PEE Lineation

   In a lot of children's stories the sentences end with phonics which can be stretched out. In Tony Ross' 'I Want a Cat' (which is aimed at young readers), the sentence ends with 'so'. This allows the reader to elongate the sound so they can focus on starting the next sentence while continuing to read fluently. Children struggle to multitask when reading, so providing them with this elastic phoneme at the end of a sentence works similarly to a full stop.

 

points

OVERVIEW
In this text the Grandma leads the speech throughout. By using interrogatives constantly she structures the conversation and leads the speech. This allows her to help Evie in her learning through a range of techniques.
POINTS
Interrogatives
Vygotskys ZPD
Skinner learning from mistakes
virtous errors

Media Text (so far)

 

   The passing of Nelson Mandela brings the end of an era. A man who dared to speak against the overwhelming odds, a man who proves that peaceful protest can prevail. He proved, to me personally, that systems created by human beings, do not have automatic universal stature. Whilst the mourning continues to take place, expect many far-right politicians to bask in the social enlightenment of Mandela's eternal greatness and what it entails. These are the same people who supported the apartheid, these are the same people who campaigned for Mandela to be hanged, these are the same people who have lied to us before. It got me thinking, why do we believe them? Even a sceptic as myself falls into the grasps of the wizardly worded utterances seeping from the silver tongued idols.
  
Every word in a political speech has been taken into consideration. We live in a world where what politicians say and do are at complete opposite ends of the spectrum. This begs the question, why do we believe a word they say? How can we be led into this false dream of promise only with the  cold slap of reality to wake us up. We all know the cliché's, the left wing 'time for change' and the rights 'god told me to' (literally god and change were the most common phrases) but aren't we wise enough to see through the triviality of each phrase as they are tossed out with such disregard? I believe there is more to what lies on the surface.

Ethos.

Being trustworthy. Knowledge is not enough. Ethos is whether the audience thinks you’re credible. Politicians often spend a large portion of their time trying to promote themselves as an honest family man while the reality of their personal lives are often not so commendable. John Major, the man who based his whole campaign and 'British family life' who was found out to have been having an affair with a fellow party member. He was lying, blatantly, but he did it well. The public believed him and that's all that mattered. The Ethos is not self-confidence, it is others belief in you. This explains why politicians take such an authoritarian stance in situations where they can clearly not be comfortable. Barack Obama is an effective user of Ethos. He doesn't state his authority simply, but creates his status by aligning himself with greats, such as Martin Luther King, a rare example of installing confidence without any surface arrogance, perhaps its why he's so likeable. We've all witnessed the fate of the weak and timid supply teacher who pales in comparison to the assertive and authoritative absent teacher.

 Pathos

Appealing to emotion is a powerful tool. Evoking emotion whether it love, hope or fear, is one of the greatest tools a politician can have at their disposal. Patriotism is a classic tool used by nearly every politician, especially right-wing. Talking about the greatness of a country is an easy way to bring a tear to the eye of its compatriots, some greater than others. Some nationalists will base their vote entirely on a politicians love for their country. Pathos is expertly effective when paired with an underlying theme that resonates with the listener, whether patriotism or poverty, when it relates to us personally, you can expect your name in that ballot box. Emotional delivery is a devastatingly powerful technique, passion and genuine concern sucker in even the cynics among us. Cue Tony Blair, the master orator, his way of speaking really connected with the public, inspiring emotion with each accentuated beginning of a sentence, and each calm whispering end. Notably his final speech as labour leader, the Iraq war had left him with a resenting party and he must be in contention for the greatest hypocrite of all time. However charismatic and controversial to say the least, somehow with that speech he managed to connect with us once again, and a hasty good riddance was transformed into a regretful farewell.

Logos
Logical and factual appeal really catapults you into discussion. If lacked you can be vulnerable and political analysts will pounce. The key to any debate and proof of all statements, logos enhances the ethos and raises you above the rest of the elegant wordsmith's and presents you as a person who can get things done. Uses of logos usually are in the form of facts and figures and supply the ammunition to change our perceptions, after all; what's a point without evidence? Lexical choice is key, contrary to pathos, where the aim is to relate to the audience, using expert and factual language from the relative field can add great depth to your argument and can also make you look as someone with an acquired expertise (ethos). Aristotle believed this should be the most important, as factual and logical appeal is what persuasion should involve, however logos itself is not enough, it needs a compatriot to instil its point as it is disengaging.
 
I believe politicians exploit the ethos and pathos as they are the smokescreen that creates the avoiding of logos. Who needs logic when your crying at the knees of a saint?
 

