Comparative Register Analysis of Two Texts - Assignment Example

TASK Text written text on Scientific Research on the Structure of the Cerebral Cortex of Physicist Einstein Text 2, face to face conversation onScientific Research on the Structure of the Cerebral Cortex of Physicist Einstein Text 1 forms the part of a longer article, and text 2 is based on the face to face conversation.I have analysed 326 words of text 1 and 176 words of text 2. Copies of both texts are enclosed as Appendices along with transcriptions. These are not included in word count. TASK 2 Text 1 Aspect of Situation Linguistic Function Shown By Grammatical Feature Linguistic Evidence from Text Field Semantic Domain: Specialization: Other Experiential Factors Experiential Theme Scientific Research Research work of experts. Medicine Expert Qualification of nouns Material: Include the idea that some participants does something(actor) i.e actors does something to some other entity(goal) Relational Include the idea that the relation is being set up between the two separate entities. It bifurcates into attributes and identifying modes Mental Expressed by verbs of feeling, perceiving and thinking such as like hate, etc Verbal: It refers to the process of saying. It also refers to the different modes of saying he told me a story . In the sentence “’He” is the sayer “Told” is the verbal process , “Me” Receiver and “A story” verbiage Transitivity It refers to the verb, which has an object There are some transitive verbs, transitive verbs have an object eg I baked some cookies, cookies is the object Intransitivity It includes doable verbs, unlike transitive verbs it does not have direct object Physicists (3) , researchers (9), tissue samples (8), microscope (15) Medical Research is related to Einstein’s brain. Cerebral-cortex (4), brain tissue samples (12), neuro-anatomy (15), connectome (29) Specialized news report based on scientific research of scientist and professors. Pathologist (6), Anthropologist(22), neuroscientist (25), Clinical neurologist (28) Quite a few Describers are used in the text; extraordinary (2), intellectual (2), slightly smaller (10), pattern of grooves and ridges (18), complexity (20).cognitive (25) Thomas Harvey Removed his brain(7)Removed is actor and brain is goal Eg Identified Unusual Features(5) in this example the unusual is attribute of feature There are no mental verbs because the text is based on research works with rational approaches. Fredrick Lepore Says that the next step would be to try to generate Einstein Connectomme(29). In the example “Fredreick Lepos “ is the sayer “ Next Step” verbal process and no receiver and “ Connectomme” is the verbiage Harvey estate donated what was left of the brain tissue(12). In the example the verb donated has an object i.e. brain tissue Small number of studies emerged (9). In the example emerged is the verb but without object Aspect of Situation Linguistic Function Shown By Grammatical Feature Linguistic Evidence from Text Tenor Persona/Expertise Social Distance Equality/inequality (Interpersonal Meta Functions) Possessors/ imparters of information Some evaluative language Formal Relative Social Status Modality Report is mostly formulated in Declarative clause Experts which in this case are the scientists and researchers which are explaining their findings regarding Einstein’s brain; like The report is based on scientific research in which researchers have shown their expertise. All human participants in the report are given full name along with their area of expertise This is a scientific research based report, therefore it is non interactive, thus social status cannot be clearly defined in the case. Epistemic Modality He then sent some of the tissue samples and photographs to… (8). Some examples are, such findings could be meaningless (23), Studying the differences might have no functional importance whatsoever (26) Pathologist, Thomas Harvey (6), Anthropologist, Dean Falk (22), Chris Chamber. neuroscientist (25), Clinical neurologist Frederick Lepore (28) The text is having strong stance throughout because researchers have put forward their findings after extensive research that describes the probability based on hypothetical research eg nex step would be(28) The weaker obligation is created using the suppose word e.g. i suppose they can see at atomic level (18) Aspect of Situation Linguistic Function Shown By Grammatical Feature Linguistic Evidence from Text Mode Written Mode Textual Cohesion Textual Cohesion The text is a report based on scientific research on Einstein’s brain where different researcher’s findings have been added. Therefore, it is a non-interactive; thus having no interrogative clause either, which means readers don’t have to respond. In addition to being non-interactive, it is non-spontaneous as well; because it is a report which inculcated findings of many researchers from different era, which were later combined in the form