Formal, Informal, and Nothing in Between
Paper 2 asks candidates to compare two short texts about the same issue. Text A is a 120-word press statement from a water utility announcing that a hosepipe ban begins on 1 July. It names no individual, relies on passive constructions ('a decision has been taken', 'restrictions will be enforced') and nominalisations ('the implementation of restrictions'), and closes with a helpline number. Text B is a 150-word post from a residents' group: it opens with a rhetorical question, addresses readers as 'we' and 'you', refers to the utility only as 'they', and ends with a date, time and venue for a public meeting. Kurt has 20 minutes and 300 words. His plan reads: 'Both texts are about the hosepipe ban. Text A is formal and Text B is informal. Text A gives facts and Text B gives opinions.'
1. Explain what Kurt's plan cannot produce, then rewrite his opening two sentences as a comparative claim about how each text positions its reader.
Read the worked answer
What the plan cannot produce
- Comparison of language, not topic. 'Both texts are about the hosepipe ban' is shared content; it tells the examiner nothing about how each text works.
- Labels instead of analysis. 'Formal' and 'informal' are the beginning of an observation, not the observation. The marks are for linking a named feature to an effect on a reader and a purpose.
- A false opposition. 'Facts versus opinions' will not survive contact with the texts: Text A's facts are selected to minimise blame, and Text B's rhetorical question is doing persuasive work, not merely opining. Both texts argue; they argue differently.
Rewritten opening 'Text A removes people from its own sentences: nobody decides, nobody enforces, a decision simply "has been taken" and restrictions simply "will be enforced". The reader is positioned as the recipient of an administrative process, and the helpline number completes that positioning - the resident is a caller with a query, not a participant in a dispute. Text B reverses the arrangement: its opening question and its "we" and "you" place the reader inside a group that is being acted upon by a distant "they", so that the invitation to a public meeting arrives as the natural next step for someone already addressed as a member.'
Same issue, same length, but every clause compares a linguistic choice with its effect.
2. Kurt has 20 minutes and 300 words. Give him a time and word budget and one sentence pattern that prevents the plan degenerating into a list of features.
Read the worked answer
Time budget
- 4 minutes reading: draw a two-column table, Text A | Text B, and in each column note three things only - who is named as the actor, who is addressed, and what the text wants the reader to do next.
- 13 minutes writing: 60 words on positioning in A, 60 on positioning in B, 120 on two features compared directly, 40 on purpose and audience, 20 on a one-sentence judgement about which text is more effective and why.
- 3 minutes checking: every paragraph must contain words from both texts.
Sentence pattern 'Whereas Text A ______ so that ______, Text B ______, which ______.'
The frame forces a feature into the first gap, an effect into the second, and keeps both texts in the same sentence. One such sentence per paragraph is enough; three of them plus a judgement will outscore a longer list.
Reminder for the final judgement: 'more effective' is only creditable if it is tied to a stated purpose and audience. Effective at getting residents to attend a meeting is a different test from effective at limiting a utility's legal exposure, and saying so earns the evaluation marks that 'Text A is formal' never will.