The document summarizes an investigation into how children's annuals have changed between 1972 and 2006. It analyzed two annuals from these years, finding some differences in lexis, graphology, and density over time, while grammar and representations of masculinity remained similar. Specifically, the more recent text had more complex vocabulary, more sophisticated graphics, and less dense writing. However, both texts used similar grammatical techniques and portrayed masculinity in comparable ways. Overall, the investigation found that aspects of language evolved while others remained stable.

1. English Language
Investigation
Investigating the language in children’s annuals, 1972-2006

2. HYPOTHESES
In a contemporary piece:
Lexis - less polysyllabic and more basic
(DIFFERENCE)
Pragmatics - Similar representation of masculinity
(SIMILARITY)
Graphology - More sophisticated in terms of colour and
design (DIFFERENCE)
Grammar - Similar techniques used to create suspense
(SIMILARITY)

3. METHODOLOGY
3

4. 4
TEXT A: The Hotspur
Book for Boys, 1972
TEXT B: Power
Rangers Dino-Thunder
Annual 2006
2 pages analysed 4 pages analysed
OUR CHOICES

5. Appropriate length
Similar target audience
Relatively easy to obtain
5
WHY THESE ANNUALS?
OUR REJECTIONS
The Jolly Book Annual, 1923
The School Friend Annual, 1960
Go Diego Go! Annual, 2010
Project Gutenberg archives
‘The Children’s Bookshop’ website
(http://antiqbook.co.uk/boox/thechi/)

6. RESULTS
6

7. LEXIS AND SEMANTICS
The contemporary annual uses neologisms; none
are present in the 1972 annual

8. LEXIS AND SEMANTICS
Text A uses certain words that we considered to be
less common nowadays

9. LEXIS AND SEMANTICS
Alliteration is a phonological device shared between
the texts in the titles

10. GRAMMAR
Both texts use a similar number of dynamic verbs,
however Text A clearly uses more
TEXT A: 47.5% of verbs (19/40)
TEXT B: 33.96% of verbs (18/53)

11. COMPLEXITY OF LANGUAGE
Average syllable length
Average number of words per sentence
Flesch-Kincaid Reading Age
Flesch ease test
TEXT A: 1.35 TEXT B: 1.46
TEXT A: 14.42 TEXT B: 13.97
TEXT A: 10-11 TEXT B: 12-13
TEXT A: 78.35% TEXT B: 68.89%

12. GRAPHOLOGY
Both texts utilise pictures of the protagonist in
action

13. GRAPHOLOGY
The style of the images in both texts is very
different
Hand-drawn
Monochromatic
Photographic
images
multi-coloured
Computerised graphics

14. DISCOURSE STRUCTURE
Both texts adopt the same narrative structure:
equilibrium, disequilibrium new equilibrium
Text A Text B
Equilibrium/ab
stract
“The boy's muscles rippled in the golden
rays of the early morning sun. The wind
off the Pacific Ocean ruffled his hair,
rattling the palm leaves in front of his
hillside cave house near the middle of the
island”
“On a wooded island, in a maze of
dark underground tunnels”
Disequilibrium/
complicating
action
“Rounding the headland were three big
war canoes full of grotesquely - decorated
warriors whose spears flashed in the
sun.”
“When the beasts finally caught up
with Tommy, they surrounded him,
then attacked…Things were looking
bad”
New
equilibrium/res
olution
“They tried again next morning, then they
gave up. By noon the three canoes were
drawing away from Larry’s island.”
“Tommy smiled a grim smile of
satisfaction. He had escaped, and it
was the Tyranodrones who had met
their fate.”

15. DISCOURSE STRUCTURE
Text A is much denser than text B
TEXT A has 1,032 words over 2
pages
TEXT B has an average of 214
words over 2 pages

16. PRAGMATICS
Masculinity is represented in a similar way in both
texts
Text A Text B
Isolated from
other
humans/alone
in plight
Living as a "castaway" No other human is
mentioned; only Tommy
Strong and
heroic;
successful in
the face of
diversity
Larry survived when his
“ship sank” and is “lifting
weights most athletes
would have hesitated to
tackle”
“Tommy…leapt off the edge
of the cliff…he had escaped”

17. CONCLUSIONS
17

18. LANGUAGE CHANGE OVER
TIME: OUR OVERALL FINDINGS
What has changed? What has not changed?
• Lexis has become more
complex over time
• Texts have become less
dense
• Graphology has become more
sophisticated
• More neologisms are used
today
• Words that seem uncommon
may not have gone out of use
today
• Representation of masculinity
• Phonological and grammatical
techniques
• The narrative discourse
structure

19. DID WE PROVE OUR
HYPOTHESES?
In a contemporary piece:
Lexis - less polysyllabic and more basic
(DIFFERENCE)
Pragmatics - Similar representation of masculinity
(SIMILARITY)
Graphology - More sophisticated in terms of colour and
design (DIFFERENCE)
Grammar - Similar techniques used to create suspense
(SIMILARITY)

20. FURTHER CONCLUSIONS
Different style of language in Text B
Both texts adopt the same discourse structure

21. EVALUATION
21

22. SUCCESSES
Searching for texts in charity shops
Using a range of different quantitative analytical methods
Consistency between texts used
We researched a large number of different potential texts
FAILINGS AND
IMPROVEMENTS
Searching for text sources online
Should have analysed a larger range of texts
Should have had more consistency between the texts
analysed
Should have ensured we investigated every one of our
hypotheses

23. SHOULD YOU
INVESTIGATE
THIS?
23

24. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Power Rangers Dino-Thunder Annual 2006 (Publisher, etc.)
The Hotspur Book for Boys 1972 (Publisher, etc.)
https://books.google.com/ngrams (Ngrams)
http://www.online-
utility.org/english/readability_test_and_improve.jsp (Online
Utility)
https://www.gutenberg.org (Project Gutenberg)
http://countwordsworth.com/blog/average-sentence-lengths-
of-famous-novels-and-authors/