Analysis terminology

Hi. I've got an AS English Language (AQA B) exam next week and was wondering if anyone could clear up a few issues for me...

We've been taught to analyse texts by considering how different 'frameworks' apply to them, specifically to look at lexis, syntax, phonology, graphology, discourse, semantics and pragmatics.

Generally when writing responses I don't specify which 'framework' I think is being considered as it seems to make the phrasing seem quite clumsy and I seem to find it's never that clear cut.

However I've been advised by my teacher that I could stand to lose marks for not showing knowledge of the correct terminology and/or what the frameworks are.

Could anyone suggest anyways in which I can integrate these into my writing. What I find trouble with is that although I think I broadly know what each means, I'm not really certain about the usage of the words.

For example when trying to show I'm talking about 'pragmatics' all I can think of saying is "In terms of the pragmatics of the piece,..." which becomes a bit repetitive and I'm not even sure if it makes sense. As far as I understand "pragmatically" is similar in meaning to being practical/sensible? Therefore I'm not sure if using it in this form would be understood in the sense I mean.

Similarly would "phonological(ly)" and "graphological(ly)" make any sense?
And is there a singular form of "lexis" ('lexeme'??) and is there any real advantage of using this over "word(s)"?

Any help would be much appreciated :smile:

Reply 1

Vamprino

Well, instead of 'lexis', you could use 'vocabulary', or even 'words used' (at a stretch). It's a bit of a step down, but it's better than sounding repetitive.

The general framework I use is first a short summary of the piece, giving the audience, purpose and maybe even context, but that just depends on the piece itself. After that I go into more detail about the audience, stating reasons (eg language, things that would appeal to them, all the while iving examples), then I move on to more specific paragraphs, eg: One for the language, one for certain phrases the writer used and their effect, then, if it was relavent, I would talk about the graphology. What I would usually do to finish it off is to write paragraph about the overall effect of the writer's techniques, and maybe even include a quote that stood out for me.

I hope that helped *shifts nervously*

Reply 2

-Matt-

OP

Thanks for the help :smile:

Reply 3

silence

16

there is a terminology of framework which you could apply to narrative discourse. it was one created by the american socio-linguist labov and is best applied to personal narratives:

you have an abstract (usually occurs at the start, basically stating what the story will be about), orientation (something which gives clues to the setting, like time, location etc, often after the abstract but appearing throughout the narrative at certain points), complicating action (just the general events of the story unfolding, e.g. 'he hit the man'), evaluation (some sort of judgement on the events.. you can have internal ones which would be characters in the text saying they 'felt that...' or external ones which would be the narrator themself saying what they think/thought), resolution (what finally happened in the story being told) and the coda (relating the story to us in the present or sharing any moral implications of the story).

Reply 4

emancipazione

For example when trying to show I'm talking about 'pragmatics' all I can think of saying is "In terms of the pragmatics of the piece,..." which becomes a bit repetitive and I'm not even sure if it makes sense. As far as I understand "pragmatically" is similar in meaning to being practical/sensible? Therefore I'm not sure if using it in this form would be understood in the sense I mean.

The framework 'pragmatics' relates to any messages that lie beneath the literal meaning of a text. It's a broad framework and can be applied to lots of aspects of a text. Consider the construction "Well done", spoken in a sarcastic tone. Literally, the utterance means 'good work', but since the speaker has used a sarcastic tone, there is an underlying pragmatic meaning. The speaker does not really mean "Well done", but is probably poking fun at the recipient.

The author of a piece can also have pragmatic expectations of their audience. For example, the commentator of a football match on radio will use lots of jargon and field-specific lexis, thus it can be said there is a pragmatic expectation for the audience to understand these terms.

As for integrating the term 'pragmatics' into your response, you could try some of the following: "The text contains... this suggests that there is a pragmatic expectation of the audience.", "In terms of pragmatics...", "Moving on to pragmatics...", "Although the literal meaning of... the pragmatic meaning appears to be..." and so on.

Similarly would "phonological(ly)" and "graphological(ly)" make any sense?
And is there a singular form of "lexis" ('lexeme'??) and is there any real advantage of using this over "word(s)"?

Yes, the terms "graphologically" and "phonologically" make sense and, as far as I'm aware, the singular for lexis is indeed lexeme.

An avoidance of the term "words" is indeed advantageous. If "lexis" or "lexeme" becomes repetitive, try just going back to basics and describing words as adjectives/nouns etc. You get marked on your knowledge of terminology, so it's advisable to make sure you do know everything.

Another thing; there is a hierarchy when it comes to the frameworks. Pragmatics, discourse structure (the way in which the whole text fits together) and syntax (the way in which sentences are structured) are the frameworks that will gain you the most marks, whereas graphology, typography (font, font size etc.) and lexis will generate the least marks and should be discussed more briefly.

In both modules 1 and 2, an emphasis is placed on context and how this affects choices in language. Always try and relate your analysis to context. Also, look at the text as a whole (its discourse) rather than dissecting it as this will earn you more marks. You also get marks for communicating clearly, spelling etc.

Sorry that was a bit long-winded... hope it helped a little.

Best of luck!! x

Reply 5

rurounikenji

13

emancipazione

The framework 'pragmatics' relates to any messages that lie beneath the literal meaning of a text. It's a broad framework and can be applied to lots of aspects of a text. Consider the construction "Well done", spoken in a sarcastic tone. Literally, the utterance means 'good work', but since the speaker has used a sarcastic tone, there is an underlying pragmatic meaning. The speaker does not really mean "Well done", but is probably poking fun at the recipient.

The author of a piece can also have pragmatic expectations of their audience. For example, the commentator of a football match on radio will use lots of jargon and field-specific lexis, thus it can be said there is a pragmatic expectation for the audience to understand these terms.

As for integrating the term 'pragmatics' into your response, you could try some of the following: "The text contains... this suggests that there is a pragmatic expectation of the audience.", "In terms of pragmatics...", "Moving on to pragmatics...", "Although the literal meaning of... the pragmatic meaning appears to be..." and so on.

Yes, the terms "graphologically" and "phonologically" make sense and, as far as I'm aware, the singular for lexis is indeed lexeme.

An avoidance of the term "words" is indeed advantageous. If "lexis" or "lexeme" becomes repetitive, try just going back to basics and describing words as adjectives/nouns etc. You get marked on your knowledge of terminology, so it's advisable to make sure you do know everything.

Another thing; there is a hierarchy when it comes to the frameworks. Pragmatics, discourse structure (the way in which the whole text fits together) and syntax (the way in which sentences are structured) are the frameworks that will gain you the most marks, whereas graphology, typography (font, font size etc.) and lexis will generate the least marks and should be discussed more briefly.

In both modules 1 and 2, an emphasis is placed on context and how this affects choices in language. Always try and relate your analysis to context. Also, look at the text as a whole (its discourse) rather than dissecting it as this will earn you more marks. You also get marks for communicating clearly, spelling etc.

Sorry that was a bit long-winded... hope it helped a little.

Best of luck!! x

Hi so are you saying the best groupings to go in the exam are pragmatics, discourse strcuture, amd syntax? and also could you tell me which terminology are assigned under which frameworks please?

Analysis terminology

Related discussions

Articles for you