of report. Some textual themes introducing Subordinate clasus, "A short passive where  in the active voice is not present" eg "The Demonstrators were shot" A Long Passive is where two participants were present" eg  The Demonstrators were shot by the Police" The lexical density is 64.7% which is relatively high because of the non- spontaneous nature of the report. . and claims to have identified unusual features (4-5), last year the curators started to digitise the materials, which allows users toexamine the neuro-anatomy as if they were sitting in front of a microscope, (14-15) last year the curators started to digitise the materials, which allows users toexamine the neuro-anatomy as if they were sitting in front of a microscope, (14-15) Claims to have identified unusual features(5). The sentence has one participant refers to “ Great Physicist” and passive in nature and active voice is not present There are no long passives in the text Text 2 Aspect of Situation Linguistic Function Shown By Grammatical Feature Linguistic Evidence from Text Field (Experiential meta-function) Specialization Assumption of Expert Knowledge Other Experimental Factors Experimental Themes Scientific Public Information Scientific Research Minimal Qualification of noun Material: Include the idea that some participants does something(actor) i.e actors does something to some other entity(goal) Relational Include the idea that the relation is being set up between the two separate entities. It bifurcates into attributes and identifying modes Mental Expressed by verbs of feeling, perceiving and thinking such as like hate,know, think,understand etc Verbal: It refers to the process of saying. It also refers to the different modes of saying he told me a story . In the sentence “’He” is the sayer “Told” is the verbal process , “Me” Receiver and “A story” verbiage Transitivity Intransitivity It refers to the main domain of the program.The text identifies the basis of topic , which is scientific in nature The participants discussed the radio program. e.g Radio Talk(4) Missed (6) Participants Discusses scientific research on Einstein Brain e.g. microscope(8) Scientists(7) Non expert participants discussing the radio based research and presenting their with it can be derived from the words such as i think(14) and not sure(14) something (16) How (17) Don’t Know(22) There is small Appeasing Noun that accepts and acknowledges the views of others. The purpose of such Nouns is to accept are such as ‘Yeah Grey’(3) Yeah (19). Moreover, the are some classifiers and describers of Noun eg The describers include Fancy (1), Unappealing(2), Little(7),Apparently(10), , smaller(10), atomic(18), are the describer and Brain(10) is the classifier. They were talking about Einstein Brain(7) . In the example “ They” refers to actors and “ Einstein Brain” is the goal They are kind of unappealing(2) refers to the Id fancy brains and unappealing is attribute of id fancy brains. Dont Know how it works(22) refers to the word “Know” which refers to the process They said something about connections(14). In the sentence “ They” is the sayer “ Something” is the verbal “about Connections” Is the verbiage Transitivity verbs include verbs with direct subjects eg i saw that i missed it (5) refers to the Radio Show, which is a direct subject Doable verbs without direct subjects include saying some scientists(7) , does not hav direct subject i.e. to whom they were saying Aspect of Situation Linguistic Function Shown By Grammatical Feature Linguistic Evidence from Text Tenor Equality/ Inequality Social Distance Persona/ Expertise (Interpersonal Meta Functions) Level of Expertise Formal/Informal Possessions/ Imparters of Information Stance Both the participants have same and low level of expertise Informal Interrogative Clause Modality not sure(1), aren’t they(2) something about (16) It is based on informal friendly discussion along with interrogative i.e Yeah(laugh) does it work like that Questions include What were they saying(5),what did they say they found(9), what did they think it was(10) The weaker obligation is created using the suppose word e.g. i suppose they can see at atomic level (18) Aspect of Situation Linguistic Function Shown By Grammatical Feature Linguistic Evidence from Text Mode Written Mode Textual Cohesion The discussion between the two persons is included in the text, which makes the text is interactive, Spontaneous and Interrogative Long passives include those which include two participants. Short Passive include those which include one participant Lexical Density of 29.2% There are no long and short passive in the text Comparative Analysis between the two Text 1 is based on scientific research, whereas the text 2 is based on the discussions between the two participants without expertise. Text 1 is based on the research work of experts in which the research is related to Einstein Brain. It includes the specialized news report