61 hotel review that hes ever seen in acc. his life =
62 C: that’s // right
63 D: which ended //
64 D: with the line saying that the person that had // been there
65 C: this is //
66 C: the cockroach hotel motel isn’t // it
67 D: no //
68 D: . the person said that he wouldn’t recommend this hotel to anybody if the alternative
69 was sleeping on the pavement // was his
70 C: owned by // ?? bates
71 D: was his final line =
72 C: Right
73 D: so im a little bit nervous
74 C: but that’s where hes gone
75 D: hes going there tonight
76 C: right (laughter & music 2.0) .h see the thing is dave id never stay at a hotel that youd
77 recommended because . its fair to say that youre not the most generous man in the
78 world when it comes to money are you (1.0)
79 D: im not tight
80 C: seriously there are eg. there are rings that have come out of kinder surprise eggs that
81 have cost more than the one that you got for your lass.
Key:
(.) Micropause
- 1 Second Pause
- 2 Second Pause
(.h) Pause & Intake Of Breath
(? Est) Unclear Words
hap. Unfinished Words
= Latching Onto Speaker
// Overlapping Talk
word Emphasised word
cresc. Increasing Volume
dim. Decreasing Volume
acc. Quicker Speech
rall. Slower Speech
C: Chris Moyles
D: “Comedy Dave”
L: “Thin Lizzie”
A i m
The aim of this project is to investigate the changing face of Radio 1. This will be explored by analysing the language used by each of the speakers, and the roles that each of the contributors play within the broadcast. Also an analysis on whether the broadcast is scripted, improvised or purely conversational will be investigated.
D e s c r i p t i o n
The excerpt of audio comes from the Chris Moyles show on Radio 1, taped on the 13th August 2002. A sample of one hour was selected. This was then narrowed down to the speech only, giving approximately 20 minutes of audio. Due to the nature of the show, no editing needed to take place as when the presenters talked, it was for duration of more than 2.5 minutes. Therefore, 2.5 minutes from a link (speech) was selected which showed many literary and improvisation techniques.
The show consists of 4 people - 3 of whom are the ‘main’ speakers, and who will be analysed the most. These are: Chris Moyles, Comedy Dave and Lizzie.
Chris was born on the 22nd February 1974 in Leeds, and started his career in many different radio stations before joining Radio 1. Off the show, he’s been quoted to say ‘I want my show to be as real as it can. Talking about other people’s lives on air gets me into a lot of trouble…People accuse us of being a bit too laddish – but we are lads, so what do you expect?’
Dave was born on the 24th April 1974 and used to live (and was born) in Hong Kong, and occasionally worked as a DJ in Hong Kong.
Producer Will was born in Woking, Surrey in 1969. He’s won various awards for the best producer on a Breakfast show, before joining Chris Moyles in November 2000.
Finally, Lizzie (Elizabeth 'Suzette' Buckingham) is 24 and was born in Southport.
A n a l y s i s
INTERACTION
One major part of the transcript involves the interaction between speakers, especially that between the dominant speaker and other speakers in the conversation. This primarily occurs between Chris and Lizzie.
Chris is able to make himself the dominant speaker right from the start. He’s first to speak, but not only that; he starts off by interrogating Lizzie on line 1 (“That’s too long wasn’t it Lizzie”). Immediately the effect that he is dominant over her is present, and this is mirrored throughout the transcript.
The question and answer routine is used to continue his dominancy over Lizzie, and can be seen between lines 11 and 30. He starts by using this method - “you have .h there is one problem” on line 13 is an example; and this is shown to its greatest effect from line 19. Chris asks a question, Lizzie mirrors his question in the form of an answer; “so who would normally do that job”, “I would normally do that job”. It also works the other way, when Lizzie says “no longer my responsibility” on line 22, Chris responds with “well whose responsibility is it” on the next line. It’s also noticeable that Chris’ questions are accelerated and are a quick-fire response to Lizzie’s responses, giving her little time to think of what she is about to say.
This alone clearly shows how Chris is the dominant speaker in the conversation, with Lizzie answering in the way that Chris asks the questions, in fear of going against him perhaps. But it doesn’t stop there. Line 26 brings in the definite questions and interrogative tags used by Chris on Lizzie; “…job that you do. Yours?” is an example of this. Line 30 is where Chris is in full force; “you’re not very good are you. You’ll never get promoted”, which makes Lizzie feel and look inadequate.
