(Original post by Rakz14)
In Source One There is no need for you to capitalise "Source One"
the purpose of the news article is to inform readers about the beloved Daffodil and how to take care of it. The article gives us a wide variety of content ranging from the origins of the daffodil all the way to the 21st century tips on how to plant them and care for them. However Source two in comparison is completely different, in that it is an extract from a non fiction book and that we explore different atmospheres from the harsh struggling atmosphere to a more calm peaceful atmosphere. That is a really nice introduction! Your are hitting the high band for detail already!
In source One No need for capitalisation!
we see straight at the beginning on the first line the reader is told `` We all love daffodils,don’t we?‘. The use of the rhetorical question both engages reader into the text as well as make it much more relevant to them as they explain the topic straight away and they ask them a question, which instantly makes them want to carry on reading. I would class this as a clear point. If you could go into a little bit more language depth and use multiple interpretations it would be better.
However in Source three we are instantly drawn to the extract when the weather is describes as `threatening, misty morning but mild‘. The Alliterative technique is used here with the words `misty‘, `morning‘ and `mild‘, which instantly makes the piece much more catchy and memorable to the reader, this also creates a quite calm atmosphere to the reader as the weather is seen as `mild‘. This is a little contradictory. In the first point you say that the rhetorical question engages the reader immediately, but you are saying that it is the same but different! I think you should say "Similarly, in source 3 we are immediately engaged, but through the use of a different technique."
Source one similarly also uses alliteration in `Become big business‘ to make the text become much more memorable and therefore more accurate. Clear, but could be perceptive.
This is used when explaining how popular the Daffodils were and that was followed by`tens of thousands were bought everyday‘; this also suggests to the reader using statistics how in demand it was and makes the statement about business much more valid and accurate. Great point! Also, statistics make the writing sound authoritative.
Source three however, instead of using statistics have made the reader feel apart of their own journey when saying `The Wind was furious and we thought we must have returned‘, the use of the word `we‘ as a direct approach instantly makes the reader feel involved in all of this, and that this makes it much more relatable and acceptable for them to read. The use of also saying `the wind was furious‘ instantly shows she personifies the wind with somewhat of a human emotion which is effective as it is quite unusual for us to read. I like this! I would recommend that you compare facts with opinions. So if one uses facts does the other one contain more opinions?
Source one also,
taken use of the direct approach in persuading the reader to buy daffodils when saying ` Follow this advice and next spring you could have your own `host of golden daffodils‘ , the use of `you‘ and `your` is effective as it makes the reader feel as if they’re talking to them and that they should buy daffodils, for the reasons mentioned in the text. It gives the reader much more persuasion to actually go out and buy daffodils as they are being directly addressed by the article. Perceptive point made!
Source two however set the tone of there extract by describing flowers like’scentless violets,strawberries and that starry yellow flowers‘, the list is catchy and also changes the tone to of somewhat calm and peaceful as they are surrounded by flowers , in comparison to the `furious wind‘. Clear point and it is relevant. I think you could add more detail here. Comparing the flowers to something else using like is a simile. Mention terms like those. Just mentioning and identifying such basic terms can make your writing more detailed and even more perceptive.
Overall Source one uses a wide range of linguistic devices which both engages the reader, persuades the reader and inform the reader. The layout is much more different with the use of bullet points to make the tips stand out and the sub headings to split sections. However source three is of somewhat less persuasive but use more sophisticated techniques to make their audience imagine their journey as well as be apart of it, the structure is simple, however there are no paragraphs.