Step 1: Reading the texts Start by reading the two texts you are going to analyse. Next: Step 2: Analysing the texts Systematically analyse each text in terms of the lexicogrammatical resources of mode introduced in Block 3. As the two texts report broadly on the same phenomenon but differ in terms of text type (a journal article summary1 versus a blog), you are asked to focus specifically on how this difference comes across in the lexicogrammatical features relating to the register variable of mode. This may include: nominalisation and clause complexity noun group composition lexical density lexical and grammatical cohesion clause-level theme choices, including marked and unmarked themes the presence or absence of hyper- and macro-themes interactivity etc. Identify features, among those listed above or additional ones, which you consider to be most important in creating textual meaning in each text. As the word limit does not allow space to discuss each of the bulleted items listed above, you will have to identify the most salient ones. We recommend you divide the texts into clauses before beginning the analysis. It is up to you to decide how you want to manage and keep track of this analysis. However, you will need to include your analysis, or parts of it, in a meaningful way in the TMA you submit. How to do this is explained further below. This step requires you to write up to 1800 words (excluding bibliographic references and appendices) in which you compare the two texts in terms of mode. Your interpretation should be based on the analysis you did in Step 2. You should try to explain why specific lexicogrammatical choices might have been made and how these combine to create textual meaning. You should include the findings that emerged from your analysis in Step 2 in the assignment, either in the body of the assignment or in the appendix or both, depending on length. The findings should be presented in a suitable form, e.g. as tables to show lexical density and/or the relative frequency of specific linguistic features; as diagrams representing thematic patterning; and/or as colour or underlining to indicate relevant parts of the text. Where relevant, you need to give examples from the texts of the lexicogrammatical features you identify, so that your marker can verify your skills in and understanding of grammatical analysis. You need to display the findings of your analysis in a way that is meaningful to your marker. How precisely you do this is your decision but bear in mind that your marker should be able to assess your skills in undertaking grammatical analysis. You should also ensure that any points you make in your comparison relate to the analysis you undertook in Step 2 as your marker will assess your skills in constructing an argument, supporting it with relevant evidence from your analysis and interpreting the meaning of the lexicogrammatical choices made in texts. So do not include any features that have not emerged from your analysis. You also need to support your discussion, where appropriate, by reference to module material. Text 1 Association Between Vaccine Refusal and Vaccine-Preventable Diseases in the United States: A Review of Measles and Pertussis Importance Parents hesitant to vaccinate their children may delay routine immunizations or seek exemptions from state vaccine mandates. Recent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases in the United States have drawn attention to this phenomenon. Improved understanding of the association between vaccine refusal and the epidemiology of these diseases is needed. Objective To review the published literature to evaluate the association between vaccine delay, refusal, or exemption and the epidemiology of measles and pertussis, 2 vaccine-preventable diseases with recent US outbreaks. Evidence Review Search of PubMed through November 30, 2015, for reports of US measles outbreaks that have occurred since measles was declared eliminated in the United States (after January 1, 2000), endemic and epidemic pertussis since the lowest point in US pertussis incidence (after January 1, 1977), and for studies that assessed disease risk in the context of vaccine delay or exemption. Findings We identified 18 published measles studies (9 annual summaries and 9 outbreak reports), which described 1416 measles cases (individual age range, 2 weeks-84 years; 178 cases younger than 12 months) and more than half (56.8%) had no history of measles vaccination. Of the 970 measles cases with detailed vaccination data, 574 cases were unvaccinated despite being vaccine eligible and 405 (70.6%) of these had nonmedical exemptions (e.g., exemptions for religious or philosophical reasons, as opposed to medical contraindications; 41.8% of total). Among 32 reports of pertussis outbreaks, which included 10 609 individuals for whom vaccination status was reported (age range, 10 days-87 years), the 5 largest statewide epidemics had substantial proportions (range, 24%-45%) of unvaccinated or undervaccinated individuals. However, several pertussis outbreaks also occurred in highly vaccinated populations, indicating waning immunity. Nine reports (describing 12 outbreaks) provided detailed vaccination data on unimmunized cases; among 8 of these outbreaks from 59% through 93% of unvaccinated individuals were intentionally unvaccinated. Conclusions and Relevance A substantial proportion of the US measles cases in the era after elimination were intentionally unvaccinated. The phenomenon of vaccine refusal was associated with an increased risk for measles among people who refuse vaccines and among fully vaccinated individuals. Although pertussis resurgence has been attributed to waning immunity and other factors, vaccine refusal was still associated with an increased risk for pertussis in some populations. (Phadke et al. (2016)) Text 2 Study: Vaccine refusal is fueling the spread of potentially deadly diseases Published this month in JAMA, the study found that a substantial number of U.S. measles cases that happened after 2000 – when the disease was declared eliminated in the U.S. – occurred among patients who were left purposefully unvaccinated (i.e. vaccine refusal). They also found that vaccine refusal was associated with an increased risk for whooping cough, though waning immunity seems to be contributing as well. To conduct the study, researchers combed through the scientific literature for reports of measles outbreaks between 2000 and 2015 and for whooping cough outbreaks since 1977, when incidence of that disease reached a record low. They identified more than 1,400 measles cases since 2000, of which more than 56 percent occurred in children whose parents refused vaccination. Among the five largest statewide whooping cough epidemics identified, between 24 percent and 45 percent of patients were unvaccinated or undervaccinated. Of the 970 measles cases with accompanying vaccination data, 574 cases were unvaccinated despite being eligible to receive the immunization and 405 cases had nonmedical vaccine exemptions, such as religious or philosophical opposition to vaccines. In eight of 12 whooping cough outbreaks from nine studies that included vaccination data, the researchers found that 59 percent to 93 percent of unvaccinated patients were left unvaccinated on purpose. However, the study also noted that epidemics of whooping cough occurred in vaccinated populations too, which highlights the issue of waning immunity. The study authors concluded that refusing the vaccine against measles meant that people were putting not only themselves but also other people, who had been vaccinated, at risk. They also wrote that while the recent surge whooping cough cases may be down to other factors too, the study clearly demonstrates that refusing to be vaccinated against measles has led to a rise in whooping cough among some groups of people. According to CDC, though measles was declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000, the contagious disease is making an unfortunate comeback, spiking to 667 cases in 2014. As for highly contagious whooping cough, the disease reached a recent high in 2012 with more than 48 000 documented cases – that’s the largest number of reported cases since 1955. To request a copy of the vaccine refusal study, visit JAMA. (Adapted from Krisberg (2016))