These different questioning techniques also shows another theme within the transcript; that of gender stereotyping. Typically, 30 to 40 years ago, both television and radio were very careful to avoid gender stereotyping, as women fought for their rights. Today, however, the ‘political correctness’ of gender stereotyping appears to have been dropped. We see this in TV and radio and especially in the transcript. The questioning in the transcript puts Chris above Lizzie; the male becoming the dominant over the female - a typical gender stereotype. Continue on from that, and look into the conversation itself, and it can be seen that the topic in question is Lizzie’s apparent inability to make the tea - again, a “typical” female job, making Lizzie look even worse via Chris’ continuing questioning and rude definite questions & comments. It is this gender stereotyping that enables Chris to create his dominance, but to also create a sense of humour for the listening audience. It is humorous because males identify themselves with him and his ideas/views – a clear sign that males are against the revival of women by agreeing with Chris’ gender stereotyping.
HUMOUR
Stockwell and Jackson, who quote Professor Grice, outline four conversational maxims: quantity, quality, relevance and manner. These four need to be present in order for the “cooperative principle” to be present. Quantity means if there is too much or too little under a topic, the conversation becomes boring. Quality means is the conversation truthful; the manner shouldn’t be obscure or ambiguous. Finally, the relation of the conversation should occur.
If any of these are ignored, then confrontational and unco-operative scenes are likely to occur. Confrontation does occur in the transcript; and this is show via. Aggressive questioning, lack of politeness strategies and felicity conditions.
Chris' aggressive questioning occurs on lines 19 - 25. This gives a sense that Chris is not really interested in the other talkers. Chris' lack of politeness is also apparent, for example on line 30: "you’re not very good are you? You’ll never get promoted". This also shows relevance in that he's truthful and to the point.
Speech is also dependant for its effectiveness on various felicity conditions. For example, utterances must be said by the right person, to the right person, at the right place and time etc. Inappropriate use of this – as humour can be generated from infelicitous comments used. Again, we see Chris using this to great effect; such as on line 54, when Chris rudely interrupts Dave by saying “it’s the cheapest hotel in Jamaica”. He flouts the felicity conditions and also shows a lack of politeness strategies. Yet this makes it appear an amusing ‘off the cuff’ comment and gives the audience something to laugh at. The audience have heard the Chris / Lizzie conversation, and now Chris is trying to lighten up the rather dull, one-sided conversation by Dave. It's a well-used technique amongst the majority of today’s comedy (either in T.V or radio), as well as breaking the political correctness of the gender stereotyping that was analysed earlier.
TURN-TAKING
It's noticeable that the transcript does not mirror normal conversational turn taking - it appears to be scripted. For example, between lines 14 and 23, latching on is used heavily. Along with this, there are very few pauses and repetition, thus adding to the sense that it's been scripted or at least planned. Use of these features means that the show sounds very slick, quick and continuous. The technique is used so that the audience has to be really involved in the conversation to be able to keep up with what is going on.
Pauses are also used; but differ from pauses in real life - as in the radio transcript they're primarily used for dramatic effect, as well as a feature of spontaneous speech. For example, on line 76, Chris laughs and leaves a couple of seconds gap to let the audience (and himself) muse over the comments made by Dave before making his own comment. There are also some features of spontaneous speech, such as fillers on line 9; 'note the. err . I emphasised...'.
Along with the pauses, there are other features of spontaneous speech. For example, on line 3, we see Chris repeating himself (perhaps emphasising his point to the audience); "Its too long. Too long Liz, too long....". Pauses also occur throughout the transcript - we've already analysed the 'deliberate' pauses used for dramatic effect, but on line 18, Lizzie pause appears to occur primarily due to her thinking on the spot as she talks; "well, dya know, im no longer a . t . err . telephone and tea technician". The pause signifies that she's thinking of how to say she makes the tea without making it sound like her job is simple, therefore she uses a prestigious semantic field by saying 'telephone and tea technician'. This is typical of any real-life argument, whereby people normally use a more complex lexis in order to put themselves above the other person.
