I have attempted a GCSE question from a past paper. I was wondering if someone could mark it for me and tell me what mark I would get for it. I have attached a link for the mark scheme below. Thanks.
Compare the different ways in which language is used for effect in the two texts.
Give some examples and analyse what the effects are. (16 marks)
Both writers of sources 1 and 3 embed language techniques to help add to the overall effect of each piece. Source 1 is about a merry “225-mile trip” a family had “down the Colorado River.” Whereas in Source 3 we are too introduced to the theme of exploration, but instead of a reading a much more relaxed piece, this piece is more dramatic and serious.
In the two sources, both writers set an instantaneous tone. In source 1 we see instant repetition of the rule "Stay in the boat." The writer uses the repetition to set an immediate tone of commands, which is different to the tone that is developed as the article progresses. Likewise in source 3, a tone is set instantly, but the set tone of tension and danger remains throughout the passage. The short sentence; "A decision was needed," is a tense, dramatic sentence which produces a sense of determination. Both of the writers use different techniques for the same effect, however although it is for the same effect (generating an immediate tone) a different tone is set for both pieces as two different rhetorical techniques have been used.
Evocative language is used in both of the sources. Powerful imagery "of 6m rafts, masses of gear, an army of river guides scurrying about" gives us a sense of the camp being seemingly military. In source 3 the same technique is used by the writer, which too generates a powerful imagery. Hyperbolic vocabulary combined with alliteration increases the impact of evocative language in this source. The "surging snow" suggests the extreme danger she is being faced by. Therefore in both sources the same technique is used, but for the same effect, although in source 1 the evocative language is much more hyperbolic then the language used in source 3.
The language used in Source 3 is more advanced than the language used in Source 1. Language such as “avalanche,” “crampons” and the names of individual places are advanced concepts, which may be undefined to people who have no interest in travelling. Therefore in Source 3 the writer has used more advanced terminology, as the non-fiction book was probably targeted at travel enthusiasts. In contrast, the writer of Source 1 uses much more basic terminology which suggests that it was targeted at the working class, who may have a very little understanding in travelling. Another difference in the pieces is their formality; source 3 has a very tense tone and the language is more advanced, making the piece more formal. Whereas Source 1 has a more light-hearted tone, the language is relaxed and there is some forms of slang, making it seem slightly informal.
The use of facts and opinions is used more in Source 1 than in Source 3. The writer in source 1 uses opinions to explain her decisions. An example of this is: “You can’t be shy,” which suggests why she decided to socialise with the other travellers. However, in this source facts are also used to describe the journey. Source 3 however doesn’t use many opinions; instead it is comprised of facts – making it sound realistic.
To sum up sources 1 and 3 imply a range of meanings through the language used. A much more relaxed approach in source 1 makes the journey seem merry, but in source 3 the journey is much more tense, dramatic and serious. Furthermore, the variety in sentence structure helps add to the tone of source 1, and the variety of factual information in source 3 enables the readers to believe that the journey is realistic and not fictional. Both writers have used language effectively to help communicate the overall meaning of each source.
A link to the mark scheme is:
http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-ENG1H-W-MS-JAN11.PDFIt is question 4.