stereotypes - cambridge elevate 13.5.5

G- Newspaper article

R- People who are interested in the guardian magazine, not stood out with a picture and isn’t a main headline so people might miss this article, because its short it might draw attention rather than reading a full page, it could cause some issues due to not everyone being a sports fan in Britain etc.,

a- people reading the guardian paper- teens-older adults, it could also be anyone who is hooked by the words ‘British stereotypes’ as it might be different to the rest of the page, people interested in what a British magazine has to say about their own stereotypes

p- Is to say that within Europe people are categorised differently and everyone stereotypically assumes each country is like that, in the main article it goes onto say about how much each European country drinks rather than talking about how we see people, is to inform people that they are more than the ‘stereotypical image’,

e- the reader would expect to agree with the article as the known stereotypes of each country are ‘correct’ and what people normally assume relates to that country, they might be surprised when reading it as it is only a small article in the corner of a page but the main article talks more into Europe’s alcoholic drinking, they might be surprised when reading this extract then reading the main one as this extract stops suddenly and doesn’t give much point about war or drinking.

‘So we know....’ - Third person, talking on behalf of the Britain’s, everything the writer is saying is ‘true’

 

 

This text is an extract from the main article from The Guardian online newspaper. The audience reading it might be mainly adults who read the news but also anyone else who might grab the attention of the extract title as it mentions ‘British Stereotypes’. This grabs the attention of the audience due to it being a small extract rather than a headline story. People might want to read about the former stereotypes as it is a short article rather than a page full with no images (whereas people might move on and get bored). People could be interested in the fact that the headline might be a different topic to the other stories on the page and this could stand out more. The writer also uses ‘Brits’ at the start of the article. This is an abbreviation of the noun ‘Britons’ which is also a noun of ‘Britain’. This implies that he is using slang to describe the ‘British’ and is less formal than the rest of the text. It makes it seem that he is connecting with the readers because Britons might use ‘Brits’ as slang when describing themselves. Due to it being about ‘British’ people in the title, people might be interested to what fellow Britons have to say about themselves and how us as a country are stereotypically known. The writer of this article is British too as he talks about how ‘we’ as a country are known. By using ‘we’, it implies that he is interacting with the audience using third person as he sounds like the main spokesperson for the Britons and everyone agrees with his point. When he says ‘us’, it implies that every Briton is the same therefore we all must do the same stereotypical things such as being a ‘drunk football fan’. This also links to rest of the text as he goes onto say that other countries are known for different stereotypical things too therefore we associate them to be the same too. Although this is mainly an opinionated extract, some readers might have some issues with this because not every person in Britain is generally a ‘sportsfan’ or ‘bingedrinker’.  The purpose of this extract is to inform the readers that Britain is known for being the ‘bingedrinking’ country however in the main article it talks about how much each European country drinks rather than how each country stereotypically see each other. The secondary purpose is to inform people that countries all around the world are stereotypically known for something such as the French for wearing ‘striped shirts’. It shows that people are more than an image. The expectations that the readers might have from this article is that they would believe most of the things that were said. This is due to the media and also modes as people always believe that the stereotypes are true. It would also be what most people assume each country is like before visiting or in the media. However, because this is a short extract people might be surprised when they finish it as it ends quickly without giving much point other than naming some stereotypes. When the audience read the online article, the might be surprised again because it goes into depth about alcoholic drinking within each country and says that Britain is ‘obsessed with the war’ even though it doesn’t mention the war in the extract. When reading the short extract they might be confused why a small extract is in the corner when it doesn’t give much of a gripping storyline other than the title

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Transcript analysis

Libby: I work in a hairdressers (.) and um (.) I answer the phones (.) do the tills and stuff

Louise: what stuff

Libby: like answer the phones (.) like makes sure when people come in give them enough time for the hairdresser (.) to do their hair (2) has to be good quality and cant have four people come in at once (.) I um (.) wash (.) hair aswell (.) gotta makes sure you got the right shampoo (2) and um (.) yeah (.) great

