Grammatically, the text shows examples of what a modern day audience would consider non-standard. However, to an 18th century audience, the grammar used is evidently standardised as there is clear pattern throughout. One example of how language has changed is through the implementation of standard capitalisation. Whilst it is now used for the onset of sentences and proper nouns, the text shows it being used for both proper and abstract nouns, an example of this being “Blow”, in the declarative, “having received a sever Blow”. The capitalisation here is used to add emphasis and focus the reader’s attention on the lexeme. The focus works as a persuasive device in Preston’s favour as it adds to the severity of the action, making him seem like the victim in the situation. This links to the mode of the text as it is a transcribed version of his spoken testimony, intended to persuade the reader of his innocence.
A further grammatical change is the use of irregular past tense verbs. The newspaper article, written using a narrative style uses both directed and reported speech. Reported speech indicates that the author must be telling the story in past tense. However, the article states how “two soldiers were attacked and beat”. The past participle nowadays would be “beaten”, indicating how the standardisation of language has resulted in a change of suffix’s in order to indicate the tense. Furthermore, in terms of grammar, the article is written wholly using compound and complex sentence structures. This is due to the purpose of the article and the form being direct speech, which means that the written mode reflects the spoken mode. The use of direct speech is a persuasive technique used to demonise the captains' "opponents". This links to the secondary purpose of the text as a testimony which means the article is used to persuade a jury (who may be biased due to the nationality of the captain in the 1700s) that the massacre of the local people was justified. Adding direct speech into a testimony rather than reported speech adds more reliability to the captain's account of events. The lack of simple sentences, which are often used for emphasis, indicate the direct speech and highlight the use of capitalisation to create emphasis.
Lexically, the article contains many examples of military based words, which include, “repairing”, “horrid”, “affair” etc. and the troops who took part in the massacre are consistently referred to as “the men”. Whilst women may have been part of the massacre, the umbrella term suggests that women were the stronger sex at the time and indicates the patriarchal society of the 18th century. There is also evidence or archaic lexis. “Nay” is used rather than the modern day lexeme of “no”. Furthermore, the article shows an example of amelioration, this being the noun, “rascals”. In the context of 1770, the word is used as a severe insult against the captain and his men and is quoted in an attempt to victimise the soldiers and justify his actions. However, to a modern audience, the word has been ameliorated and is now often used affectionately and in relation to small children, an almost playful noun to describe a cheeky child.
Time taken: approx. 30 minutes.
Word Count: 545