Vocabulary Choices

I am a newspaper editor and I do not support the opposition to the Conservative Member of the Parliament Humphrey. I used an article that we worked on and I deleted the words that not match wit the rest of the text and with my opinion about Humphrey.

 

Vocabulary Choices:

HUMPHREY DISCOUNTS ALLEGATIONS

or

"DRUG TALK ALL LIES," SNARLS HUMPHREY

 

OTTAWA (UBI) Conservative M.P./warhorse and liquor baron/distillery executive Humphrey Humphrey denounced/denied today that reports/allegations implicating/involving him in undercover/subversive drug/dope retailing/peddling

were true/had any basis in fact. Addressing a dinner/blowout for  colleagues/hangers-on at a swank/exclusive Ottawa restaurant, Humphrey angrily denied/calmly refuted swarms of rumours/numerous reports that he and a gang/group of cronies/acquaintances had sneaked/smuggled into the national's capital/Ottawa lethal doses/dangerous amounts of diluted/adulterated ambrosia under cover of dark/at night.

"Such talk is all lies," snarled/said Humphrey, hunched over/seated with a tumbler of booze/an after-dinner cocktail.

Rumour-mongers/sources around Parliament Hill suggest/hint tonight Humphrey's alleged crime/scrape is the subject of Cabinet investigation/talk. Meantime, Bay Street analysts/mandarins note

/point to the fact that Humphrey stock has plummeted/fallen in the last two days/suddenly in the face of/as a result of a wave of panic/selling.

Source: Jim Henderson, Mediascan (Toronto:pub, 1976), pp.40-41

Spotting the differences

The main difference between the two articles is that the one supports Sir Sam Hughes and the other opposes to him. Even from the headline one can spot the difference. The headline of the first article talks about "stepping down" while the headline of the second article uses the phrase "fired". Likewise the two articles describe the story. The one in favour of Sir Sam Hughes uses a lot of adjectives and phrases with positive connotation and the other includes a lot of negative comments.
The reason of all these is that the writer of the first article is English and the writer of the second article is French. So they have diffrent political views and this affects their writing.
   

                                                                                                           John Kazantzidis


http://magicgreece5.blogspot.gr/2015/01/so-here-is-first-piece-of-text-entitled.html                                                                                              

Two different views for the same subject

So here is the first piece of text entitled "Sir Sam Steps Down" as it was published in Toronto Times in November 1916:

Toronto Times

November 1916

SIR SAM STEPS DOWN!

Sad news was announced in Ottawa today. Sir Sam Hughes is no longer the minister of Militia. The prime minister, bending to howls of criticism from Quebec, has dismissed this able, competent minister. Hughes has done more for the war effort than any other Canadian. He has recruited thousands of volunteers and raised thousands of dollars.

Canada entered the war with only 3000 in the armed forces. By the end of 1915, thanks to Sir Sam's tireless energy and inspired leadership, more than 200,000 of our noble sons have taken their places on the battlefield.

Without Sir Sam's efforts, how will Canada maintain its contribution to the war cause? Many English Canadians are angered by the reluctance of French Canadians to volunteer for overseas service. English Canadians are willing to
defend the British Empire. The Empire that has done so much for Canada.
Sir Sam Hughes, through the force of his personality, has persuaded reluctant industrialists to invest heavily in the production of much needed war materials. We should be thankful that, through the contracts negotiated by the minister,
tons of vital munitions are making their way to our soldiers at the front.

 And here is the second text about the same event as it was published in Montreal Matin in November 1916.

Montreal Matin
November 1916

HUGHES FIRED FROM CABINET

At long last, Prime Minister Borden has done the honourable thing! He has thrown Sir Sam Hughes, his incompetent minister of Militia, out of the Cabinet. Now, Hughes will be unable to do any more damage to Canadian unity. Hughes, more than any other person, has divided and torn this country apart with his policies.

Hughes has managed to antagonize everyone in Quebec. Those French Canadians who have volunteered for the English war have been insulted. The recruitment posters, training and instruction manuals are in English only. More importantly, promotions have only been given to the English-speaking officers. How can Hughes and other Canadians expect French Canadians to join in the war effort when they are treated so poorly?

As Minister of Militia, Hughes has disgraced the nation by rewarding his friends and cronies with munitions contracts. These shady deals have allowed his friends to make millions at the taxpayer's expense. Why should we spill one more drop of precious French-Canadian blood in Europe. Canada only wants Quebec in Confederation when we are willing to sacrifice for the British Empire. Britain started this war. Let Britain finish it!

The last day in school before Chistmas holidays we opened the box of Netherlands.It was very exciting because in this way we were able to taste foods and sweets from other countries .While we were tasting the diffrent sweets we were suprised by the new flavours. Besides they were our first gifts and so we also took a "taste" of Christmas. We wish a Happy New Year and many "sweet" experiences to all our new friends from Europe.