The most obvious examples of specialist language found in my transcripts lie in the descriptions of the geography of the pitch and descriptions of various types of contact with the ball. Some examples are listed below;
Examples from Television Transcripts
Geography Edge of the area
Offside
Forward Run
Penalty Area
Over the top
Contact Clearance
Tap
Knockdown
Lashed
Deflection
When comparing the use of specialist language in the television transcriptions with the radio transcriptions of the same match shows several varieties. Firstly, it seems that the radio commentary uses a higher amount of specialist language and terminology. A likely reason for this is that the due to the higher number of words used in the radio commentary. A higher number of words and in turn a more detailed description may be used to make up for the lack of visual aids for the listener. The lack of visual aids would make it a necessity for the commentator to provide more detailed descriptions of the movements of the player and ball as well as more frequently.
When looking at pitch geography and ball contact we can also see that the radio broadcast provides an increased number of these terms and also an increased level of technicality or detail related to this type of specialist language. For example;
Examples from Radio Transcripts
Geography Goes round
Penalty Area
Outside
Back of the Net
Left hand side
Right hand side edge
Across the face
Out of Play
Into touch
Contact Bend it
Hit
Smacked
Lifted
Hacks it away
Touch
Volley
Save
Knocked it
Slotted
Also, when looking at radio commentaries, it can be said that the audience reflects the higher level of technical language and the its higher frequency of use. Radio listeners likely to have gone to great lengths to listen to a game, especially as one game I transcribed was on pay per view. Therefore these people are likely to have a high degree of knowledge of the game and therefore are equipped to deal with a high level and intensity of football related language. Therefore the commentator can base the descriptions and detail of descriptions around his use of specialist language and can therefore use technical terminology more freely without it being off-putting or too difficult to understand for the greater majority of the audience.
In conclusion of specialist language in football commentaries, I can identify one main difference, between television and radio presentations. The difference between the two is that the radio broadcast tends to contain a more sophisticated level terminology/vocabulary about the game and also this use of language tends to occur much more frequently and constantly throughout the radio transcripts than in the television transcripts. The key reason for this is without visual aids the commentator is forced to go into greater detail to create an image in the listeners head of what the scene looks like, and also to maintain interest in the game.
Grammar
Having analysed my commentary transcripts it is evident to me that the language of a sports commentary is remarkably fluent due to the unscripted and spontaneous nature of a football commentary. There is little evidence of words which do not make sense, unplanned noises, restarts or hesitations. One contributing factor to this is that commentators are often very experienced at what they do, but it is also because of the certain linguistic conventions which they work within that contribute to the degree of fluency found in commentaries.
One of the most noticeable of these conventions is the use of the present tense, certainly by the main commentator. The reason for this being that it is often the case that the expert summariser will be reviewing the action, usually with the aid of an action replay, and will therefore use the past tense. An example from my transcripts is when the expert summariser says ‘Well it was an outstanding strike by Del Piero’. The context of this comment arises from a description of a goal which has just been scored, and it is therefore that a replay will have been shown on the television screens.
On the other hand, the way in which the main commentator uses the present tense can take several forms during a commentary, usually based on elision and ellipsis. It is frequently the case in football commentaries, to see the auxiliary ‘is’ being omitted. An example from my transcripts is ‘Corner whipped in at pace’ rather than ‘The corner kick is whipped in at pace’
Some more example of uses of ellipsis from my transcripts are shown below:-
It is also frequent to see the impersonal construction ‘It is’ (Shortened to ‘It’s’) being used, as in ‘It’s Robert’ which in the context of my transcript means ‘Its Robert with the shot’, this can take on another meaning, ‘Meantime it’s Trezeguet’ means that Trezeguet is in possession of the ball.
The reasons for the frequent use of ellipsis are firstly, that since there are pictures being constantly shown on the television screen, the commentator is therefore only required to give a short and concise description of the action that is happening. Secondly, it is also possible that if too many words are used to describe pieces of action, then the commentator may begin to fall behind the action and possibly cause the viewer/listener to become confused or miss a piece of action altogether.