based on scientific research on scientists and professors. On the other hand, participants in text 2 discussed the radio program Radio Talk(4). The discussion in text 2 also related to Einstein Brain but the level of expertise as compared to that of in text 1 is lower for participants. Text 1 is primarily focused on the research conducted on the Einstein brain so the mental process , which refers to emotionally factors are cannot be covered because text 1 is rational in nature. Contrariwise test 2 is based on the general discussion, which may refer to the radio program on the same topic, which is covered in text 1 but the format of the topic is different. Text 2 includes less informative people, who do not have in depth understanding of the topic but they are discussing it on the basis of assumption, whereas text 1 is scientific in nature and includes the scientists and researchers in the discussion to explain the topic, so the text 1 is more informative than text 2.Moreover,Text 1 is which is based on research based article and refers the reports, which is mostly formulated in Declarative clause. In text 2, interrogative clause is used. means the two participants discussed about the radio programs using the queries in their mind. It is based on informal friendly discussion along with interrogative Both the participants have same and low level of expertise eg not sure(1), aren’t they(2) something about (16). Therefore, despite of the fact that the two texts discusses the same topic but the level of discussion and expertise level lead to the significant change in the construction of two texts. The text 1 is a report based on scientific research on Einstein’s brain where different researcher’s findings have been added. Therefore, it is a non-interactive; thus having no interrogative clause either, which means readers don’t have to respond. In addition to being non-interactive, it is non-spontaneous as well; because it is a report which inculcated findings of many researchers from different era, which were later combined in the form of report. Appendix i Text 1 1Albert Einsteins brain fascinates scientists general public 2 provide clues neurological basis extraordinary intellectual 3abilities. The latest study of the great physicists grey matter analysed previously 4unpublished photographs cerebral cortex, claims identified 5unusual features. sceptical interpretation findings. 6Shortly Einsteins death 18 April 1955, pathologist Thomas Harvey 7removed his brain dissected 240 blocks, taking dozens of 8photographs. sent some tissue samples photographs 9researchers,eventually small number studies emerged. 10early ones showed Einsteins brain slightly smaller, 11weighed 200g average. 12Harveys estate donated left of the brain tissue samples and 13photographs US National Museum of Health Medicine 2010, and 14last year curators started digitise the materials, which allows users to 15examine neuro-anatomy sitting microscope. 16Fourteen photographs museum collection together reveal 17entire surface Einsteins cerebral cortex first time, enabling 18researchers examine pattern grooves ridges compare them with 19those seen in other brains. 20 complexity convolutions certain parts Einsteins cerebral cortex 21striking unusual comparison brains normal individuals says 22anthropologist Dean Falk Florida State University. 23Some argue conclusions drawn findings 24meaningless. Studying Einsteins brain like studying writings 25Nostradamus, Chris Chambers, cognitive neuroscientist Cardiff 26University. Studying the differences might functional importance 27whatsoever. 28Clinical neurologist Frederick Lepore says next step would be to try to 29generate Einsteins connectome, connections brain, 30comparison brain with those geniuses another possible avenue 31of research. Text 2 1A not sure Id fancy brains 2Bmm theyre kind of unappealing, arent they 3Ayeah grey  4Btalking of which, there was a programme on the radio last week about brains 5Aah yes, I saw that I missed it what were they saying? 6Bwell it was mm I cant remember exactly but they were talking about 7Einsteins brain they were saying some scientist had sliced it into little er  8thin little slices and now theyre looking at them under the microscope 9Aoh what did they say they found? 10Bwell apparently his brain was smaller than most peoples, but it had more folds 11A I thought they didnt think folds  12B well no they said that I mean they didnt think it was the folds 13Awhat did they think it was? 14Bwell Im not sure I think they said something about the connections 15AOh 16Bsomething about making a map of the connections 17AGosh I wonder how theyll do that how they I mean, I can they see 18er I spose they can see at atomic level 19BYeah 20AThats weird. I spose theyll be stuck at his last thought. 21BY-yeah [laughs] does it work like that? 22ADunno. Dont know how it works. References Milton, K. & Hall, W., 2005. Open University. s.l.:s.n. Read More