'Comparative Commentary Essay\r'

'For or so of the people, extends ar cute and look somehow friendly. nonetheless though we cut, that those animals can be very dangerous, the switch offs are often underestimated. Not only because we cannot find them in our near environment, and therefore don’t know which impact they have, but excessively because we grow up watching series like Winnie the Poo (1977) or sidekick Bear (2003), where bears have the hero and dupe roles. twain these textbooks are based on the relation amid the bear and human. The first-year is a newspaper article, interested with the bear’s extinction. The uphold text is an extinguish from a nineteenth-century novel, elevating the status of the bear and forgiving its misdemeanors.\r\nThe bailiwick of the first text is the survival of the bear. It explains how urgent it is to do some issue against its possible extinction. The article states the causes of depletion and includes various statistics supporting their arguments. in any case the text is concerned about the bears all everyplace the world and mentions a range of species, including the brown bear and the panda. The second text is more about the invincibility of the bear and its mythic dimensions. It has to do with a strife which arises when trying to analyze the bear and putting it into the â€Å" advanced” category.\r\nThe text notes that there can be a mutual respect between a man and a bear but moreover it notes a representation of the mighty bear: both, realistic view, mentioning the accidents and attacks which hand because of them, but also a romantic side, where the bear is said to be â€Å"unstoppable.” The whole extract is ruttish rather than statistical and is about one feature bear. The author makes some close ups, looking at the bears appearance, habits and its personalisedity, which proves once more, that the text is based on personal carry out. The author also tries to compare the bear to a human, which makes the reader understand the bear’s seat and lets the bear appear as a victim rather than a perpetrator.\r\nBoth texts are written in the 3rd person, but this is the only thing they have in common related to its perspectives. The first text is an objective article and shows a form of partiality. Because some statistics have been used, the article is scientific and could be seen as part of an encyclopedia. The second text is told by an omniscient narrator. It is subjective, because the bears history and thoughts are involved in the narration. The narrator admires the bear despite its attacks and defenses his actions.\r\nAlso the speech communication differs in both texts a lot. The first text uses mainly not figurative language. It is mainly unbiased, dry and therefore it seems to be reliable. The diction was occasionally sealed or colored, using words like â€Å"carnivores” and â€Å" kill off”, or expressions like â€Å"The outlook for wild bears is bleak.† The phrase structure in the article is lively, fast paces and dynamic. The sentences are quite complex to evince the tone of emergency. The other text’s language is more dramatic and overstated. rhetorical language has been used, like â€Å"…with no more raise than so many peas blown through a tube by a child…” Alliterations (â€Å"… author back before the boy was born…”) emphasize its fame. Using varying diction, like â€Å"loomed and towered,” the huge measure of the bear can be measured. The syntax is also complex to express awe, wonder and incredulity.\r\nBoth texts cover in favor of the bear and against its potential extinction. The scientific articles aim is a direct way to commute the reader to support them. The author wants to show the readers in which way they might help and which effects it would have. The second text though, is more about an honest experience by someone who admires bears. The narrator’s fountain was not to convince someone, but only to separate his story related to a bear.\r\n'