Television commentaries, in particular, also contain passive constructions. In the context of football commentaries, Passive constructions are when the commentator puts the name of the player involved last and therefore after the description of the action. Examples of Passive Constructions found in my transcripts include ‘On the edge of the box at the moment is Dyer’ and ‘A good effort from Laurent Robert’. The use of this technique enables the commentator to avoid any mistakes as it gives the commentator slightly longer to correctly identify the player in question. Inversion is a similar technique used by commentators with much the same benefits. For example ‘Into the challenge went Robert’ which should read ‘Robert went into the challenge’. Syntactically, this foregrounds and emphasizes the preposition phrase ‘into the challenge’.
Another linguistic technique employed by television commentators to avoid mistakes is through the use of adverbial phrases. Since the football pitch is a clearly defined area, with delineated areas, spaces and areas within it are quite frequently and vividly sign-posted by employing adverbial techniques. In television commentaries, this is not a technique I expected to see used. The reason being that since the television commentators have the benefit of visual aids and the viewer can clearly see where the play is going on in terms of the area of the pitch these adverbial phrases would rarely be used in television commentaries. However, in the case of my television transcripts there is clear evidence of these adverbial phrases. For Example, ‘Edge of the Box’, ‘Forward Run’, ‘Left Hand Side’, ‘In the Sunderland half’, ‘Wide right’, ‘Clearance’, ‘The balls fed up to the frontman’ and ‘Penalty area’.
An additional technique which relates to where things are on the pitch and helps the commentator to stay on track and avoid mistakes is the use of Deictics. This refers to words or phrases, which give pointers to where things are (Both spatially and temporally). Some examples of the use of Deictics from my transcripts are ‘That’s a freekick’, ‘This is a problem for Given’, ‘That was clever play’, ‘This time he has won the ball’ and ‘That sloppy piece of play’. It is also often the case that the determiner ‘That’ tends to be used by the commentator as the events on screen unfold. On the other hand ‘This’ is often used when the expert summariser is reviewing an event that has happened during the game with the aid of an action replay. In the case of my transcripts both of these facts are true. Deictics such as ‘This’ and ‘That’ are always likely to be used in television commentaries because the commentator is reflecting in language what the viewer can see on their screen.
As an additional way of buying themselves some time, commentators also use pauses. These are most commonly micro-pauses, and are often used to replace conjunctions and connectives. Some examples of these can be seen in my transcripts, ‘Sticking Jenas into midfield () certainly at the moment is paying dividends’ and ‘Dyer () bounces nicely for him’. Longer pauses are also evident in my television transcripts, ‘Here’s Nedved (…) oh little uncertain touch there for Dabizas’. These usually occur when the pictures alone show the action and no further description is needed.
Comparisons of Grammar between Television and Radio Commentaries
The first comparison I am able to make is the use of ellipsis in radio commentaries. I chose to make transcripts of the same pieces of action in a game, both on radio and television, and when comparing my transcripts it can be seen that the transcriptions of action via radio contain more words, this is shown in the table below:-
The primary reason behind this difference is down to the fact that on radio, sound and speech, are the only methods for relaying information and communicating with the audience and there are no pictures. The absence of visual aids on radio commentaries is key to the way in which the language is used in my radio transcription.
Firstly, the lack of pictures forces the commentators in my transcriptions to frequently use what is known as Continuous Speech. Some examples of this from my transcripts, shows the commentator combining several different utterances into one line without employing any pauses or micro-pauses;
Example 1
Utterance 1: What a strike
Utterance 2: He tears away
Utterance 3: What a beauty
Utterance 4: Salutes the fans
Example 2
Utterance 1: Shearer hits it
Utterance 2: Players arriving
Utterance 3: Oh it’s Robert
Utterance 4: It’s a great save form Buffon
Example 3
Utterance 1: Here’s a right foot shot
Utterance 2: Takes a deflection
Utterance 3: Back of the net
These 3 or 4 utterances are combined by the commentator in my radio transcripts to give:-
-
‘What a strike, he tears away, what a beauty, salutes the fans’.
-
‘Shearer hits it, layers arriving, oh its Robert, its a great save from Buffon’.
-
‘Here’s a right foot shot, takes a deflection, back of the net’.
