Comparing writing styles
Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:08 pmI have read two articles with the same subject from two different newspapers:
The Sun: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... 009744.ece
The Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 697392.ece
Firstly, we can see The Times is a more serious newspaper because the page is fulled of more news, meanwhile The Sun has a page with many advertisements.
Both articles talk about the Olympic Games in China and the Tibetanian boycott in Paris, but the difference in style is quite significant: The Times uses long sentences with well structured ideas and well connected all them. Moreover, they write and favour the use of phrasal verbs and more complex sentences (passive voice) as in the headlines, for instance: "Tibet protests force organisers to snuff out Olympic flame in Paris".
On the other hand, The Sun has short phrases with very bad connection between them and use more plain words. Moreover, they emphasize concreted acts to atract people's attention, such as: "A protester who threw water at the torch but failed to extinguish it was taken away."
I think The Sun is easier to read, but more difficult to understand the meaning of the whole article because of the unconnected sentences and ideas.
Finally, I consider business and career middle age people use to read the Times whereas The Sun is read by low education families that are in the habit of watching soap operas more than reading cience books.
The Sun: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... 009744.ece
The Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 697392.ece
Firstly, we can see The Times is a more serious newspaper because the page is fulled of more news, meanwhile The Sun has a page with many advertisements.
Both articles talk about the Olympic Games in China and the Tibetanian boycott in Paris, but the difference in style is quite significant: The Times uses long sentences with well structured ideas and well connected all them. Moreover, they write and favour the use of phrasal verbs and more complex sentences (passive voice) as in the headlines, for instance: "Tibet protests force organisers to snuff out Olympic flame in Paris".
On the other hand, The Sun has short phrases with very bad connection between them and use more plain words. Moreover, they emphasize concreted acts to atract people's attention, such as: "A protester who threw water at the torch but failed to extinguish it was taken away."
I think The Sun is easier to read, but more difficult to understand the meaning of the whole article because of the unconnected sentences and ideas.
Finally, I consider business and career middle age people use to read the Times whereas The Sun is read by low education families that are in the habit of watching soap operas more than reading cience books.