Libby used the most air time in this transcript as the topic of conversation was jobs and she was the only person who has one so she can talk about it. Although she is the main speaker she seems confident in what she is saying and gives a lot of examples and roles that she does within her job. Throughout the transcript she uses a lot of filler such as 'um'. This tells us that she is thinking on what else to say next or reassure other people in the conversation the responsibilities of a job. As well as fillers she also uses hedges such as like. This could be down to being embarrassed from recording as people don't like the pressure (especially if they are the only one talking). It also means she wouldn't be the powerful speaker as they are usually confident and direct however if you are embarrassed your not.

My part in the transcript was very short as I don't have a job and didn't have much to say. At the start however I interrupted Libby by saying 'what stuff?' so she could elaborate her responsibilities to us.
I hold power to her as I wanted to find out more about her job however there wasn't much power as I was generally talking to her like a friend/classmate.

language and representation

 Years and Years - Eyes Shut Lyrics (first part of song)

Throw your heart to me
Let it fall and hit the ground
Let it go
Your timing was so wrong
I just want to be found

In this song the band talks about a possible breakup or loss of someone as they would want to be 'found' again. This suggests that they are now lost without them and don't know what to do anyone because they are missing a part of someone or something.  'Throw' demonstrates a metaphor as they gave all they could to them but it was at the wrong time. It also is exaggerated and sounds like it was forced for them to do so. In the second line it also seems like they want the heart to be left on the ground (not only because it was bad timing for them) but also because it sounds like the heart is now worthless and unwanted. 'Your' also states that they are putting all the blame on them when it would of been an equal decision if it was a breakup or one betrayed the other badly. It is also a personal pronoun as they would be directly aiming the whole song at someone. Overall this would make the reader seem sad as it is a slow song anyway but also want to know how bad the lead singer felt after betrayal. It could also make the audience think that something so simple such as love can be broken and hurt at anytime so it must be looked after and not 'hit the ground'.

gender research - hallas absense

Beattie’s challenge to Zimmerman and West

Geoffrey Beattie studied and recorded that within a conversation there were 557 interruptions within 10 hours of discussion. Zimmerman and West recorded 55 interruptions. Beattie also found that men and women interrupt an equal amount- an average of 34.1 men and 33.8 women. This made men interrupt more however not as much as Zimmerman and West shown.

John Grey's popular book 'Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus'

In the book, men and women differ in the language they use when communicating. The main points in the book and theories are:

• Language and communication matter more to women than men.
• Women are more verbally skilled than men
• Men focus about getting things done in the conversation. Men are more factual whereas women want to connect and make a relationship out of the conversation.
• Can lead to miscommunicating between the sexes and could cause misinterpretations

This book makes it seem like men are the bullies in the conversation and women only care about feelings and connecting with others. It is also patronising to men to read it as they sound like bullies too. This can also make women sound less ‘powerful’ than men because men want to get the conversation over with whereas women want to enjoy the conversation and enjoy it. Today, the sexes would be equal so I think the language is slightly diverged.

Mary Beard

She believes that men have more power over vocal compared to women and that women are not treated equally. This is because she thinks that women do not speak authoritative however men come across as ‘deep voiced with connotations of profundity’. Men also appear to always get the last word even if women come up with the ‘excellent suggestion’. In the old punch cartoon she talks about how younger children would be influenced by the behaviour and looks into how women speak in today’s society.

Dale Spencer

The research is based upon the book ‘Men made language’. She argues that men have more power over women over all societies and classes. They also believe that they are the dominant gender and disobedient women who fail certain tasks are then labelled as ‘frigid’ or abnormal’. This is also down to the low toned masculine tone of voice.

Dale Spencer and Pamela fishman challenges to other theories

Pamela- she conducted research upon young American couples by listening to 50 hours of pre-recorded conversations between them. She found that five out of the six subjects were going to graduate school. The subjects included feminists, were white or between the ages of 20-30. She mainly found the women’s language use a lot of tag questions such as ‘you know?’