The main effect of the use of continuous speech is that it puts the radio commentator under a great deal of pressure and can force him into hesitations, false starts and use of fillers as in ‘Well he’s surrounded by er a number of bodies the referee’. This is to be expected as the use of elliptical expression is one of the most obvious ways in which spoken commentary differs from written reports.
A further use of elliptical techniques in the radio commentary includes the omission of pronouns and articles in order to help the commentator to keep up with the action. This can be seen in the examples below:-
The use of this form of ellipsis involves omitting words which are not necessary in terms of telling the story of the action. This helps the radio commentary because unlike on television, the commentator must be almost constantly talking in order to keep the attention of the audience. Also, cutting unnecessary lexical forms from speech ensures that the commentator keeps up with the events of the game.
It is also possible for me to compare the use of adverbial phrases in both television and radio commentaries. Again, the main difference between the uses of this type of phrase relates to the lack of pictures on the radio commentary. To overcome this problem. The radio commentator usually establishes his viewpoint as the centre of attention, with the match going on around him. This is evident in my radio transcripts in these examples, ‘Away right hand side’, ‘Corner right hand side’, ‘Away for Hugo Viana left hand side’ and ‘Infield’. Another interesting point to make is that in the early years of commentary on radio, listeners were issued with a map of the pitch which was divided into squares. One commentator would precede on commentating on the action, whilst another would call out the number of the square where the action was taking place. A pass back to the goalkeeper became ‘Back to square one’. This is also an example of an idiom which has remained in the language of football long after this form of commentary was abandoned. However on examining my transcripts, this type of commentary was not evident.
A further use of adverbials, which can be identified in radio commentary, are the use of adverbials linked to time. Due to their being no pictures to give a sense of continuity of time, it is the radio commentators job to fill this gap. From my transcripts it is evident that the commentator does this by using phrases such as ‘The balls back with Iuliano though (..) and now with Montero’ and ‘Still Dyer across the face’. Another difference is that the absence of pictures means that adverbials often replace the deictics found in the television version. So, ‘Forward run from Davids’ becomes ‘Nedved down the line for Davids’.
It is also evident that throughout the radio extracts, only the terms ‘that’ and ‘there’ are used, and not ‘here’ and ‘this’. The reason for this may be down to the fact that no action replays are being shared between the main commentator and the expert summariser.
When looking at both my radio and television transcripts I can also draw some comparisons between the tenses used in the transcripts. It is evident that both commentaries use mainly, but not exclusively, the present tense, however there is some variation in the use of verbs. Television commentaries often use the verb ‘to be’ especially in conjunction with deictics, as in ‘That’s a very good idea for a referee’ and ‘Here’s Nedved’ whereas the radio commentator will often omit the verb ‘to be’ for example ‘[it is] still Dyer’. There is also evidence of this in passive constructions ‘Del Piero [is] at the edge of the penalty box’.
In conclusion, when comparing television and radio commentaries it is evident that there are both differences and similarities in the use of grammar. Television and Radio commentaries it is evident that there are both differences and similarities in the use of grammar. Television and Radio commentaries use similar techniques, however these are used in different ways and for different reasons. It seems to be that the main factor in the reason and way these linguistic techniques are employed is the visual aids, which are available on the television, these being both live coverage and action replay.
Role of Expert Summariser
A further interesting feature of sports commentaries to consider is the role the expert summariser plays in each of the commentaries. Expert summarisers tend to comment upon certain pieces of action in the game rather than general play, which is covered by the commentator.
As sports coverage has developed, so have aspects of commentary. Currently, it is common for there to be two commentators on a football game. The main commentator is now accompanied by an expert summariser who can offer sophisticated speaking skills. Normal conversation tends to have considerable overlap 5between speakers. However, overlapping tends to be minimised in commentaries because if two people speak at once the audience can become confused, therefore turn-taking is an important part of the role of the expert summariser.
