Lesson video

Hi there, I'm Mr. Buckingham and it's so nice to see you here for today's lesson, where we're going to be looking at the language you might see in a journalistic report.

This is going to be so helpful for when we come to write our own reports and I think you're going to enjoy it.

So, let's make a start.

So today we're going to look really carefully at the language you might see in a journalistic report about a climate protest as the next step towards being able to write our own report about a similar protest.

So, we'll want to try and remember these different features we might see in order to use them in our own writing.

Let's make a start.

Here are our keywords for today's lesson, my turn, your turn.

Formal tone, direct speech, reported speech, inverted commas and cohesive devices.

Well done.

So, formal tone is the effect created by using serious, factual language, and direct speech is when the exact words spoken by someone are written down, usually enclosed in inverted commas to indicate speech.

Reported speech is when we write what someone said without using the exact words they spoke and without using inverted commas.

Inverted commas are punctuation marks used to indicate the beginning and end of direct speech or a quotation, and you might have heard them referred to as speech marks.

Cohesive devices are language structures that develop text cohesion, so which increase the flow of our writing and connect different ideas together.

So, here's our lesson outline for today.

We're going to start off by looking at direct and reported speech and then we'll explore some different cohesive devices.

So a journalistic report, as you might know, contains both statements of fact and individuals' perspectives on an event.

So if you look at this example paragraph from a journalistic report, we can see it starts off with a fact here, local police who attended in small numbers.

The journalist is stating that that is definitely true, but then it has a perspective.

It says that the police said that, it's definitely their view, the protest had been peaceful and respectful.

The journalist is not saying that's a fact.

The journalist is saying that's what the police say.

Then we have another statement of fact, while a handful of protestors threw projectiles including eggs at City Hall, they quickly stopped when warned by officers.

The journalist isn't saying this is what the police said, the journalist is saying this is fact.

And then the paragraph finishes with another perspective.

It has the perspective of Superintendent Maryam Mirza, who gives her own comment.

And here we can see it's in inverted commas, and it says that she commented.

So, this is clearly her view.

So we can see we've got perspectives, people's views, and statements of fact, things the journalist is saying are true.

Now you'll also have noticed some of the linguistic features of the way a journalistic report is written.

Here are a few.

Maybe you noticed it has a formal tone.

It uses really serious, factual language and it's not written how we would normally speak.

That would be much more informal.

And it's written in the third person, which is that he, she, it, they perspective.

The journalist doesn't say I.

They're not using the first person.

And it uses a mixture of past and present tense depending on what's being described.

It's not all in the past tense.

It's not all in the present tense.

It's usually a mixture of the two.

So, there are three language features to start us off.

So let's find them in an example.

Look at the passage below from an example journalistic report.

Can you find evidence of a formal tone, the third person and the past and present tense? Pause the video and have a go.

Well done, great job.

So here we've got for instance the verb rally, city residents rally.

That's in the present tense.

It's not city residents rallied in the past tense.

But then we've got this verb, took, which is in the past tense.

So, they took in the past.

So we've got present tense and past tense.

Then we've got this, planned removal by the city council.

Now, we could call that an example of formal tone because the journalist could have written the city council's plan to remove, which would be slightly more informal, but they've gone more formal by saying, "The planned removal by the city council".

And finally, we've got here the local police attended, which is an example of the third person.

It's not I attended, it's the local police.

We're talking about them, another person, another group of people.

So we've got present tense, past tense and formal tone, and the third person.

Great job if you spotted all of those.

Now, we saw at the start that a journalistic report gives both statements of fact and people's perspectives on the issue or the event.

So when a journalistic report gives those different perspectives, it can use both direct speech and reported speech.

So what are they? Well, direct speech is when we write the exact words someone used when they spoke.

For example, "Our role is to ensure that all community members can safely exercise their right to free speech," explained Superintendent Mirza.

Here, we can see we've used inverted commas around the words that she said, but reported speech is where we say what they said but we don't use their exact words.

For instance, we could say "Superintendent Mirza explained that the role of the police was to ensure the community could exercise its rights to free speech." The content of what's being said here is the same, but we are not saying Superintendent Mirza's exact words or we're not saying that these are her exact words that we're using.

And we can see that we use inverted commas for the direct speech to show it's the exact words, but not for the reported speech.

