Transcript analysis

Courtroom transcript analysis

1) What do you notice about the use of proper and/or pronouns in referring to people and events?

What I notice about the transcript is proper nouns are almost always used when the barrister is addressing both of the men involved in the situation. The reason for this is to make it completely clear to themselves and the audience in the courtroom who is being talked about. If they were to use pronouns like he, she and they rather than proper nouns it could create confusion with the listeners. I also feel that although the barrister is the one with the authority he feels it is part of his job to respect the defendant which is why he addresses him with in a formal way with ‘Mr Neil’. The defendant also uses pronouns when referring to the police as ‘em’ which is a shortened version of them. It is a feature of spoken language because when writing you would not use the term ‘em’. It also is showing he either has a strong Scottish accent and these abbreviations come natural to him, but also that he’s not too bothered with talking formally to the barrister.

2) Which parts of the dialogue seem prepared or part of courtroom conventions and which seem spontaneous (said without thinking beforehand)?

Throughout the transcript most of what the barrister says seems to be part of the normal courtroom procedures.  The first introduction to the case from the Barrister is what you would class as a normal courtroom speech. One spontaneous and abnormal part of the transcript that stands out is ‘is that because the police have been to see you so many times Mr Neil that you can’t remember  what they were up to see you about one incident as compared to another incident?’ This is abnormal because the barrister is basically insulting rather than being professional like he should be. Other than this he does act in a normal way throughout the courtroom incident.

3) Who seems to have the most power in the in the dialogue and why?

The person with the power in the dialogue is the barrister. The first reason why I think this is he controls the conversation and it is obvious to see how much more he speaks than the defendant. The lack of speech from the defendant indicates he does not have much power and he is controlled by the barrister.

Another way that shows Mr Neil is not the man in authority is his constant pauses and use of 'ers' and 'ems' it makes me feel like he is constantly thinking or nervous. I get the feeling that Mr Neil is thinking of what to say and is constantly thinking what he should say which indicates suspicion on his behalf. This is especially the case because he is in a courtroom getting questioned and if your not seen as confident then it could alert suspicion to the barrister and the audience. The fact that the barrister is high in authority and the audience is there to analyse and make thoughts on the defendant which shows Mr Neil is under power.

At other parts of the transcript you can see how Mr Neil tries to cross the barristers authority by speaking over him.
barrister-you cant remember whether they came to /see or not/
Mr N-                                                                        / I don't /think they did no.

Although people may see talking over someone as trying to be in power i think Mr Neil goes through the realization that he cant say anything else so he bluntly responds to the barrister because he has nothing else to say. He does this again at the end of the transcript where he says 'no' over the top of the barrister which also supports the fact he knows he has nothing else to say so he is blunt. The fact he says little when speaking over the barrister shows the lack of authority because he doesn't have big persuasive responses but instead short blunt ones.

two blogs analysis commentary on abortion

Analysis Commentary on the two bloggers on Abortion

I have chosen to speak about the controversy behind abortion and although i share personal views, I have created two characters that are looking to express their feelings on Abortion and I will analyse both. They are both unknown members of the public who are blogging for the first time about their feelings on the controversy surrounding abortion. The form of the two blogs is a persuasive article in a section of a local newspaper. The audience that these views are received by is people who have purchased the newspaper and viewed the pages where these blogs on abortion controversy are.

 The first character Lucy is a 20 year old woman who is looking to express her feelings on abortion and explains how she has actually experienced the full force of an abortion as a sixteen year old girl. The other character is a 47 year old called John Staples whose profession is being a doctor.

As soon as both bloggers start it becomes obvious who is more comfortable and used to writing in this manner. John Staples seems more sophisticated and comfortable with the use of vocabulary being used. Lucy on the other hand does not come across as completely less confident but less comfortable than John. Because of the fact John is a doctor he does seem quite fair at the start of the blog saying his view could be disagreed with the fact it’s okay if the women 'health is at risk' which is clearly understandable as his profession means he thinks safety is the most important thing. The use of vocabulary and the fact all of his blog makes sense, gives me the view that John is higher academically than Lucy which is also supported by the fact he’s a doctor. Because of the high level of grammar and punctuation Johns view seems very persuasive and I think if I was to  read this I would be drawn to Johns view because of how he expresses the religious and health views which he is very educated about which would draw me to believe him more. A very interesting statement  John uses is 'its only a matter of time abortion could become illegal' the cliche being used means he thinks eventually abortion will become illegal. This is a strong view and because he is putting an opinion across without care it shows his  beliefs are firm and because of his views and others that agree with him are right then its only a 'matter of time' others see this and it will become illegal.

