Introduction:
-I have chosen to explore how people with political power use a high level of formality within their tweets
-Compared Ed Millaband with Fearne Cotton
Tweets were picked at rnadom
Methodology:
-Why i am comparing Fearne Cotton with Ed Millaband: both British, both are of a similar age bracket, both have inluential power and are in the public eye
-Picking tweets at random (every 8 tweets) although they will be from a similar time frame (in the last couple of months)
Analysis:
-Fearne more informal (x12 informal English)
-Ed more emotive 12:7
-Fearne uses more 1st person per tweet
-Ed more persuasive/Fearne Discursive
Conclusion/Evaluation:
-Hypothesis is correct
-However, there were many limitations in this investigation one being he small pool of data
-Subjective quantifying e.g. emotive language and formality
-Comparible issues
Good - you show awareness of key issues in the comparability of subjects and in the subjectivity of linguistic issues of register and emotive language. Your analysis could be a little clearer - how many tweets per subject did you collect? Were 12 of Cotton's informal - to what extent? What counted as a use of emotive language or were you counting tweets that contained at least one use? Some examples would have helped to illustrate these points. Remember to say how far the hypothesis was supported - does Milliband use a "high" level of formality only in comparison with Cotton? Do you think what you found was representative of his tweets? What about of other politicians' tweets?
ReplyDelete