Open University E303 TMA03 : Comparative register analysis

*To calculate lexical density I used Text 1 including its title, but without references in it and used text 2 without turn taking marks or reference. Inserts in Text 2 counted as function words.

Both texts do have a common subject – census and problematic aspects surrounding it. Both contain vocabulary items which refer to census, both critique time consuming process of filling the census in, income question included in census, some lack of choices around the ethnicity question and costs involved.  However there are some differences… the text 1 uses formal language while  text 2 uses informal/colloquial language and similarity is only at general level of meaning.

Tables show many differences. One of them is lexical density. LSGSWE Lexical Density Statistics (corpus tasks p. 41) note Conversation register at 32.8% and News register at 54.7% . (Corpus Tasks, p. 41). I got very close number for Speech in Text 2 (33%) and a bit lower number for journalistic article /Text 1 (49.5%). The number is close to Academic register statistics, possibly because the text is editorial and less tightly packed than some other news publications might be, also author tried to make article more readable in some degree close to academic style.

Using the word-frequency list in concordancer  helped me a lot to spot the patterns in both Texts.  The most noticeable for example is frequency of definite article the  and frequent use of pronoun you in text 2. Pronouns, frequently used in speech instead of nouns, have no need for the article. Frequent of pointed out at number of complex noun phrases used, which are common in written registers. (p.84, LSGSWE).  Frequent present time, modal verb and negation occurense  as well as use of interrogative and imperative clauses in speech is also a common pattern (p.154, 239, 252, LSGSWE).  Frequency of most common lexical verbs. (p.110, LSGSWE). Distribution of phrases with premodifiers and postmodifiers as well as noun+noun instances are very frequent in news register ( p. 267, LSGSWE ) Frequent even spread of describers and clasiffiers also  typical for news register (book1, unit4). These are not all examples of the patterns across registers, that can be found via comparative analysis – the list is extensive.

Word count  2765  including in-text references and examples

Appendix I

Text 1

1        The 2001 UK census: remarkable resource or bygone legacy of the ‘pencil  and 2        paper era’?

3        There is no doubt that national censuses are expensive. The most recent estimates

4        suggest that the 2001 UK census cost £259 million. The need for a census also has

5        to be questioned given the uncosted burden of the time taken by the population to

6        complete it, the invasion of their privacy and even more basic criteria such as how

7        it is possible to conduct an exercise every decade that relies on many tens of

8        thousands of people being available to work for short periods on very low wages to

9        carry out the survey. The 2001 UK census has been attacked on all these fronts.

10        The type of information that is collected is also often criticized. Most obviously,

11        the lack of a question on income has frustrated many academic and applied

12        practitioners, especially as the question has been regularly included in other

13        national censuses such as in the US. A careful assessment of the implications of

14        including such a question was conducted, and it was felt that the reliability of the

15         returns may have been  influenced if an income question was added, as the UK

16        population is apparently less willing to share information on their income than

17         those in other nations.

18        Other variables have also attracted some critical attention. The addition of a

19        question on ethnicity in 1991 was broadly welcomed, but it has since been

20        criticized for failing to distinguish between race and culture. Although the question

21        was improved for the 2001 UK census, capturing such a flexible and situational

22        construct with a single question is difficult, as the concepts invoked by the term

23         include culture, heritage, language, community, religion, nationality, lineage,

24        geographical origin and shared symbolic characteristics such as foods and clothing

25        (Ahmad 1999). The concerns raise the question of whether collecting information

26        on ethnicity is at all worthwhile.

(Ahmad and Sheldon, 1993).

(Adapted from Boyle, P. and Dorling, D. (2004) ‘Editorial: the 2001 UK census: remarkable resource or bygone legacy of the “pencil and paper era”?’ in Area, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 101–10. Whilst this text is taken from an academic journal, it is also an editorial and therefore shares features with both types of discourse.)

Text 2

         A:  I supposed we’d better sit down and do this questionnaire thingy.

`         B:  What?

         A:  Er this.

         B:  Oh, the census.

         A:  That’s the fella. Let’s have a look at what Big Brother wants to know

         now.

         B:  Have you got a pen?

         A:  Nope. I was going to write in my own blood (B: Oh give over) so they

         can check it on the DNA database.

         B:  You you’re getting all paranoid in your old age.

         A:  ‘Who else is staying overnight here? Remember to include children and

          babies.’ Have we got any babies you haven’t told me about?

         B:  Blimey, I hope not.

         A:  Listen to this. This is a classic. ‘How well do you speak English?’ and

         then there’s a box to tick for ‘Not at all’.

         B:  No way. I mean how are you supposed to fill it in if you can’t speak

         English?

         A:  And this one. ‘What type of central heating does this accommodation

         have?’ What kind of question is that? Nu-cle-ar re-ac-tor.

         B:  You’ve not written that, have you?

         A:  Yes.

         B:  Give it to me. You’re supposed to take this thing seriously. It costs a

         fortune to send this thing out so don’t spoil it.

         A:  I know and it’s a complete waste of money.

         B:  [Flicking through census] Flipping heck! It’s 32 pages long. Oh hang

         on. Er OK, it’s only 4 pages per person.

         A:  Still 4 pages too many.

         B:  And why did they have to make it this revolting purple colour?

         A:  Because that’s the colour most people’s faces turn when they try to fill it

         in.

         B:  If you’ve got nothing constructive to say then go and put the kettle on or

         something.

         A:  OK but seriously how how are you going to answer all those ethnic

         questions?

         B:  Er um I er I dunno. This wasn’t really designed for someone like me.

         A:  What does it make er matter anyway? You’re British. Who cares where

         your grandparents were from.

         B:  The government obviously does.

         A:  Well at least they don’t ask you how much you get paid. (B: Hmm)

         That’d be a step too far.

         B:  No, that’s true but there’s one and a half pages of other questions about

         work and stuff.

         A:  Oh you’re joking. There’s no fff there’s no way I’m filling that thing in.

         B:  Suit yourself.

Appendix II                

References:

Biber, D., Conrad, S., Johansson, S. and Leech, G. (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English, London, Longman.

Coffin, C., Hewings, A., O’Halloran, K. A.,  (2004),   Applying English Grammar, Functional and Corpus Approaches, Open University Press.

O’Halloran, K., Wynne, M., E303 Corpus Tasks (UK), (2007), Open University Press.

Maybin, J., Mercer, N., Hewings, A. (1996)       Using English (U211) , Open University Press.

O’Halloran, K., Coffin, C., (2006),  E303 Book 1, Getting Started, Describing the grammar of speech and writing, Open University Press.

Coffin, C., (2006),  E303 Book 2, Getting Inside English, Interpreting Texts, Open University Press.

Coffin, C., (2006),  E303 Book 3, Getting Practical, Evaluating everyday texts, Open University Press

E303, MonoConc Pro Version MP2.1, (2011), The Open University CD

E303 Activities CD-ROM, (2011), The Open University