In radio commentaries, the summariser has to give a ‘verbal replay’ of what has just happened. The main reason for this is that the viewer will not have seen the action, which will have been described spontaneously and quickly by the main commentator, a description which the listener may not fully understand at such speed. Therefore it is necessary for the expert summariser to provide a second description to re-cap the action in slightly more detail. An example of a verbal replay from my radio transcripts is shown, along with the main commentators original take on the events, below:-
MC - Main Commentator
EC - Expert Summariser
-
‘Away for Kieron Dyer () Dyer plays a first time ball to Solano () then Solano hooks it over the top (.) and Dyer’s got a march on his man if he can keep the ball in it’s still Kieron Dyer BURSTING () KIERON DYER TO THE RIGHT HAND SIDE EDGE OF THE BYLINE HE NEEDS AN OPTION () STILL DYER ACROSS THE FACE () SHEARER HITS IT PLAYERS ARRIVING () OH IT’S ROBERT () IT’S A GREAT SAVE FROM BUFFON’
ES) ‘Great chance () great play from Kieron Dyer his first touch was fantastic (0.5) his pace took em into the penalty area (0.5) he didn’t play it first time cos he knew no one was gettin there () he’s took it to the deadball line (0.5) knocked it back across (0.5) a think Alan Shearer tried to get on the end of it (0.5) but in the end it’s finished up back with err Laurent Robert (0.5) great save from Buffon’
This means that the content of what the radio summariser says about the action will be much less focused on tactics and will instead tell listeners what has just happened.
In television commentaries, the role of the expert summariser differs quite substantially. The main reason for this being that more often than not the television summariser has the visual aid of an ‘action replay’, which the viewer can also see, at their disposal. This means that it is often the case that the summariser tends to comment upon a piece of action giving tactical knowledge of the situation and so the action replay governs what the expert says about the action. The example below is a prime example of this. At the point at which the expert summariser is talking an action replay is showing just after Newcastle have scored.
ES) ‘Well the best and worst possible starts for either team but what a part Shearer played you talk about holding up the ball Martin and the captain couldn’t have done anything else here () Bjorklunds got booked for that tackle watch the referee book em (0.5) but great refereein he allowed the play to go on and Bellamy we saw him back in the side kept in the side Bobby debated whether to keep Bellamy in or not today he’s stuck with em and what a cool finish early on in a white hot derby beautiful finish (0.5) Dream start for Newcastle’
In this example the commentator is clearly pinpointing certain parts of action leading up to the goal whilst they are shown on replay and is also adding a more in depth, tactical view of what has happened. ‘Holding up the ball’ is a tactical term used to describe when a player keeps the ball from opposition players in order for his teammates to catch up with play, and is an example of the finer detail which an expert summariser would address about a piece of action.
It is again, therefore, the lack of visual aids which brings about the differences between the two commentaries with the radio summarisers having to simply describe the piece of action which they see, rather than being able to display more in-depth knowledge like their television counterparts.
Syntax
When comparing television and radio commentaries, another significant aspect to analyse are the various types of speech syntax which each form of broadcasting uses.
Speech syntax contributes to the cohesion (Patterns of Language) of what is being said. Written texts can be planned and organised, therefore they have complex sentence structures which can be organised into full punctuated paragraphs. Speech, on the other hand, is often spontaneous, unplanned and responding to events as they happen, especially in sports commentaries. Radio and television commentators are required to think, or plan ahead, whilst they speak to the audience, and often are listening to instructions from producers through their headsets.
Commentators speech is also very different from that usually found in casual conversation, in that commentators are not speaking to one specific person, but to an entire audience. Thus, the commentator is aware the audience is out there, but unseen to them, and therefore the commentator receives no visual indicators or feedback which is so vital in one-to-one conversation.
The key aspects to remember when looking at speech syntax of different commentaries are:-
- Speech syntax differs from written syntax and so must not be seen to be incorrect or imperfect in comparison with a written model. Few people can say they speak as they write.
- Speech syntax found in sports commentaries often differs from that of normal conversation.
- Syntax of television commentaries often differs from that of the radio equivalent.
The point at which the ‘Laurent Robert Chance’ takes place in the game between Juventus and Newcastle is a useful point at which to compare the language of television commentary:-
Television Transcript
Taken quickly to Del Piero (..) trying to engineer a shooting position () and Jenas just stood his ground ahead of him () that was clever play from the young man (…) solid play (..) Dyer () bounces nicely for im and he’ll take it on and fancy his little run against Montero for pace () GREAT PLAY FROM DYER () SHEARER SCUFFED IT (0 CHANCE HERE AND BUFFON KEEPS OUT ROBERT (..) AND MANAGES TO PUNCH AWAY THE REBOUND TOO (.)