It is clear that from these features that the transcript is primarily NOT spontaneous speech, however some features (such as the pauses, fillers, and repetition) gives the show a 'human edge', allowing the audience to identify themselves with the presenters.
Topic and Lexical Choice
The topic of the transcript is two-fold; firstly there's the argument over the tea-making, or more to the point, the fact that Lizzie is assigned the task to making the tea, thus giving the typical gender stereotyping; and also the conversation between Chris and Dave concerning Producer Will's holiday.
We've already looked at how the gender stereotyping is portrayed, but what about the other issue , which re-enforces the idea of a 'lad dish culture'?
Producer Will is in his thirties, and is therefore slightly older than Chris and Dave. Because of this, he appears to be portrayed as an 'outsider' to the group. Dave recalls the facts of where Will has gone, and in fact even sounds concerned for Will's welfare - "...when he looked up on the internet he got the worst ever hotel review that hes ever seen in his life" on lines 60-61. However, this is seemingly mocked by Chris, who on line 51 says "oh yeah hes gone to that hell hole that you said..." and on line 66; "the cockroach hotel motel isn't it...". By mocking Will's choice of hotel, Chris is stating that lads don't go to 'nice' hotels.
What's interesting is Dave's comment on line 68; "the person said that he wouldn't recommend this hotel to anybody if the alternative was sleeping on the pavement...". If anything, Dave is mirroring one aspect of true laddish culture - lads get drunk and tend to go anywhere and do anything.
Another issue that comes from this area of the conversation is Chris' statement that Dave is tight; "...its fair to say you’re not the most generous man in the world when it comes to money are you". Chris is being polite in his interrogative questioning, just waiting for the opportunity to pick up on something that Dave says, and Dave reacts by bluntly saying "I'm not tight". This has opened a door of opportunity for Chris to get a snide remark in' "seriously there are rings that have come out of kinder surprise eggs that have cost more than the one that you got for your lass". Again this enforces the idea of this laddish culture, in that lads don't buy anything expensive or nice for their 'lasses'.
The lexical choice throughout the transcript is simple; the separation of ideas/topics is clearly defined by gaps where music is played (between lines 48 and 49). The changes between the topics are very clear, and thus allow the audience to follow what's being said easily. As the context of Radio 1 is aimed at those travelling home from work (as the show is aired from 3 until 5.45pm, known as the 'drivetime' show), listeners who are driving home don't want to listen to an involved and complex conversation - they simply want light humour to help unwind after a day at work. Also the target audience is those who are between 16 and 25; so the topics needs to be relevant to this group in society.
An example of this simple lexis comes from Chris on lines 19, 21 and 23. On each of those lines he starts with single words; 'ok', 'right', 'well' - this shows how persistent he's being in interrogating Lizzie. The use of this simple lexis indicates that perhaps Lizzie isn't clever enough to understand 'real' talk, and Chris feels he has to use this language as she's only a tea maker.
E v a l u a t i o n
From writing the transcription of the recording to analysing the transcript, I found all areas very interesting. The analysis, for example, showed up the many different techniques that Chris uses; yet as a ‘normal’ listener I would not appreciate the complexity of the show, as it would merely sound like an improvised broadcast to myself.
The transcript clearly shows two issues; gender stereotyping and the laddish culture. It appears, via critical analysis of the transcript, that gender stereotyping is clearly still with us, despite the political correctness that goes against it. Chris uses many techniques to show these issues, such as interrogative questioning, simple lexis, repetition, utterances, flouting of conversational maxims etc. He also mocks other members of the team (both those that are there and those who aren't there) to portray the idea that he is in control.
I would have liked to have pursued the area of “accents” and the changing face of accents in the BCC reflected by the new breed of presenters, but decided to prioritise the frameworks above as I felt they were more relevant to my aims.
B i b l i o g r a p h y
“The Nature and Functions of Language” – Howard Jason and Peter Stockwell (pp. 139 – 152.)
“English Language for Beginners” – Michelle Lowe and Ben Graham (pp. 156 – 158.)
“The English Language” – David Crystal (pp. 327.)
“Mastering Advanced English Language” – Sara Thorne (pp. 398 – 429.)
“Varieties of English, 2nd Edition” – Dennis Freeborn (pp. 246.)
