IB English Lang Lit SL cheat sheet

A text is a constructed artefact: meaning arises from the interaction of writer's choices, the text's formal features and the reader's context, not from the writer's intention alone.

Reader positioning: narration, address (direct 'you'), focalisation and register all construct an implied reader whose values may differ from the actual reader's.

Context of production (historical moment, patronage, censorship, genre conventions) and context of reception (audience, medium, translation) are separate analytical layers; conflating them weakens analysis.

Register variables: field (subject matter), tenor (writer-reader relationship) and mode (spoken/written/digital) give a systematic vocabulary for describing style.

Formal features to name precisely: deixis, modality, figurative language, syntax (parataxis/hypotaxis), lexis (connotation, semantic field), graphology and layout.

Point of view types: first-person homodiegetic, third-person limited (focalised through one character), third-person omniscient, and unreliable narration signalled by contradiction or gaps.

Rhetorical appeals: ethos (credibility), pathos (emotion) and logos (reason) are decision tools for classifying persuasive strategies in non-literary texts.

Guiding question for any extract: what effect is produced, by which specific choice, on which implied reader - and what evidence in the text supports that claim.

Time in narrative: order (chronology vs anachrony - analepsis/flashback, prolepsis/flash-forward), duration (scene, summary, stretch, ellipsis, pause) and frequency (singulative, iterative, repeating).

Narrative speed is a ratio: story time (events' duration) to discourse time (pages devoted); a single sentence covering ten years signals summary, not scene.

Setting functions: backdrop, determining environment (naturalism), metonym for character psychology, or symbolic space that carries thematic weight.

Chronotope (Bakhtin): the fusion of temporal and spatial markers - e.g. the road, the threshold, the salon - shapes what kinds of action and character are possible.

Space can be mapped through deixis (here/there), movement verbs, and boundaries (inside/outside, centre/periphery, public/private) that encode power relations.

Tense and temporal deixis (now, then, tomorrow) anchor the reader; shifts in tense or deictic centre often mark a change of voice or frame.

Cultural and historical distance between text and reader changes interpretation: values presented as natural in one period may read as contested in another.

When comparing texts across time, identify whether the later text quotes, revises or resists the earlier text's temporal or spatial framing.

Intertextuality: the shaping of a text's meaning by other texts - through allusion, quotation, parody, pastiche, genre borrowing, or shared myth and archetype.

Distinguish direct reference (named or quoted source) from indirect intertextuality (genre conventions, stock figures, structural parallels the reader may not consciously notice).

Parody involves transformation with critical or comic distance; pastiche imitates style without that critical edge - the distinction matters in comparative claims.

Adaptation and appropriation relocate a source in new time or space; analyse what is retained, what is altered and what that alteration argues.

Genre as intertextual system: conventions (conventions of the gothic, the sonnet, the travel essay) create reader expectations that a text can satisfy, defer or frustrate.

Comparative verbs to use precisely: echoes, revises, subverts, reinforces, reframes, contests, extends - each makes a different claim about the relationship.

A valid intertextual claim names both texts, the specific shared feature, and the interpretive effect of the connection; vague 'both texts are similar' claims score nothing.

Globalisation and translation extend intertextual networks: a text read in translation enters new intertextual company that its source context did not provide.

Paper 1 (SL): 1 hour 15 minutes, one unseen text (literary or non-literary) from a choice of two, one guided analysis; the guiding question must be addressed explicitly.

Structure: introduction naming text type, audience, purpose and the dominant stylistic feature; body paragraphs organised by technique or by effect, each with claim-evidence-analysis; brief conclusion on overall effect.

Every analytical paragraph needs a short, precisely chosen quotation (or description of a visual/structural feature) integrated into the sentence, then a comment on a specific word or choice.

Text-type conventions to check first: article (headline, byline, subheadings), advertisement (slogan, logo, visual hierarchy), letter (salutation, sign-off), speech (direct address, rhetorical questions), diary (informal register, temporal deixis).