I am now going to analyse Lucy's blog next. Lucy's blog is written more informally than Johns and I see a lack of successful use of punctuation in her blog. Although above I have stated that i was drawn to Johns view more the fact that Lucy has the experience of going through an abortion it helps her explain her views because she has been through it not only physically but had to deal with the controversy mentally. Because of this I can see why an audience may be drawn to Lucy's view because its fact and the audience could feel an emotional connection. She does show some good punctuation also. 'Abortion is murder' is it really? If abortion is killing someone then why did I not get a jail sentence? The fact she uses rhetorical questions shows she does know some good ways of persuasion and punctuation but in my opinion it is overused which supports the fact John understands the use of words more and what is best to do when expressing personal views. Lucy does write in continuous pros as does John so it shows both have an understanding on formatting their writing, yet because Lucy's  doesn’t seem to have the same academic level as Johns it becomes irrelevant. 

I feel the primary purpose of John’s blog is to express his beliefs about abortion and is looking to persuade his audience that his view is right and should be accepted. This is the same as Lucy's primary purpose but she also intends to share more of a personal experience with her audience as well as expressing why discrimination to females having an abortion is wrong and how she dealt with this as a 16 year old girl so she does show more of a personal view than a knowledgeable one. 

Abortion controversy

Abortion views for a newspaper article 


I have chosen to speak about the controversy within abortion. I do have my own views about abortion but have chose to express two views about abortion through two characters. The first character is a young woman who has been through an abortion and what the experience feels like. She had an abortion and still believes her decision was the correct one and proceeds to explain why abortion should be allowed and not sinned upon.
The other character is a more mature man who has the profession as a doctor. Although he feels very strong about his opinion he also has to accept that their are some reasons why it should be done. His job means he needs to help the abortion process to take place and he feels its awkward because he feels so strongly about the fact abortion should not be allowed because of his religious views and his personal views.

Below are the two bloggers and they have wrote into a local paper to put across their personal views and experiences on the controversy of abortion.
Audience is newspaper readers.

Blogger one- I am a 20 year old woman who has experienced the full force of the choices of an abortion. At the age of 16 i had an abortion and still from that day i stick by the fact it should have been done and i think others should not be frowned upon for their decisions.

The reason for my abortion was because i was at a very young age and i felt like it would be a huge struggle for myself to look after a baby. The main statement i had to deal with by a range of people was 'It was your fault, you need to live with it' my answer to this was why? As a sixteen year old i did not make any money and knew it was impossible to look after a child by myself. I realize i was stupid and did not consider the high risk of becoming pregnant whilst unprotected.

The reason for my view does not just come from my experience but also a range of other factors. Shouldn't a woman have full responsibility for her own body? As a society that is equal i feel like a woman having an abortion should be completely up to her and not be faced with discrimination for her actions.

Many people have the view usually religious that sex should not be between two people without the intention to make a child. Why cant we be free? If we have choice and abortion is NOT illegal then why is it still seen as a crime to many people. Its completely insane! Do you not think a girl is going through enough already with the choice they are making?why make her feel even worse.

I can see from some peoples eyes that it is wrong but my strongest view is that like me if you cannot give a child the best upbringing possible then the most loving thing to do is end its life before it has began. This brings me to my next point when people claim it is murder.

'Abortion is murder' is it really? If abortion is killing someone then why did i not get a jail sentence?
Its clear stupidity to say its murder. My opinion is that when the baby has left the whom then it is human so before this happens when its a fetus its not a human being so this means you are not ending  living human beings life.

Thanks for listening to my view, Lucy Watts (20)

Blogger two- My name is Dr. John Staples and i am writing to express my feelings on abortion. I am an experienced doctor who has done countless abortions in my past experiences.

My main view is that Abortion should be illegal. As a doctor i do see why in some circumstances abortion should be allowed. First i will express why it could be okay to have an abortion. If the woman's health is at risk then i believe an abortion is the right thing to do.

My doctor personality will not be relevant for any of my next views. It drives me crazy the fact a woman has the cheek to say 'its my body i can do what i want' yes i agree with it but the fact you have used your body to have sexual intercourse without protection and your fully aware with the risk of this you should be made to pay for it.

I also am one of the many others who feel that abortion is murder. I mean how isn't it? as soon as the sperm is inserted into the egg then the human process has began. As a doctor i am aware of how quickly a fetus develops inside the whom and if you look at it, it is obvious to see how similar it is to a baby. Their is no difference to a 1 day old baby and a highly developed baby in the whom but if you killed a living child then you would be sentenced to jail so why aren't people who have no relevant reasons for an abortion sentenced for murder?

Not only am i a doctor but i also am a christian and my view is that sexual intercourse should only happen if the couple is married and are intending to make a new life, so i see abortion as not only murder but i also feel its a sin.

With my view being shared and i know many others feel the same way about abortion I believe that its only a matter of time abortion could start to become illegal in the UK and if others speak up about this situation we could ban this absolute disgraceful action.

Thanks for listening to my view Dr. John staples (47)