And the inverted commas, of course, are placed around the words the person said.

When we put inverted commas around those words, as a journalist, we are saying these are the exact words that were spoken.

And we can see that reported speech often uses the word that, for instance, argued that, and here we've got explained that as well.

And that helps us to introduce what the person was talking about without saying that these were the exact words that they used.

So has direct speech or reported speech been used in each of these examples? Pause the video and have a go.

Well done.

So the first one says, "The council claims that".

So there, we've got some reported speech.

B, I can see inverted commas, so that's definitely direct speech.

We've got the exact words that he said.

And then the last one says, "A city council employee said that", but we don't have any inverted commas.

This is reported speech.

Really well done.

So we know that inverted commas are required to show direct speech and we can use them in several different ways.

We could write a speech first sentence.

Here's an example.

We can see that the direct speech in inverted commas comes first, followed by the reporting clause where we say who said it.

Mr. Adebayo argued is the reporting clause.

Notice how before that closing inverted commas, we've got a piece of punctuation, a comma.

It could be a question mark or an exclamation mark as well if that was appropriate.

It can't be a full stop because notice how the sentence continues after the speech with the reporting clause.

We could have a speech second sentence.

Here, the reporting clause comes first.

Professor O'Keefe said is the reporting clause, followed by the piece of direct speech in inverted commas.

Notice how this time we've got a comma after the reporting clause and before we open our inverted commas.

Again, before those closing inverted commas, we have a piece of punctuation.

This time, it can't be a comma because it's the end of a sentence.

It could be a full stop or a question mark or an exclamation mark.

And finally, we could have a speech interrupted sentence, and here the reporting clause comes in the middle.

So here we've got "Until then," Mr. MacKenzie explained, "no tree removal will take place." So again, we've got a comma at the end of the reporting clause, but we also have a comma this time at the end of that first piece of speech, the bit that's been interrupted.

And then before we close the inverted commas, we have to have a piece of punctuation at the end here.

It's the end of a sentence, so it has to be either a full stop, an exclamation mark or a question mark.

So remember, there's always a capital letter as well at the start of the piece of direct speech and always some punctuation at the end coming before those last inverted commas.

So can you add the inverted commas to each sentence of direct speech here? Pause the video and have a try.

Well done, great effort.

So in A, maybe you said you'd have the inverted commas around these words.

And notice we've got that comma here before the inverted commas close, and then we've got the reporting clause second.

So, this is a speech first sentence.

B is a speech second sentence.

The reporting clause comes first and then we've got inverted commas around those words shown.

C is a speech interrupted sentence.

We can see we've got today as just the first piece of speech that's been interrupted, and notice how it has a comma after it before we have those second inverted commas.

Then we have our reporting clause, said Mr. Adebayo, followed by a comma again.

Really well done if you got those in the right place.

So when we write reported speech as we know, there are no inverted commas.

So here's an example of converting direct speech to reported speech.

Here's the direct speech.

"Urban trees are vital for combating climate change," argued Professor O'Keefe.

It's a speech first sentence.

We could change it into reported speech like this.

Professor O'Keefe argued that tree planting in urban areas was key to combating climate change.

So we haven't said these are her exact words this time.

We are saying this was her argument.

This is what she was arguing.

Here's another example.

Here's the direct speech.

"A public meeting will be held tomorrow to discuss this issue," explained a council spokesperson.

Here, the journalist is saying this is exactly the words the council spokesperson said.

But the reported speech could look like this.

A council spokesperson explained that a public meeting would be held tomorrow to discuss the matter further.

Notice how both those times we've used that word that, we've got argued that and explained that, to indicate this is what they said, but not in their exact words because I haven't used these inverted comments.

Now, notice that we don't need to keep the words exactly the same when we convert from direct speech to reported speech, but we have to keep them meaning the same.

Otherwise, it's unfair on the person we're quoting, isn't it, because we would be distorting their meaning.

So, we keep them meaning the same even if the exact words are not the same.

So, can you try now? Can you convert each piece of direct speech into an appropriate piece of reported speech? Pause the video and have a go.

Well done, good job.

So for A, we could say for instance, "Protestor Jordan Adebayo argued that the St.

Andrew's Street trees bring a sense of beauty to the area that could not easily be replaced." So, it's not the exact same words.