Radio Transcript
Del Piero at the edge of the penalty box () still Del Piero () thankfully two black and white shirts surrounding () Gary Speed and Jenas comes away with it () away for Kieron Dyer () Dyer plays a first time ball to Solano () then Solano hooks it over the top (.) and Dyer’s got a march on his man if he can keep the ball in it’s still Kieron Dyer BURSTING () KIERON DYER TO THE RIGHT HAND SIDE EDGE OF THE BYLINE HE NEEDS AN OPTION () STILL DYER ACROSS THE FACE () SHEARER HITS IT PLAYERS ARRIVING () OH IT’S ROBERT () IT’S A GREAT SAVE FROM BUFFON (.) OH A THOUGHT THAT WAS A GUARANTEED GOAL AND THAT REALLY WAS AN EXCEPTIONAL SAVE (.) LAURENT ROBERT HIT IT () AND SOMEHOW BUFFON STOPPED IT.
The Pauses in the television commentary act as distinct breaks in the flow of the commentary, with the accompanying pictures helping to maintain the overall cohesion. The way in which pictures influence what is being said is illustrated by the way the utterance ‘Jenas just stood his ground ahead of him () that was clever play from the young man (…) solid play (..) Dyer ()’ is broken up by ‘bounces nicely for im’; here the commentator is forced to respond to what he sees on the screen before completing what he intended to say.
This balance between language and pictures means that single, one and two-word phrases are often used as complete utterances. Noun phrases such as ‘Solid Play(..) Dyer ()’ and ‘Chance’ act as complete utterances, making complete sense to the viewer when shown alongside the pictures.
On the other hand the radio commentator is at a disadvantage when commentary on the same piece of action, due to the lack of pictures. Therefore, the effect is that Language has to carry out the task of maintaining the overall cohesion of the text. The micro-pauses, seen in the radio transcripts, indicated by ‘()’ in the text, are in most cases simply the commentator taking short breaths rather than syntactical breaks in the text. This means that utterances such as ‘AND BUFFON KEEPS OUT ROBERT’ and ‘AND MANAGES TO PUNCH AWAY THE REBOUND TOO’ are much closer to the syntactical elements found in writing. The radio commentary also contains more Past tense references. Especially when the expert summariser comments upon the action. For example, the line;
‘Andy Griffin’s done a good job on Nedved’
The line has a subject; ‘Andy Griffin’, being the player in question, a verb, ‘done’, an adverbial ‘a good job’ and an object ‘on Nedved’. The main point, when looking at this example, is that the verb ‘done’ is in the past tense, however this must be uncovered by changing ‘Andy Griffin’s done’ to ‘Andy Griffin has done’. This suggests that the event has already happened and is now over and in the past.
On the other hand, the television version, which has fewer verbs, seems to take place in the present tense. This is evident in my transcripts in the example;
‘Well there you see Dyer’s wonderful run’
Here it is clear that the present tense s being used, especially when we examine the verb ‘see’ which is in the present tense. The use of the present tense stems from the context of what the expert summariser is referring to. This stems from the fact that an action replay of the action is being shown and so the present tense is more appropriate at this moment.
Radio commentary also requires a more complicated degree of syntax being used. This is shown in my transcripts, in the example below:-
‘OH A THOUGHT THAT WAS A GUARANTEED GOAL AND THAT REALLY WAS AN EXCEPTIONAL SAVE (.) LAURENT ROBERT HIT IT () AND SOMEHOW BUFFON STOPPED IT’
Here it is evident that there are 3 main clause which make up this sentence:-
Clause 1 - OH A THOUGHT THAT WAS A GUARANTEED GOAL
Clause 2 - THAT REALLY WAS AN EXCEPTIONAL SAVE
Clause 3 - LAURENT ROBERT HIT IT
Clause 4 - SOMEHOW BUFFON STOPPED IT
Here, three of the four clauses are connected by the use of the simple coordinating conjunction ‘and’. Furthermore, there is only one micro-pause in the line. This shows a more complex syntactical structure in that there are so many clauses and so few pauses within one whole utterance.
