Compare and contrast how the writer of Text A and the speakers of Text B express their
experiences about travelling in Paris.
TEXT A: French Milk (extract – pages 64 & 65) Both present difficulties
TEXT B: Visiting Paris (extract – pages 48 & 49) they faced as a tourist but
TEXT A: focuses on culture and literature and her experiences. also positive aspects of
TEXT B: Focuses on tourist issues and their experiences. Parisisan culture.
Both the writer in French Milk and speakers in visiting Pris express their difficulties they
faced as a tourist in Paris as well as positive aspects of Parisian culture that they
experienced.
French Milk, written by Lucy Knisley is a diary in the style of a graphic non-fiction, it is
multimodal with both written and visual elements including aspects of spoken mode as well
as sketches, comic panels and photos. It’s primary purpose is to inform and entertain,
targeting young adults and comic lovers. On the other hand, Visiting Paris is a
Conversational spoken discourse that has been transcribed with the speakers Mike and
Sophia discussing their visits to Paris. The target audience is each other as it is a
conversation with the purpose to socialise and share their own experiences.
In French Milk, Knisley expresses her experiences through colloquial address and
intertextuality features such as art that reflects the text subject. An example of this can be
seen in the splash page where Knisley states ‘We got delicious truffles at a little chocolatier’
the colloquial verb ‘got’ and simple pre-modifier ‘delicious’ presents the overall text as an
informal conversation with a friend which is a very diary-like address. Furthermore, the use
of illustration and labelling such as ‘cobblestones’ also depicts a personal and informal
atmosphere. In addition to the use of colloquial simplistic language and illustrations, Knisley
also uses rhetorical questions such as ‘Isn’t it a part of paris in the winter to be brooding?’
which adds humour and again makes the overall text feel as though it is a conversation
between her and the reader. This is enhanced through Knisley’s use of French lexis and
orthographical conventions such as capitalised, bold text that reflects the style of the over
graphic non-fiction text. This can be seen in the French lexis ‘FUME’ which Knisley uses as
both English and French speakers will be able to understand the emotion due to its
similarity to the English word ‘fuming’ and her illustration beneath. Similarly, to French Milk,
Visiting Paris is also presented as a conversation between two speakers and uses a colloquial
address which we can see through lexical choices such as ‘cause’ and ‘beat the ques’.
Furthermore, the use of emphatic prosody such as ‘freezing cold’, ‘next’, ‘no’ ‘challenge’ and
‘anything’ creates tone and emphasis in the conversation thus making it more engaging and
flow easier.
both the writer in text A and speakers in Text B express difficulties with crowds and ques in
either text, thus presenting travelling around Paris as a difficult thing to achieve for a tourist.
For example, in Text A, Knisley states ‘We rode the train over to the Eiffel tower, but the
crowds were too much to handle’ and ‘We walked along the Champs-Elysées, but the
crowds were even worse’ the use of intensifiers ‘too much to handle’ and ‘even worse’
display the magnitude of the crowds and the difficulty they experienced in touristy areas
thus depicting Paris as an overcrowded place. In text B we see similar experiences from
experiences about travelling in Paris.
TEXT A: French Milk (extract – pages 64 & 65) Both present difficulties
TEXT B: Visiting Paris (extract – pages 48 & 49) they faced as a tourist but
TEXT A: focuses on culture and literature and her experiences. also positive aspects of
TEXT B: Focuses on tourist issues and their experiences. Parisisan culture.
Both the writer in French Milk and speakers in visiting Pris express their difficulties they
faced as a tourist in Paris as well as positive aspects of Parisian culture that they
experienced.
French Milk, written by Lucy Knisley is a diary in the style of a graphic non-fiction, it is
multimodal with both written and visual elements including aspects of spoken mode as well
as sketches, comic panels and photos. It’s primary purpose is to inform and entertain,
targeting young adults and comic lovers. On the other hand, Visiting Paris is a
Conversational spoken discourse that has been transcribed with the speakers Mike and
Sophia discussing their visits to Paris. The target audience is each other as it is a
conversation with the purpose to socialise and share their own experiences.
In French Milk, Knisley expresses her experiences through colloquial address and
intertextuality features such as art that reflects the text subject. An example of this can be
seen in the splash page where Knisley states ‘We got delicious truffles at a little chocolatier’
the colloquial verb ‘got’ and simple pre-modifier ‘delicious’ presents the overall text as an
informal conversation with a friend which is a very diary-like address. Furthermore, the use
of illustration and labelling such as ‘cobblestones’ also depicts a personal and informal
atmosphere. In addition to the use of colloquial simplistic language and illustrations, Knisley
also uses rhetorical questions such as ‘Isn’t it a part of paris in the winter to be brooding?’
which adds humour and again makes the overall text feel as though it is a conversation
between her and the reader. This is enhanced through Knisley’s use of French lexis and
orthographical conventions such as capitalised, bold text that reflects the style of the over
graphic non-fiction text. This can be seen in the French lexis ‘FUME’ which Knisley uses as
both English and French speakers will be able to understand the emotion due to its
similarity to the English word ‘fuming’ and her illustration beneath. Similarly, to French Milk,
Visiting Paris is also presented as a conversation between two speakers and uses a colloquial
address which we can see through lexical choices such as ‘cause’ and ‘beat the ques’.
Furthermore, the use of emphatic prosody such as ‘freezing cold’, ‘next’, ‘no’ ‘challenge’ and
‘anything’ creates tone and emphasis in the conversation thus making it more engaging and
flow easier.
both the writer in text A and speakers in Text B express difficulties with crowds and ques in
either text, thus presenting travelling around Paris as a difficult thing to achieve for a tourist.
For example, in Text A, Knisley states ‘We rode the train over to the Eiffel tower, but the
crowds were too much to handle’ and ‘We walked along the Champs-Elysées, but the
crowds were even worse’ the use of intensifiers ‘too much to handle’ and ‘even worse’
display the magnitude of the crowds and the difficulty they experienced in touristy areas
thus depicting Paris as an overcrowded place. In text B we see similar experiences from