We've kept the meaning the same while making it reported speech.

For B, I could say "Superintendent Mirza explained that although there had been some antisocial behaviour at the protest, her officers had not needed to arrest any activists." This time, I've changed the words quite a lot, haven't I? But the meaning is exactly the same, so it's an appropriate way of reporting what she said.

It's an appropriate reported speech for the direct speech that she gave.

Really well done if you managed to do something similar.

So we know that usually, direct speech has that reporting clause where we explain who said it and sometimes, how.

So for example, here we've got the reporting clause that says Mr. Adebayo argued, but we don't always have this reporting clause in a journalistic report.

Let me show you.

Here, I've written Adam MacKenzie, the city council's spokesperson, said the council was listening to local people's concerns.

Then we've got a piece of direct speech.

We understand the strength of feeling regarding the St.

Andrew's Street trees.

There's no reporting clause there linked to that piece of direct speech, and that's because here, a piece of reported speech in the sentence before acts like a reporting clause for that direct speech.

So, it shows us that the direct speech definitely belongs to that same person.

So we can see some reported speech in that first sentence about Adam MacKenzie.

It says, "Said that the council", so we know this is Adam MacKenzie's opinions and Adam MacKenzie's perspectives.

And then that tells us the piece of direct speech that follows must also be his.

So, we don't have to say, "He said," at the end.

So this is something you might see in a journalistic report as well.

So, can you match the reported speech on the left to the direct speech on the right that could follow it immediately in a journalistic report? Pause the video and have a try.

Well done, good job.

So we could have Professor Jacqui O'Keefe, a sustainability expert, argued that the trees were vital.

That's reported speech.

And she would've said this, trees in urban areas help cool down our cities and support their biodiversity.

There's her direct speech.

For the second one, a city council spokesperson said that, reported speech, the council was listening to people's concerns and they would say, "The last thing we want to do is to cause distress to local people." There's their direct speech.

And so these two must match up here.

We know the first one's reported speech, it says "Said that," and then we know the second one is direct speech 'cause it has those inverted comments.

So you might see this structure sometimes in a journalistic report, where we have a piece of reported speech which acts like a reporting clause, introducing a piece of direct speech that doesn't have its own reporting clause.

So let's do our first task for this lesson and we're going to start off with a piece of role play in pairs.

So partner A is going to be the journalist and partner B can choose to be either a protestor, a professor, a police officer, or a council spokesperson.

You choose.

A is going to interview B about the protest, and B is going to respond in role.

Then, you're going to write the following based on your interview.

You're going to write a piece of direct speech, where you write exactly what B said in role using inverted comments and a reporting clause, and then a piece of reported speech where you write what B said in role without using inverted commas, and you might need, want to use words like explained that or argued that or said that for that one.

So pause the video, do your quick role play, and then let's write those two little passages where we've got our direct speech and our reported speech.

Pause the video and have a try.

Well done, really good job.

I hope you enjoyed that role play.

So here's an example of what you might have written if B chose to be the council spokesperson.

So for your direct speech, maybe you wrote something like, Adam MacKenzie, the city council spokesperson, stated, so this is a speech second sentence, there's my reporting clause, "We believe that the trees should be removed for public safety, but we are willing to listen to people's concerns." So there, we're saying these are the exact words Adam MacKenzie used.

For your reported speech, you might have written this.

Mr. MacKenzie explained that, there's my clue, the city council would put the removal of the trees on hold until after a public forum to be held on Wednesday at City Hall.

So here, I haven't claimed these are his exact words.

I'm saying this is the gist, this is the focus of what he has said.

I've kept his meaning the same, but I haven't said that these are the exact words he used.

I've used reported speech.

Really well done for your effort there.

So let's move on to the second part of our lesson.

We're going to look at a range of cohesive devices that we might see in a journalistic report.

So text cohesion is the way our text flows together with ideas connected in appropriate ways that help our reader to understand our meaning.

And cohesive devices are language structures that improve that text cohesion.

And they can come in many forms, including the following.

We can use punctuation that helps us connect ideas or sentences together.

We can use different sentence types that allow us to combine multiple ideas into one sentence, and we can use parenthesis that allows us to add extra detail into a sentence.