Comparing these aspects of each media form of commentary can bring us to many conclusions. Firstly, not only does the radio transcript contain far fewer pauses than the television transcript, but also the pauses, which are evident, are much shorter in duration, often lasting one second. This increases the need for conjunctions in the text, making the syntactical structure of the utterance more technical and more complicated. The fact that the radio has such short pauses is brought about by the lack of pictures. Pictures are also the difference between the television and radio commentaries when it comes to the analysis of the tense used when the expert summariser makes comment upon the action. The fact that the expert summariser on the television commentary has the benefit of an action replay is evident in that he can talk about a piece of action in the present tense as the pictures are shown of it. Radio expert summarisers, however, tend to talk about such events in the past tense, describing something which has happened and is over.
Figurative Language
The primary aim of figurative language, when used in football commentaries, is to add color to the game and engage the interest of viewer or listener. This, in turn, may create an atmosphere of tension around a game, giving the overall result a feel of importance and that the viewer/listener must stay interested in the game.
A first example of its use can be seen in the lines;
‘Their own penalty area’
‘Solano, Dyer, Speed and Robert make up the midfield (0.5) with Craig Bellamy and Alan Shearer playing in a dressed headwound (.) up front and the substitutes bench for Newcastle its Jermaine Jenas, Stevie Harper, Titus Bramble, Shola Ameobi, and Hugo Viana’
The use of ‘midfield’ to describe a number of players playing in a certain position, the use of ‘their’ to describe an area of the pitch defended by Newcastle, and ‘bench’ to describe the substitutes, managers and trainers, are all use of synedoche, the representation of part as whole. Using one word to represent something bigger and more detailed becomes a useful shorthand as well as lively and dramatic language.
Many of the words for contact with the ball are metaphorical as in ‘hack’, which has connotations of violence, and a range of other words like, ‘smacked’, ‘knock’ and ‘hit’ which all suggest striking something. Other common words in this field also used in my transcripts are ‘tap in’, ‘slotted’, ‘touch’ and ‘control’.
Another interesting example of metaphor in my transcripts is found in the sentence;
‘Sticking Jenas into the midfield () certainly at the moment er is paying dividends (0.5) of course the ultimate dividend must be a winning goal’.
This shows use of an extended metaphor, and shows connotations and semantics of finance and or gambling used to describe the rewards of moving a player to a different position on the pitch.
Furthermore, the sentence;
‘Regardless of whether it was a legitimate challenge or not by Dabizas (0) Del Piero got the other side of im when he got tugged’.
This example again shows the use of metaphor, this time in the form of connotations of legal language to speculate as to whether or not a tackle made by a player broke the laws of the game.
However, undoubtedly, the most interesting use of figurative language, again comes in the form of metaphor. Metaphorical terms relating to warfare are very common in my transcripts. One example is ‘Salutes the fans’, this likens the celebration of a goal to a military salute. ‘Newcastle battle it away’, ‘Drilled like an arrow’, and ‘Bedlum’ are all linked to warfare and have a semantic field of combat. Another interesting example I found was ‘Resistance broken’, this sentence was used just after a goal and is referring to the fact that Newcastle have defended successfully until that point, this again has connotations of warfare and a battlefield.
The main reason I think I found so much metaphorical language linked to Warfare and Combat is due to the context of the game. The game between Newcastle and Sunderland is a match between local rivals. These so-called ‘Derby’ games are often built up by commentators to add an extra edge to the game and help the neutral viewer understand the importance of the game as relates to local pride. This is a technique which is cleverly and correctly used, and helps create a feel of importance.
The use of figurative language in the television transcripts seems to be to ensure variation and to dress up the incidents in the game in order to keep the viewer entertained.
On the other hand the use of figurative language in my radio transcripts is quite different. A notable feature of the language used in the radio transcript is the use of language relating to disbelief and also to visual perfection once the goal is scored.