Dale- she also looked into tag questions such as ‘isn’t it?’ however she believed that this was down to gaining conversational power.

Accent Article

 How are accents changing throughout the UK?

Within the UK, there are thousands of accents ranging from the ‘uneducated accent’ from Essex to the ‘poshest one of all’ by Received Pronunciation users. These accents are quite different when they are in the same room together and can sometimes be quite a challenge to understand.

 

Most people in the UK are brought up with an accent whether it is the slightest phrases or speaking it constantly to everyone.  Some people’s accents might also be more recognised and easier to understand than others but this selection of research tells us otherwise. Labov did some research in 1963 (Martha’s Vineyard) where he flew to America to find out how the British, Portuguese and Wampanoag language, changed in speech. He found out that different areas of the same city have different accents. He also found that the people varied in the open and closed mouth pronunciations however looked mainly for diphthongs- combining two vowels.  This shows that within the city
you can have multiple accents and dialect that can be different from the next but also the way of speaking can be varied. It also provides individuality and being unique to that specific region because having one accent throughout the country would be quite boring, right?

The term of ‘divergence’ explains how accents are verified and how everyone’s accents are completely different to others- from the way people pronounce their words or how they speak in general. In a class survey, I found out that that the friendliest accent was Birmingham (Brummie) and the least trustworthy accent was Scouse. This shows that the divergence can change and determine how people view you as a person. But, what makes the ‘Scouse’ accent sound so untrustworthy and seem less likely to be trusted than any other accent? Received Pronunciation was found to be the most intelligent as they pronounce all the letters in the words, whereas people from Bristol (Bristolians) miss out some letters from how they are supposed to sound like ‘Luvver’ from ‘Lover’, and so it makes it sound like they are more intellectual and have knowledge in what they are speaking about, even if it’s a shopping list! It was also prescriptive as people could be referring this information from either a film or relatives that live elsewhere in the country. Has this become the harsh truth or are people starting to discriminate other accents?

People also diverge as they want to make a good impression on other individuals. This could be at a job interview or in general conversation. For example, at a job interview, if you don’t think your accent or dialect is suitable or sounds confident in getting the job then you might change your accent slightly by making it more precise. People tend to move away to different parts of the country to explore other people’s way of living too and by doing this, making a good first impression is vital.  The term of ‘convergence’ explores how people fit in to a specific social group or class by changing their language and speech. This shows that by moving to a different region for a short while, can impact your personal way of speaking as you are trying to be more like them. Research such as the Milroy Belfast Study in 1987 shows that people seem more friendly and approachable when you are speaking the same dialect and sound similar in accents while also claiming you are ‘a friend of a friend’.

 

Transcript Questions

1. The use of proper nouns like 'Mr Neil' suggest that they are being formal and want to address them directly rather than calling them by there first name. The Barrister is also directly speaking to him using second person pronouns. This is to show that he should be engaging and anyone else would recognise that they are only talking about him.

2. Parts where the dialogue seems prepared is when things are underline like 'so many times'. This shows that they have the evidence even though he can try to deny it. It can also be emphasis that he has done the same thing repetitedly. This can also make them feel on the spot which makes the audience question him. Spontaneous parts are where fillers and pauses are. Both of the people use fillers but the witness pauses for longer. This can be down to thinking or nerves.  The Barrister pauses to make each point of the story stand out so the audience can understand. At the start both people use fillers such as 'er' because they are just getting started and probably find it hard to begin. Later on they begin to to talk 'normally' and they have broke the stage of begining and ackwardness. It doesnt happen again with the barrister. When the barrister stutters at the start with 'er' inbetween some words it sounds like they are not confident with what they are saying. It makes them sound unproffessional and that they are not confident in what they are saying. However, they could be sounding proffessional but could be reading it off a sheet and not memorising what the case is about. Other parts which are also spontaneous is where they talk over each other. Mr N makes out that he is repeating himself as the barister is asking so many questions. It makes it seem like he has planned what he wants to say therefore not listening to the rest of the question. It can also make the witness sound like he is in a rush and wants to get the court case over and done with.