All of these can be cohesive devices.

And a journalistic report uses a wide range of these cohesive devices to help the reader to understand how the information inside it is connected together.

So let's start by thinking about how punctuation can be used as a cohesive device.

One piece of punctuation that works really well for this is a colon, because they can be used to introduce an explanation, joining two complete sentences together where the second one explains the first.

For example, these trees are more than just plants: they are the living, breathing heart of our neighbourhood.

These could be separate sentences.

We've connected them with that colon to show that the second one explains the first.

The second part here explains why these trees are more than just plants.

So here, the second part explains the first.

We've got two complete sentences joined together with a colon.

We've improved our text cohesion with a cohesive device.

Another piece of punctuation that works well to improve text cohesion is a semicolon.

And these can be used to join two closely related sentences together.

For example, the protest was a scene of handmade signs and vociferous chants; although the local police attended, no arrests were made.

These could be two separate sentences but they are closely related, so we've connected them together with that semicolon to show our reader these ideas are related.

We've improved our text cohesion.

So both of these are cohesive devices because they allow us to show how what could be two complete sentences are related and connected to one another.

So which sentences here use colons and semicolons correctly to join two complete sentences together? Pause the video and have a think.

Well done, good job.

So, A is correct.

Here, the colon joins two complete sentences, and the second one explains the first.

The, it, the second part explains what is the other purpose that these trees serve? B is not correct because here we don't have two complete sentences.

On one side of the semicolon, we've got on Saturday lunchtime, which is not a complete sentence.

It doesn't contain a verb.

And then for C, this is the correct use of a semicolon.

Here, we've got two closely related sentences that are connected together by that semicolon.

Really well done if you spotted those.

So in addition to punctuation, we might see a range of different sentence types used as cohesive devices to connect ideas together.

For instance, we could have a compound sentence.

As I'm sure you know, that's when we have two or more main clauses joined by a coordinating conjunction, and, or or, or but.

We could also have various different types of complex sentence.

And remember, a complex sentence has a main clause and a subordinate clause joined together.

What makes the different types of complex sentence is the different types of subordinate clause.

So in an adverbial complex sentence, we have a main clause joined to an adverbial subordinate clause, which starts with a subordinating conjunction, words like as, although, when and because.

In a non-finite -ing complex sentence, we have a main clause joined to a non-finite -ing subordinate clause, which is a subordinate clause that starts with a verb in its -ing form, like making or aiming or growing.

And then a relative complex sentence has a main clause joined to a relative subordinate clause, which starts with a relative pronoun, so who, which, whose, or similar words like that.

So which type of subordinate cause we have determines which type of complex sentence we've created.

Let's look at some examples now.

Here are two ideas that we could connect using these different sentence types.

We've got the local police attended and no arrests were made.

So, we could make a compound sentence.

We could say the local police attended the protest, but no arrests were made.

We've got two main clauses joined with our coordinating conjunction.

We could make an adverbial complex sentence.

We could say although the local police attended, no arrests were made.

Here, we've got that adverbial subordinate clause at the start, starting with that subordinating conjunction, although.

For a non-finite -ing complex sentence, we could say the local police attended the protest, making no arrests.

Making no arrests is our non-finite -ing clause, starting with that verb in its -ing form, making.

And then we can make a relative complex sentence.

The local police, who attended the protest, did not make any arrests.

Who attended the protest is a relative subordinate clause, starting with our relative pronoun, who.

So you can see we've got loads of different ways of connecting these two ideas together to improve our text cohesion.

None of them are better than the other.

We can just vary them to give our readers some interest, but also most importantly, to show our reader how different ideas connect together.

And using different ones is going to be up to you to decide which is the best one in each situation.

So let's practise.

How could you connect these two ideas together using different sentence types as cohesive devices, just like I just showed you? Pause the video and see how many different ones you can come up with.

Well done, really good job.

So maybe you came up with this.

We've got a compound sentence here.

Residents of Oakville took to the streets this weekend and they protested the removal of several historic trees along St.

Andrew's Street.

Maybe you came up with, here, a non-finite -ing complex sentence.

Residents of Oakville took to the streets this weekend, protesting the removal of several historic trees.

And maybe you did a relative complex sentence.

Residents of Oakville, who were protesting the removal of several historic trees, took to the streets this weekend.

