Introduction to textual analysis Seminar practice 3
Activity 1: Critical thinking Different newspapers report events in different ways, and their use of actives and passives can be significant for the point of view given to the reader. In Text: Pit bull attack (1a and 1b), newspaper reports from the Guardian and the Daily Star respectively, the attack on a man by pit bull terriers is described with particular use of the active and passive voice. What are the main differences in their use in the two newspapers? Why are there these differences?
Text 1a Man critical after pit bull attack A man was critically ill in hospital with facial injuries last night after being savaged by two pit bull terriers. Police shot dead one of the dogs. Frank Tempest, aged 54, of Lincoln was attacked as he walked home from work. Police warned people to stay indoors as 20 police officers, six armed, hunted for the dogs. One animal was shot and the other caught and destroyed. Describing Mr Tempest’s injuries, a police spokesman said: ‘You wouldn’t recognize it as a human face—it is positively horrendous.’ Police said the owner of the dogs could not be prosecuted as both were dead. Dame Janet Fookes, Conservative MP for Plymouth Drake, said the Government should introduce compulsory dog registration. Guardian, 9 May 1991
Text 1b HORROR ATTACK! By Martin Stote COPS shot two savage pit bull terriers yesterday after they gored a man’s face to shreds. The escaped devil-dogs tore into shift worker Frank Tempest, 54, as he walked home at dawn. Shocked witnesses said the hell hounds RIPPED OFF his nose, MAULED his ear and TORE skin off his Face. The dogs ambushed father-of-four Frank, then dragged him screaming along the road as he struggled to fightthem off. Police sealed off the street and warned terrified neighbours to stay indoors as the marauding dogs savaged acat to death.mThen six police marksmen with automatic rifles blasted the dogs, believed to be a bitch and her pup, with ahail of bullets. One pit bull was shot dead, the other wounded and trailed for an hour before being killed. Both had escaped from a house close to despatch loader Frank’s home in Monk’s Road Lincoln. Police refused to name the owner last night and said he would NOT face prosecution. Daily Star, 9 May 1991
Commentary The main difference between the two newspapers is that the Daily star emphasises the actions and the ways in which one person or (animal) does something to another. The report in the Daily Star is therefore more instantaneous; it is as if people imagine things being directly enacted before their eyes. Many of the verbs, moreover, are not just ‘active’; they are also mainly verbs of violent physical action: shot, gored, ripped off, mauled, tore, dragged, savaged, blasted. Such choices sensationalise the story, involving the reader and giving the story more impact.
Activity 2: Lexical vs Structural Ambiguity
Below are five “crash blossoms” taken from various sites on the Internet.
For each one, (a) state the two possible interpretations in plain words via paraphrases; (b) state whether or not the headline is lexically ambiguous or structurally ambiguous; (c) locate the source of the ambiguity, whether word or phrase; (d) describe how the source causes the ambiguity (for instance, a word in the headline has two meanings).
ď Ž
For structural ambiguity, explain the two structures in terms of which words go together more closely, or who is doing the action, etc.
ď Ž
Sometimes a lexical ambiguity causes a structural one. If you notice such a case, try to explain it. One is done for you as a model.
Model: Eye Drops Off Shelf A lexical ambiguity leads to a structural ambiguity. The ambiguous string is eye drops, which can be either a compound word naming medicinal liquids which we use to relieve eye problems, or a subjectverb pair in which an eye falls. Interpretation 1: Eye drops have been taken off of the shelves of a drug store for some reason: [[Eye drops] off shelf] Interpretation 2: An eye fell from a shelf: [[Eye] drops off shelf]
Your headlines: (1) Squad Helps Dog Bite Victim (2) Judge to Rule on Nude Beach (3) Police Discover Crack in Australia. (4) Satellite Tracks Cows From Outer Space (5) Doctor Testifies in Horse Suit
(1) Squad Helps Dog Bite Victim Structural ambiguity: Interpretation 1: The squad is providing aid to a person who has been bitten by a dog. Interpretation 2: The squad is helping the dog to bite a victim. In the first case, dog bite is a compound noun which describes victim: [Squad helps [dog bite victim]] In the second case, dog is the doer of the biting action, and victim names the object of the action: [Squad helps dog bite [victim]]
(2) Judge to Rule on Nude Beach Lexical ambiguity, which causes a structural ambiguity. The ambiguous word is on, which can be interpreted either literally as identifying a location, or figuratively as part of the expression to rule on, which we use to name the act of a judge pronouncing a decision in a lawsuit. Interpretation 1: A judge is going to make a ruling regarding the status of a nude beach. Interpretation 2: A judge is going to make a ruling on something while located on a nude beach.