Introduction (draft update)

A Comparison of Language Techniques within Election Victory Speeches,

Introduction

The way politicians compose themselves on their victory/inauguration speech encapsulates a nation, often even more than that and is a key milestone in not only their political career, but in modern history. It’s clear that a lot of preparation and crafting goes into every syllable and hyperbole, structuring a patriotic ode to the motherland. Whether misguiding or truthful, patriotism is a theme I expect to find throughout my investigation, in the U.S, the U.K and both ends of the metaphorical wing.

   My Hypothesis is that I will be able to group the speeches in two ways. Similarities in the ways both U.K Politicians relate to the audience emotionally, using patriotic themes, and respectively the same with the U.S politicians. In the alternative group I anticipate both politicians from the same wing will have similarities in the language choice they use rather than simply their policies (Bush & Cameron, Blair & Obama).

  This area of language interested me primarily due to its extreme importance. It sets a landmark, a potential historic milestone which will be quoted and studied for years to come. Therefore I find the words chosen by the politician, (and possible speechwriter) and the delivery, equally fascinating. No mistakes can afford to be made, each syllable must be pronounced delicately and accurately with the exact amount of time to create suspense, rather than awkwardness. A fine line, much like a confident and cocky delivery that no politician would dare to intentionally cross. methods of

  Ancient philosophers as well as new age revolutionaries have highlighted and shared the importance of discourse and rhetoric, with it widely regarded as one of the great arts. Political dialect analysts have been around since democracy itself, with universally renowned philosophers such as Isocrates, Plato and Aristotle all adding their own ideologies on the subject. The former taught civilians the art of public speaking as a means of self improvement while the latter outlined that 'rhetoric is the counterpart of dialect'.
 
   I will base my research on Aristotelian theory of rhetoric and his three methods of persuasion, Ethos, Pathos and Logos. Each division varies in matter, Ethos is the appeal of the speakers character, Pathos relates to the listener's emotional state or the manipulation of it and Logos presents the logical appeal for example facts and statistics.

  I will be looking at variety of language framework for my research. Lexis is key in political speeches, with the lexical field needing to be specific in the means of relating with the audience but also maintaining self-promotion through complex word choice. Phonology will be relevant as pronunciation is key in public speech. I will use discourse structures in comparison to the structure of the speeches, seeing how speeches are similar and different to conversation. Pragmatics will be key to my investigation. I expect 'Political code' to be present throughout and I expect similar subtler terms for complex and challenging issues to be contained in all of the speeches.

Data Analysis

DATA ANALYSIS

   My data is a fair and representative example of the whole data pool as there are two victory speeches from each country and political wing. By using this data I cover a great range of politics in the US and UK and as it is the last four victory speeches the data is relevant and representative of UK and US politics from the 1990’s era onwards.

  I think there is the correct amount of data to test my hypothesis and analyse it using 1500 words. The comparisons I will be able to draw from the four speeches will be enough to write an in depth analysis due to the variations and similarities between them, e.g. nation, political wing. I will analyse the whole four 20 minute speeches

Overview & Methodology

OVERVIEW

For my investigation I’m going to study the last two victory speeches from both UK and US politics and how the speeches are used to evoke faith, belief and hope in their politics. I am studying language and power and I expect to find stylistic techniques such as anaphora and parenthesis to try and relate to the country and make them excited for a new future. I am going to use four speeches from the last four election victory speeches, which are David Cameron and Tony Blair in the UK and Barack Obama and George Bush in the US. I have chosen these as they are all from different parties and represent different political wings from their respective countries. My hypothesis is to find similarities in the nationalism used in their respective countries and also similarities in the techniques and language within political wings (Obama and Blair v Bush and Cameron). Selecting the speeches I was going to use was based on the similarities differences and conclusions I predicted I would be able to draw and highlight. Initially I was going to investigate only the speeches of David Cameron on his election campaign but I decided to try and use a greater range of data so I decided to use one from the last four election campaign victories from four different prime ministers and presidents.

ETHICALITY                                                                                                                                                  

There are no ethical issues in my research as the speeches I am using have already been published therefore being no complications and no reason to seek informed consent.

RELIABILITY                                                                                                                                                  

I believe my investigation is reliable in that I am using speeches that directly support my hypothesis and cover the primary aspects of politics, being from the US and the UK and with the Democrat and Labour party representing a similar political stance as do the Conservative and Republican Parties.

COMPARABILITY

My investigation will be comparable as the data I have collected spans and spreads across a range of politics. As both the speeches of David Cameron and Tony Blair are both UK election campaign victory speeches I expect to find similarities between them and will be able to differentiate between the UK speeches and the US inauguration speeches of both