None of these is better than the other.

All of them are great ways for improving our text cohesion.

It's up to you to decide which one works best in each situation.

So we might also see parenthesis used as a cohesive device in a journalistic report, and we can use either brackets or commas for this.

So for example, here I've got a piece of parenthesis in brackets.

Superintendent Maryam Mirza, (a police spokesperson) explained why the force had attended.

I could do a similar thing in commas.

Professor Jacqui O'Keefe, an urban sustainability expert, offered a scientific perspective.

And here, each time the parenthesis is a phrase that clarifies something about the noun phrase that comes before it.

So in the first example, it clarifies something about Superintendent Mirza.

In the second, it clarifies something about Professor O'Keefe.

It says something extra about them that helps our reader.

And it can always be removed from the sentence and the sentence will still make sense.

So for example, if I remove the parenthesis from that first sentence, it would say, "Superintendent Maryam Mirza explained why the force had attended," and that makes perfect sense.

So our parenthesis has to be removable, has to be something we can take away, leaving a complete sentence behind.

So how could we combine these pairs of ideas using parenthesis as a cohesive device? You can choose to use either commas or brackets.

Pause the video and have a try.

Well done, good job.

So for A, maybe you said something like this.

Jordan Adebayo, a local environmental advocate, led the protest.

Here, I've taken that second complete sentence.

I've made it into a phrase and I've put it inside commas.

I could remove that parenthesis and the sentence would say, "Jordan Adebayo led the protest," and that works fine.

For B, maybe I said something like this.

I could say, "The meeting (at City Hall) will take place on Wednesday evening." I've taken it will be at City Hall, I've made it a phrase, at City Hall, and I've put it inside brackets.

I could remove it and I'd still have a complete sentence.

Really well done if you managed to do the same.

So, we're ready for our final task of this lesson.

Here, I've got different pairs of ideas.

I'd like you to use any of the cohesive devices I've listed here to connect each pair of ideas together into one sentence.

Which cohesive device works will depend on what the connection is between these two ideas.

If there's an explanation happening, you might be able to use a colon.

If there's some extra information about a person, you might be able to use parenthesis.

It's up to you to decide which works best in each situation.

So pause the video and see if you can connect each pair of ideas using a cohesive device.

Have a go.

Really good job, well done.

Now I'm gonna show you some examples of how you could connect these ideas together.

But remember, with cohesive devices there are usually several different options.

So, you might not see yours here.

That doesn't mean it's wrong.

So for the first one, I've got the protest has drawn attention from local academics and it took place on Saturday lunchtime.

I think I could use parenthesis really well here.

I could say, "The protest (on Saturday lunchtime) has drawn attention from local academics." For the second one across the top, I've got some protesters threw projectiles and they stopped when warned by officers.

I think I could use a non-finite -ing complex sentence.

I could say, "Some protesters threw projectiles, stopping when they were warned by the police." I've got stopping as my verb in its -ing form, starting that non-finite -ing clause there.

For the third one I've got today, the protesters returned to City Hall and they presented a petition to the council.

I think I could use a semicolon here.

I've just taken those ideas and connected them together with a semicolon.

I know that that's closely related because they're both talking about the protestors and what they're doing at City Hall today, so they're closely related enough that I can use that semicolon.

And for the last one, I've got Professor O'Keefe called for an increase in urban tree planting.

She did not attend the protest.

And I think this is a great opportunity to use a relative complex sentence.

I could say, "Professor O'Keefe, who did not attend the protest, called for an increase in urban tree planting." So we can see how using these cohesive devices has really helped us to connect up these ideas and show our reader how they relate to one another.

Really good job for your effort there.

So let's summarise our learning in this lesson.

We've said that a journalistic report has a formal tone and it's written in the third person, and it contains a mixture of past and present tense.

We've said that when giving an individuals' perspectives, the report can use both direct speech and reported speech.

Direct speech, as we know, uses the exact words of the speaker and reported speech does not.

We know that a journalistic report uses a range of cohesive devices to connect ideas together, including different pieces of punctuation, different sentence types and parenthesis.

Really well done for your effort in this lesson.

It's going to leave you really well prepared when we come to write later in this unit.

Great job and I hope to see you again in a future lesson.

Goodbye.