ď Ž
The structural ambiguity then lies in what on goes with: in the first case, it goes with ruling and nude beach is the object of ruling on: [Judge to rule on [nude beach]]
ď Ž
In the second case, on goes with nude beach, signalling that the nude beach is the location where the ruling will take place: [Judge to rule [on nude beach]]
(3) Police Discover Crack in Australia. Lexical ambiguity: The ambiguous word is crack. It could refer to crack cocaine, or it could refer to a fissure in the ground. Interpretation 1: Police have discovered a cache of crack cocaine somewhere in Australia. Interpretation 2: Police have discovered a fissure in the ground in Australia.
(4) Satellite Tracks Cows From Outer Space Structural ambiguity: Interpretation 1: A satellite located in outer space is being used to track the movements of cows on the ground: [Satellite tracks [cows] from outer space] Interpretation 2: A satellite is being used to follow the movements of cows that come from another planet: [Satellite tracks [cows from outer space]] In the first case, from outer space describes the location of the satellite, and therefore modifies the verbs tracks. In the second case, from outer space describes the cows, and therefore is part of a noun phrase with cows.
(5) Doctor Testifies in Horse Suit Lexical ambiguity: suit can refer either to a lawsuit or a clothing outfit. Interpretation 1: A doctor has testified in a lawsuit that has to do with a horse. Interpretation 2: A doctor has testified while wearing a suit made to look like a horse.
Activity 3 A mysterious atmosphere is the aim of Text: ‘A Haunted House’, which is the opening of a short story by Virginia Woolf, published in 1921. How does V. Woolf create this atmosphere?
‘A Haunted House’ Whatever hour you woke there was a door shutting. From room to room they went, hand in hand, lifting here, opening there, making sure—a ghostly couple. ‘Here we left it,’ she said. And he added, ‘Oh, but here too!’ ‘It’s upstairs,’ she murmured. ‘And in the garden,’ he whispered. ‘Quietly,’ they said, ‘or we shall wake them.’ But it wasn’t you that woke us. Oh, no. They’re looking for it; they’re drawing the curtain,’ one might say, and so read on a page or two. ‘Now they’ve found it,’ one would be certain, stopping the pencil on the margin. And then, tired of reading, one might rise and see for oneself, the house all empty, the doors standing open,only the wood pigeons bubbling with content and the hum of the threshing machine sounding from the farm. ‘What did I come in here for? What did I want to find?’ My hands were empty. ‘Perhaps it’s upstairs then?’ The apples were in the loft. And so down again, the garden still as ever, only the book had slipped into the grass.
Commentary Virginia Woolf extract A sense of mystery is created in this text partly by the fact that the reader is unsure who is in the story, and this effect results from the range of pronouns used: you, they, we, it, she, he, one, I. At the beginning, it seems that ‘you’ means ‘one’ and that ‘they’ are ‘a ghostly couple’. But then it’s uncertain who is talking in direct speech in the second paragraph; also, the second use of ‘you’ (in the final paragraph) appears to mean, not ‘one’ as before, but ‘they’ (i.e. the ghosts). Throughout the whole text, it’s unclear exactly what ‘it’ is that everyone seems to be searching for. The language makes the reader behave like the characters, in that it makes the act of reading an act of searching to locate the meaning.