Again the absence pictures is an important factor here; the television commentators can hardly deny what the viewers have seen with their own eyes, but when only the radio commentator has seen the action, he can give his commentary drama, color, and flair by suggesting that he is witnessing something miraculous in terms of the football played. Synedoche is also evident in the radio transcript. The use of ‘the net’ on several occasions to describe the goal as a structure, represents this. The use of metaphors is essentially the same, and serves the same purpose as it did in the television transcripts; descriptions for contact with the ball. Evidence of these is. ‘flick’, ‘play’, ‘slips’ and ‘slotted’. The connotations of warfare are also strongly evident. Examples of this are ‘battle’, ‘home camp’ and ‘bedlum’. These metaphors are much more widely used in the radio transcripts and the type of term used also varies a lot more.
In conclusion, the use of figurative language in each transcript has both differences and similarities. The use of metaphors, and the technique we now recognize as synedoche are evident in both television an radio commentaries. However their use in the radio transcript is much more abundant and is used primarily to add excitement where the listener cannot see what is going on whereas on the television their use is a means of variance and to further distinguish action whilst keeping the viewer entertained.
Conclusions
As my analysis and conclusions of my television and radio commentaries progressed throughout the course of my investigation. I began to identify a number of key differences.
Firstly, the use of specialist language in television and radio differs in certain ways. A lack of pictures to accompany the radio broadcast has an indirect influence on this. On television, pictures are used as a means of portraying the action to the viewer along with words. On the radio, this is not the case where words are the only means of portraying the action. Therefore I found that my radio commentaries contained more words than the corresponding television commentaries, in order to make up for the lack of pictures and to fully describe the vents of the game. This requirement to portray the details of the game is evident in terms of player and ball movement.
Secondly, the use of figurative language in my radio commentaries does feature more heavily than in the television commentary. However, the use of this figurative language in terms of metaphors and synedoche can be found in both commentaries, however, their use is very different in principle. The main use of figurative language on television, is a means of creating variance, avoiding repetition of terms, and also in order to build up and exaggerate events in order to keep the viewer
On the other hand, the main use for figurative language in the radio commentaries is to add excitement and color to the game where the listener cannot see what is happening, in order to give the listener the greatest description of events on the field.
Thirdly, I can conclude that the use of grammar in the commentaries does bear similarities in terms of the techniques which are employed, but is different in terms of reason and quantity displayed. One technique, which is used by both commentaries, is ellipsis. However, even this technique differs in quantity of use. Ellipsis is used more frequently on the radio in order to help the commentator to keep up with the action and cut out unnecessary words. On television, this is not the case as the commentator can let the viewer keep up with play visually. Further conventions like passive constructions help radio commentators avoid slip-ups, in a similar way deictics and pauses are used by television commentators to fulfill the same purpose. However it should be noted that pauses are all but absent in my radio transcripts due to the need for continuous speech. Also, adverbial phrases are used frequently on radio to give the audience a sense of time and position and often fulfill the role of deictics used in television commentaries, as a result of a lack of visual aids. Furthermore, the use of action replays and live determines the changes between past and present tenses on the television, whereas the tense on live radio remains almost always in the present. It is again clear that pictures and visual aids play a huge part in the differences.
The role of the expert summariser also differs between television and radio, mainly in terms of the way they comment on a piece of action. Radio summarisers are required to give a verbal replay of the action, due to the fact that the listener has not seen the action. On the other hand, television summarisers are able to give tactical analysis of action because the audience has already witnessed the action. One similarity between the role of the expert summariser is the frequency of their comments, which occur following the key events.
The syntax of each commentary is also very different. Comparisons of the same piece of action showed differences in the number of pauses, less being found in radio commentaries and also tense, where radio commentaries feature mostly present tense, again due to the lack of pictures.
Overall it is evident that there is a range of differences between television and radio football commentaries, as relates to the language used, some are very clear, some more subtle. It is also distinct that these differences are caused mainly by a single factor; visual aids. Television commentaries are complimented by both pictures of live action and action replays whereas any such type of visual aid does not accompany the radio commentary. This means that despite employing similar techniques, these techniques are used in a different way by the different commentators on television and radio in order to cope with pictures, in the case of television, and without in the case of the radio.
Bibliography
Title Author Publisher
The Language of Sport Adrian Beard Routledge