3. At the start of the transcript the barrister has more power than Mr N as they are directly addressing him by calling him 'Mr Neil' and giving factual information to start the case. It can also make it seem like they are only advising him to reply with short answers as they already have the evidence for the case. This  also sounds like they want him to reveal more of the truth. The Barrister also has more power by asking simple questions before hand such as 'what for'. This gives the impression that he hasent said enough and then they go on to say 'youve put two and tow together' which are also underlined. They have figured out the solution by asking sneakily other questions to get to the bottom fo the solutions. Asking rhetorical questions like 'is that right?' also has power as the jury already knows the answers but want to hear it from him himself.
Mr N also shows power as he has interupted the barrister a couple of times. He does this because it shows that he has already thought about what to say and doesnt need the rest of the question. It also shows that he doesnt want to hear anything else or wants to be heard and wants to get on with the next question. He also gives the impression that he doesnt want to wait until the barrister is fnnished and wants to say his part. Saying 'no' when asked if it 'crossed his mind'. This could make him sound agressive or angry as they might not be listening or understanding him. Also, the barrister could also be saying things that are not true so he has to confront them and say what really happened before he gets accussed. He is standing up for his opinion whether it means refining the truth or telling the truth because they might have got it wrong.

4. The case itself i find is very confusing as he has been accussed of driving a car with no insurance but he thinks Mr Peterson told the police on his for driving into his gate. He also starts to repeat himself for not having insurance to empahsis that he made the mistake of not having the insurance. It also doesnt make sense as he then says 'thats not true' even though he just admitted it. The Barrister says after that 'didnt it cross your mind at all?'. This is puzzling as I dont know what crosses his mind and for him to interupt the barrister straight after saying 'no'. Bits where i find it interesting is where Mr N 'laughs quietly'. This could be because the court room is taken seriously and he ruins it by laughing. It could be down to nerves for being on the spot or that he is guilty. It could also be down to pity as they might of got some parts of the information wrong and wants to correct them.

Changing Dialects

Nowadays people would identify your dialect from the area in which you live or social group you hang out with. This can also be the way of identifing everyones individual idolects. Depending on the specific dialect in your region, people can identify it more quickly and easily. This can be because of the types of ways you can pronounce or say certain words. But are certain dialects changing and merging into one? Are accents becoming the same?
Accents can vary from different parts of the UK. A Geordie accent would sound conpletely different to a North London accent. This can occur when certain regions either pronounce words or single letters differently. If you were to move from one side of the UK to the other your accent would be stronger to the people you are now with. For example, a Brummie accent would stanjd out more if you were to move to the South West where it is also different there. If you were to stay there for a while your accent may merge into the accent region you are now living in. This could be down to social groups or generally picking up on the slang or pronounciation of things.
With the ability to travel more across the world than we did 10 years ago, people can go to other countries and explore foreign dialects. Some might be harder to understand than the others. This can also affect certain peoples idiolects too. If you move across the country with your idiolect it can be very different to your new region. This can have a big difference on your now social groups as them too can speak differently than what your old friends did back home. Social medias and television is also a big impact. Watching shows like 'Friends' can also change a persons dialect without realising it. 'Friends' is an American show in which they might say things differently to British people or we might not have heard of. These can be interpreted overseas can cause habits and could affect some children/ teenagers when it comes to exams. It can also enable yourself to fit into a society easier so you feel less uncomfortable. Accents can also be very recognisable if you were travelling abroad. If you were at a hotel resort and had other people from different countries speaking, you could tell by the way thaty they are speaking and also the prononciation of specific words.
Proffessor Crystal states that dialects are 'due to immigrant groups' in urban areas. This states that the main centre of a region (town not the outskirts) can be changed due to the variation in dialects. This being said it means that people with different types of background live within the UK and when in a certain region it can change certain peoples dialects and also idiolects. It can also be passed on to social medias and social groups.