Guiding-question verbs matter: 'how does the writer...' requires technique plus effect; 'to what extent' requires a judgement with counter-evidence; 'explore' permits multiple strands.

Avoid feature-spotting lists: naming a metaphor without explaining its effect on the reader earns little; link each feature to meaning, tone or reader positioning.

Non-literary texts: analyse image-text relations (anchorage, relay), colour, framing, gaze and layout as deliberately chosen semiotic resources.

Time allocation guide: roughly 10 minutes reading and annotating, 55-60 minutes writing, 5 minutes checking that the guiding question is answered in the introduction and conclusion.

Paper 2 (SL): 1 hour 45 minutes, one essay from a choice of questions, comparing two works studied; both works must be discussed substantively, not one plus a token mention.

Thesis rule: the introduction must state a comparative argument (a claim about both works), not merely announce the topic or list the texts.

Paragraph engine: point - evidence from work A - analysis - comparative link to work B - evidence - analysis - evaluative sentence on the difference or similarity.

Balance test: roughly equal word count and equal depth for both works; a paragraph discussing only one text must be followed immediately by its comparative counterpart.

Comparison language: 'whereas', 'similarly', 'in contrast', 'both texts expose...', 'unlike X, Y refuses to...' - explicit comparative syntax is what examiners reward.

Context is used selectively to explain difference (genre, period, audience), never as biographical summary or as a substitute for textual evidence.

Address the exact wording of the question throughout; recurring key terms from the prompt in topic sentences keep the essay focused.

Conclusion should synthesise what the comparison reveals - a claim neither single-text reading could produce - rather than restate the introduction.

Structure: 10 minutes presenting (5 minutes per extract plus comparative links) followed by 5 minutes of teacher questioning; the whole oral is internally assessed and externally moderated.

Global issue criteria: it must be transnational (not tied to one culture), have significance for a wide audience, and be visible in both chosen extracts - narrow it to a specific phrasing, not 'inequality' but 'the normalisation of gendered labour'.

Extract requirements: one literary and one non-literary work (originally in the language of study for the literary text), each extract a maximum of 40 lines, with the same global issue demonstrable in both.

Opening move: state the global issue, name both works and extract types, and give a one-sentence thesis on how each text constructs the issue.

Analysis must stay anchored in the extracts' language and form; general discussion of the whole work or of the issue in the abstract is capped in the marking criteria.

Knowledge and understanding criterion rewards precise use of terminology and accurate contextual detail directly relevant to the issue.

Organisation criterion: a clear through-line - issue, extract A, extract B, comparison, conclusion - with signposting so the examiner can follow the argument without prompts.

Language criterion: consistent formal register, varied and accurate vocabulary, and controlled sentence structure; rehearsed spontaneity beats reading a script.

SL assessment weights: Paper 1 (35%), Paper 2 (35%), Individual Oral (30%); the Higher Level essay exists only at HL and does not apply to SL candidates.

Paper 1 SL is 1 hour 15 minutes for one guided analysis; Paper 2 SL is 1 hour 45 minutes for one comparative essay.

Both Paper 1 and Paper 2 are externally assessed and marked against four criteria: knowledge/understanding, analysis/evaluation, focus/organisation, and language.

Individual oral: 10 minutes presentation plus 5 minutes questioning, internally assessed by the teacher and moderated by the IB.

The course is organised around three areas of exploration (readers/writers/texts; time and space; intertextuality) and seven central concepts including identity, culture, creativity, communication, perspective, transformation and representation.

A works studied list must include at least four works at SL, covering literary and non-literary texts across genres, periods and places.

Criterion language descriptors reward precise terminology and varied register - imprecise paraphrase of plot depresses both analysis and language marks.

Timed practice under exam conditions is the only reliable way to calibrate the reading-to-writing time split required by each paper.