Two very different newspapers
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:26 pmI’ve selected 2 articles from 2 very different newspapers:
The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/04/nato.russia
The Sun: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sh ... 612083.ece
The Guardian is supposed to be a serious newspaper and the article explains the last outcomes of the NATO summit with the participation of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The article is well written using what we could describe as Oxford English.
The much shorter article of the Sun talks about the incorporation of the Little Brittain comic Matt Lucas as a “Celebrity Hijack” in the Big Brother program. This article use short words such as celeb instead of celebrity and expressions such as “Celebrity Hijack”. The structure of the phrases is less coherent than in th Guardin even if it’s shorter and the overall impression is that the article is much more colloquial.
The Guardian uses some typical expressions used by diplomats in international relations such as: "I cannot report that this morning we saw stunning breakthroughs."
Some phrasal verbs such as “nailed down” could be found easily in the Dictionary: “Washington gained formal Nato support for the anti-ballistic missile scheme and also nailed down an agreement with the Czech government to build a missile-tracking radar on its soil.”
The Sun is more difficult for me to read not only because I have no idea on the subject (is not my cup of tea) but also because I don’t understand well expressions in the phrases such as “Celebrity Hijack” or this one between hyphens:
“The funnyman — catchphrase “Want that one” — will join in setting tasks, giving punishments and listening to housemates’ woes in the diary room. “
I consider that wealthy middle age people of London read the Guardian while low income families living in the suburbs and more addict to TV programs are reading the Sun.
The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/04/nato.russia
The Sun: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sh ... 612083.ece
The Guardian is supposed to be a serious newspaper and the article explains the last outcomes of the NATO summit with the participation of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The article is well written using what we could describe as Oxford English.
The much shorter article of the Sun talks about the incorporation of the Little Brittain comic Matt Lucas as a “Celebrity Hijack” in the Big Brother program. This article use short words such as celeb instead of celebrity and expressions such as “Celebrity Hijack”. The structure of the phrases is less coherent than in th Guardin even if it’s shorter and the overall impression is that the article is much more colloquial.
The Guardian uses some typical expressions used by diplomats in international relations such as: "I cannot report that this morning we saw stunning breakthroughs."
Some phrasal verbs such as “nailed down” could be found easily in the Dictionary: “Washington gained formal Nato support for the anti-ballistic missile scheme and also nailed down an agreement with the Czech government to build a missile-tracking radar on its soil.”
The Sun is more difficult for me to read not only because I have no idea on the subject (is not my cup of tea) but also because I don’t understand well expressions in the phrases such as “Celebrity Hijack” or this one between hyphens:
“The funnyman — catchphrase “Want that one” — will join in setting tasks, giving punishments and listening to housemates’ woes in the diary room. “
I consider that wealthy middle age people of London read the Guardian while low income families living in the suburbs and more addict to TV programs are reading the Sun.