FA Cup Final June 2010

Contrasting Texts I and J through the linguistic methods, I can clearly see that Text I is an asynchronous article in the Souvenir edition of the Manchester Evening Chronicle that was published on May 1^st 1934, meaning this article was distributed three days after the match had been won. The reasoning behind this is because the technology was not available for the article to be published as soon as the game was finished or even during the football match (Explain how we how techonology today which would offer a focused contrast). Compared to Text J where the article is published on the BBC sports website live, on the 17^th May 2008 which was the day of the match. This online article emphasises the importance of technology at this day and age, technology was available a lot compared to Text I where it was lacking the availability of technology. It is clear that the author of Text I wrote notes on the football match so the key features were not forgotten before writing the article up and then edited after before the printing. (Not sure if she edited it or if there was some sort of editing before it was finalised on the webpage) Contrasting to Text J where it was wrote as it was watched. However because the BBC sport is a prestigious company and extremely professional the articles updates had to go through editing before being published because it couldn’t afford to make mistakes and jeopardise the brands popularity. Good - perceptive AO3.

In terms of graphology Text I does not have much white space because the cost of printing in 1934 was too expensive to leave spaces, because of this the article looks very squashed together because the writers do not want the article to have more expense than needed. The font that is used in this text is not the main font of choice to be used in the modern day because it could be seen as difficult to read. Due to the development with technology within the time period of these different articles, Text J has a lot more white space and is set out neatly however because this article was published online during the FA cup final, when it was happening, it is less likely to be kept (ephemera). Contrasting to text I which is from the Souvenir Edition of the Manchester Evening Chronicle, the target audience would clearly purchase this newspaper with the intention of keeping it with years to come. Comparing both these texts it is clear that due to technology development the articles have different graphological features. 

The semantic field of text I is football friendly, compared to the semantic field of text J which is fighting and competitive nature. This conveys the change between how the football match was seen in 1984 compared to 2008. Text I consists with quotes from important people who have a connection with this football match, for example the chairman of Portsmouth explains “I am bitterly disappointed, but I must congratulate the winners” this is extremely friendly however because this article is asynchronous it is clear to the target audience that this may be a rehearsed speech. AO3 However in Text J the game was evidently more competitive by the way the, Cardiff boss Dave Jones, explains his views on the loss of the game “A slight mistake cost us. But we’ve done everyone proud.” This is a lot more driven compared to text I because Dave Jones is not congratulating the other team but only stating that they could have one if they didn’t make a mistake. Therefore this conveys a change within the nature of football throughout the years. Both texts use a lot of shared knowledge throughout the articles for example Text I uses quotes from important people to do with the FA cup and the two football clubs, similarly in Text J they use the surnames of most football players which not only suggests shared knowledge but also the fact that this is wrote and published instantly, so the writer types it the easiest way possible before something big happens that has to be included too. The names “Tony Adams” and Lassana Diarra” are used as shared knowledge because the target audience would know who they were.

In terms of Discourse Structure, it is obvious that changes with technology have caused these two texts to differ so much with layout. Text I was published three days after the football game happened, whereas Text J was published live during the game. Therefore Text I clearly went through an in depth editing process to make sure everything included was grammatically correct. However the asynchronous article in 2008, was wrote for the BBC website therefore their reputation is key to their success so they cannot afford to be making errors with grammar so we must assume that this text also underwent an editing process also however it would have had to be much more instant because of the fact it was being updated live. Text J uses chronological order throughout the online article because of the fact it was being updated constantly, the newest features to this blog stay at the top of the page therefore meaning the target audience can find out the updates there and then without the need to scroll down the website. The layout of Text I is set put with columns, not only emphasizing that it is a newspaper article but also conveying the lack of technology. The columns allow the cost of printing to be minimalized because it allows the article to be more squashed together.

To conclude, comparing both Text I and J it is clear that technology has developed a lot since 1934 and has had an impact on how language has changed over this amount of time.