Innholdsfortegnelse
English mock exam,
Task 1, short answer
Professional Football against Hunger

Task 2b, long answer
The Dead Planet

Utdrag
Focusing on the language of these three texts, you will come to find that there are huge differences between the texts, in terms of language devices and their effects.

Firstly, there’s an important difference in the overall style of the texts. The writer of Text 1 has chosen to write an expressive text.

Using adjectives frequently, he/she is allowing us an insight in his/her feelings and opinions about the subject.

An example clearly showing that this is an expressive text, is found in the very beginning of the paragraph: “Everyone should have the chance to lead active, healthy lives.

But perhaps you’re not aware of what is needed to stamp out starvation.” Not only does the author clearly express his/her opinions on the matter, stating that everyone should be allowed a chance to lead active, healthy lives, but he/she is clearly also using adjectives to add strength to the sentence.

The author of Text 2 however, has chosen to write an objective text.

The style is more neutral, and there are not as many adjectives. “The Food and Agricultural Organization, an intergovernmental organization under the auspices of the United Nations, has accepted the mandate to serve as the legal and administrative body in charge of the “Professional Football against Hunger” project for its entire duration.”

Throughout the text, the author chooses to focus on the facts around this project, rather than expressing his/her opinions about the subject. Text 3 is, like Text 1, an expressive text.

The author uses sentences such as: “Let’s kick the hunger off the pitch! ” and does unlike the writer of Text 2 choose not to write in a neutral style.

He/she is presenting this project in a way making it clear that seen from his/her point of view this project is an absolutely amazing idea.

There are also differences between the three texts in terms of their language in general. For example, writers choose words because of their connotations.

A word’s connotations basically means the thoughts and feelings a word brings with it, whether it’s positive, neutral of negative.

The writer of the very first text, chooses to refer to the football players as: “our heroes on the pitch”4 .

Hero is a word with extremely positive connotations, and therefore this specific choice of words causes the reader to think of the players as great men, maybe even as legends, who fights for a better world.

The author of text number two however, does not seem to be trying to create an effect using positive or negative connotations.

The writer chooses mostly to use neutral connotations, which is natural in an objective and neutral text. An example of this is: “global governance policy issues”5 .

Instead of the word “issue”, the writer could have chosen to put a word with negative connotations - such as “problem”. In text number three, the writer makes use of the words’ connotations in order to create an effect.

The writer constantly uses typical “football words”, allowing the reader both negative and positive connotations. An example showing this is the following sentence: “(..)wants to score a goal against hunger.”6

The phrase “score a goal” is loaded with positive connotations, whereas “hunger” is a word with extremely negative connotations.

This causes the reader to support the subject of “scoring a goal” against hunger.

Lastly, these three texts also differs in terms of formal and informal language. The writers in Text 1 and Text 3 uses an informal language.