King's slogan " Have it your way " uses direct address to really engage with the text reader, adding the feature of spoken text as it sounds as if they are talking to its potential customers. This slogan also gives away the fact that they are advertising the wide range of food they have to offer, as customers can have it 'their way', meaning they can choose and change anything thy want; this combines good advertising with the effect of spoken text in written text.

" You're better off at Asda " is a slogan that Asda adopts; straight away there are features of spoken text due to the apostrophe instead of a space and an 'a', allowing them to show "you're". This may be used to sound like a person recommending Asda to a friend. Furthermore, this shows that Asda are confident, as they are trying to lure people away from using rival supermarkets by stating they would be 'better off' at Asda, be it better off in terms of money or products on offer.

From other class discussions and rounding up different examples from different companies, conclusions were made that many companies use synthetic personalisation to try and persuade the text reader that they know them personally, for example L'Oreal using " You're worth it "; this shows that they are communicating with their target audience through spoken text, relating to them to think that they are 'worth it' and will entice them to go to the shop and potentially buy products. This is similar with Coca Cola who on their bottles presented, " Share a coke with..." and then a name at the end. If a person had a name on a bottle, they may feel that they have a connection with Coca Cola, and may want to buy a bottle to keep.

How English language is being valued or devalued

http://hallaslanguageblog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/as-language-computer-room-lesson-150915.html

The article in this blog is interesting, as it analyses the new 'language' that is sweeping across London and possibly to come other areas of the country. This langauge is a new multi-ethnic dialogue that stretches language from Cockney to Bengali; this is possibly devaluing the original English language, as new slang words are becoming the normality in spoken language, for example some of the words in this article are 'nang' translating to good and 'creps' for trainers. Speech like this may have evolved as people (or the Londoners who originated this type of language) want to stand out from the rest in their own unique way, and feel that is their way of allowing themselves to be more comfortbale in the way the talk and communicate.
“We’re not trying to devalue patois, we’re trying to teach the kids that there is a time and a place for it.” This quote from a head teacher of a school shows that they are not happy with the constant use of patois that is sweeping over Britain.


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/13/literally-broken-english-language-definition

This article is very intriguing, as straight away it catches your eye from the title of the article, containing the word 'literally' - but in its misused manner, something we have discussed in class and is featured in my previous blog. From them using it as a title, it shows just how much they believe that the English language is changing, and in their words, 'broken', due to the frequent occurrence of people misusing words. Although many may think that this started quite recently, it came as a shock to me to find out that the misuse of 'literally' (most probably the catalyst for all other misuses of different words) started in 1827.
Despite that fact, this generation as a whole have contributed to the demise of the English language (in my opinion) through the constant wrong application of words, such as 'literally'.

Texting and instant messaging is another factor that contributes towards the decline of the English language and how it is constantly changing. When texting and instant messaging over various social media sites, users want to talk and get their thoughts across as quickly as possible, thus why a lot of non-standard English is used such as abbreviations (lol) and slang. This then gets transferred to being used in spoken language,changing young teenagers and younger people's perception of the English language, and how much some people value it.

Class findings of liked and disliked words

Taboo words
Clunge - liked
Be***nd - liked
Shag - disliked
C*nt - disliked
Slut - disliked

From this we can tell that most taboo words are disliked, understandably due to the nature of the words, which some people may take offence to or generally dislike.

Non standard uses
Literally - disliked
Like - disliked
Sweat - disliked
Trust - disliked
Mint - disliked

As shown above, from the class discussions, every word that is misused in non standard uses is disliked; this could be because, as an english language class, we expect words to be used in their correct meanings, therefore disliking and possibly getting annoyed at words like the ones above which are regularly used in non standard uses.

Adjectives 
Amazing - liked
Lush - liked
Naive - liked
Inconvenient- liked
Peng - disliked
Sanguine - liked
Moist - disliked

Apart from the odd few words which could be classed as slang adjectives and not real ones (peng), the majority of adjectives spoke about in class were liked.

Food
Nugget - disliked
Gravy - disliked
Asparagus - disliked
Honey - liked
Sprout - disliked

For some apparent reason, the majority of the words in the food category discussed in class were disliked, with 'honey' being the only liked word. This may be because of people's unique tastes in foods and liking or disliking the taste, therefore gaining a disliked for the word.