Crime
Article A:
thugs, muggers, yobs, law-abiding citizens, robberies, gangster-style,
armed robberies, shoplifting, intimidation, commit crime, terrorise victims
Article B:
yobbishness, low-level disorder, victims, attackers
Article A has few references to young people but lots to crime, whereas Article B
has more references to young people and much fewer to crime. In Article A, the
journalist also avoids the use of the word ‘child’, suggesting that we shouldn’t
treat hoodies as children. In Article B, the use of ‘child’ has the opposite effect
− it allows us to look at hoodies not as dangerous adults but as young children.
The choice of words associated with crime in Article A is also interesting: emotive,
emphatic terms like ‘gangster-style’, ‘yob’ and ‘terrorise’ create a sense that
hoodies are responsible for serious, violent crime. In Article B, the use of the term
‘low-level disorder’ suggests the opposite − that the types of crime committed by
hoodies are not too serious at all.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |