 Welcome to a summary on all you need to know about explorers or boys messing about, which is an article that appeared in the Guardian newspaper by a man called Stephen Morris. Now my name is Barbara and in this video I'll read and explain in depth this article, however do bear in mind that the version that I will read is what appears in the Pearson International GCSE anthology. Now I'll explain the meaning related to this text by looking at different language devices and doing a lot of word-level analysis and I'll point out things that you will find helpful as you study this text and of course as you prepare to write about it. So let's get started. Now do bear in mind that this text is adapted from an article that was published in the Guardian newspaper on the 28th of January 2003. Now what this text essentially talks about is a helicopter duo who are plucked from a life raft after an arctic crash or rather an Antarctic crash. So what I will do is I'll read the passage as we go through it and then highlight word-level analysis that you need to be aware of. So now I'm going to begin by reading this passage and then afterwards I will go over literary techniques and language techniques that you need to be aware of. The last expedition ended in fast when the Russians threatened to send in military planes to intercept them as they tried to cross into Siberia via the ice-round Bering Strait. Yesterday a new adventure undertaken by British explorers Steve Brooks and Quentin Smith almost led to a tragedy when their helicopter plunged into the sea off Antarctica. The men were plucked from the icy water by Chilean Navy ship after a nine-hour rescue which began when Mr. Brooks contacted his wife Jovesti on his satellite phone asking for assistance. The rescue involved the Royal Navy the RAF and the British coast guards. Last night there was resentment in some quarters that the men's adventure had cost the taxpayers of Britain and Chile tens of thousands of pounds. Experts questioned the wisdom of taking a small helicopter the four-seater Robinson R44 has a single engine into such a hostile environment. There was confusion about what exactly the men were trying to achieve. A website set up to promote the Bering Strait expedition claims the team were planning to fly from the north to south pole in their trusty helicopter but Mrs. Vesti claimed that she did not know what the pair were up to describing them as boys messing about with the helicopter. Now let's stop there first off and let's look at how this article begins. So of course just to be clear the first paragraph opens with a complex sentence and it starts like a report and of course if we know that this article ended up in the Guardian newspaper of course this is a report for a national newspaper about these two men in particular. Then the report highlights or rather this article highlights key terms expedition and farce and this is really interesting there's a semantic contrast in these two terms so of course expedition is something that's quite large very adventurous very inspiring however the term farce which is basically a silly outcome something that is very silly essentially shows that this expedition was just something that should never have happened. So this article already we can sense in the underlying tone that it's really critical of these men that they're going to be talking about. Also pay attention to the semantic field of nationalities that are mentioned. There are Russians, British and Chileans involved so this shows just how farcical this whole expedition was but also how much it cost in terms of manpower and all the different people globally that were impacted by these men's actions. Now of course in the second paragraph we are told who these men were so this is Steve Brooks and Quentin Smith and of course these proper nouns really place focus and emphasis on these men. Furthermore the active verb plunge really shows how drastically this adventure this massive massive exploration turned almost into tragedy. Now of course the specific jargon that's used in this article is related to a specific part of Antarctica and of course this jargon really enforces the geography of where this event happened. Furthermore the writer points out the Royal Navy the RAF and the British Coast Guards and this listing emphasises the sheer size of the rescue mission the sheer amount of resources and manpower that was used when it came to rescuing these two men and of course part of the resentment comes from a lot of people who are wondering why do they even go out on this really dangerous mission. Furthermore this adverbial phrase of time now shifts back and shifts back and of course what this article does is it highlights how a lot of people are really angered by the actions of Steve Brooks and Quentin Smith. Furthermore this hyperbole and of course alliteration so tens of thousands of pounds this emphasises just how much this rescue mission which really was not necessary at all this whole exposition was not necessary it was never needed how much it ultimately cost taxpayers in both Britain and Chile. Furthermore the mention of what these men used to go into this really hostile environment a small helicopter this pre-modifier small shows just how inadequate the helicopter was and of course again there is an underlying critical tone in the journalist's report which shows that you know these men were they did they even know what they were doing why do they do this. Furthermore again there's specific technical detail related to this helicopter and throughout this article there's a lot of jargon that shows of course the author so the person that's written this newspaper article Stephen Morris really knows what he's talking about so it reinforces of course the integrity of this article and it reinforces our trust in the article's readers but ultimately also this specific technical detail really shows the mistakes that these two men made. Furthermore this intensifies such a hostile environment shows this wisdom was really really lacking in their decision to take this small helicopter to into such a vast expedition. Moreover the negative adjective hostile shows that these men should have known better than to take the small helicopter to engage in this expedition that really nobody requested and it's cost people a lot of money. Furthermore the personification of the website which claims that they were planning to fly from the north pole to the south pole as well as the inverted commas trusty helicopter really is the rightest way of mocking what these men were doing and you know these grandiose claims that they had which ultimately ended really badly. Moreover the diminutive common noun boys really make them seem to be almost people who didn't have that much power they didn't know what they were doing so maybe we should forgive them it takes agency and power away from these men which of course is the opposite these men knew what they were doing but they just didn't pay attention to the safety in what they were doing. Moreover there's colloquial language and of course this is related to what the wife of one of the men so mrs vesti she's saying oh they were just messing about again it downplays their actions it downplays that they actually wasted a lot of people's resources a lot of people's time and of course ultimately cost taxpayers a lot of money. Let's carry on. The drama began at around 1 a.m. british time when mr brooks 42 and 40 year old mr smith also known as q ditched into the sea 100 miles off antartica about 35 miles north of smith island and scrambled into the life car life raft mr brooks called his wife in london on his satellite phone she said he said they were both in the life raft but were okay and could i call the emergency tell people meanwhile distress signals were being beamed from the ditched helicopter and from mr brooks's brake lig emergency watch a wedding present the signals from the aircraft were deciphered by a full mirth coast guard and passed on to the rescue coordination centre at raf kinsloss in scotland the royal navy's ice patrol ship hms endurance which was 180 miles away surveying uncharted waters began steaming towards the scene and dispatched its two links helicopters one was driven back because of poor visibility but the second was on its way when the men were picked up by a chilean naval vessel about 10 20 am british time though the pair wore survival suits and the weather at the spot where they ditched was clear one arctic explorer told mr brooks's wife it was nothing short of a miracle that they had survived both men are expensive venturers mr brooks property developer from london has taken part in expeditions to 70 countries in 15 years he's tracked solo to ever a space camp and walked barefoot for three days in the himalayas so i'll pause here for now and let's look at some of the language that's used between these lines so of course the hyperbole drama to talk about uh what's happened this failed expedition again shows that these men caused a lot of chaos furthermore the mention and the more specific detail that we get of mr brooks who's 42 and mr smith who's 40 these four more proper nouns so mr brooks and mr smith coupled with their ages we know that they're 42 and 40 not exactly young is of course a contrast to the previous mention of boys this is the journalist's way of putting agency back in their hands and to show that no these people knew what they were doing and they were making mistakes that really they shouldn't have been making furthermore the active voice that's used so of course they ditched into the sea and they scrambled for their life this active voice again it's it's deliberately chosen to really put blame on these men and to also show the power that they had furthermore the adjectives distress and ditched and of course the litteration in these adjectives emphasize how these men are misusing government resources furthermore the mention of mr brooks's bright leg emergency watch so that pre-modifies bright leg and emergency if you know about watches these are particularly expensive watches this is an indirect hint and a dig at the men's wealth and social status they could have afforded to use better resources to make sure that their expedition didn't end up in such a massive disaster furthermore the mention of the form earth coast guard so form earth is a part in the southern part of england and raf kins loss so these are mentioned of really official government departments and now these men who misjudged this expedition and now making the government get involved and use all of its resources furthermore the acronyms raf and hms or rather raf and hms essentially lend credibility to this article the journalist knows what he's writing about but of course also this again these are both official government departments is showing how serious this expedition and this issue became furthermore the mention of statistics 180 miles always remember that when journalists use things like statistics what this does is it lends credibility to what they're writing it shows that indirectly to us that they know what they're writing about so of course this is showing that the journalist has done his homework and he knows exactly what happened as tragedy struck furthermore the present continuous verb steaming highlights how quick the british government was in acting and how quick they were to rescue these men however also the chileans were also very quick to act because the men were picked up by a chilean naval vessel so what this is also showing is they both had plenty of options which they selfishly exploited on the one hand they had the british government which would look after them but also there was the chilean government that they could also count on to look after them again this is showing the perhaps indirectly the journalist's own opinion that actually these men were not being quite fair in using all of these resources furthermore the sibilants here which highlights that they wore survival suits show that these men also could have easily survived this calamity furthermore where they mentioned that the weather the spot where they ditched was clear shows that even if they sunk where they were staying was mild and temperate so the really they did have time to wait on either the british or the chileans to act however they didn't want to wait so they just rushed to call anybody and everyone who could come and rescue them furthermore the speech marks which quote one arctic explorer that this rescue was nothing short of a miracle actually adds a mocking tone it really wasn't a miracle these men would have survived anyway moreover this simple sentence both men are experienced adventurers really emphasises and focuses our attention on how these two men should have known better than know exactly what they were doing and they've had lots of other expeditions and other massive journeys that they've embarked on which they know how to manage and of course this should this was all completely preventable furthermore the mention of mountains this is a semantic field of mountains Everest and Himalayas these are two really really vast mountain ranges what this shows is just how extensive these men's experience was so let's continue he has negotiated the white water rapids of the Sembesi river but kayak and survived a charge by a silver back gorilla in the Congo he is also a qualified mechanical engineer and pilot he and his wife spent their honeymoon flying the helicopter from Alaska to Chile the 16,000 mile trip took three months mr smith also from london claims to have been flying since the age of five he was twice flown a helicopter around the globe and won world freestyle helicopter flying championship despite their experience this is not the first time they've hit the headlines for the wrong reasons in april mr brooks another explorer Graham Stratford were poised to become the first to complete a crossing of the 56 mile wide frozen buried strait between the u.s and russia in an amphibious vehicle snowboard six which could carve its way through ice flows and float in the water in between but they were forced to call a halt after the russian authorities told them they would scramble military helicopters to lift them off the ice if they cross the border ironically one of the aims of this expedition for which mr smith provided air backup or to demonstrate how good relations between east and west have become so of course what the author does is now go into more specific detail about not only how experienced both mr smith and mr brooks are but also just how much personal wealth and personal resources that they have at hand but instead of using the personal wealth personal resources they're then still wasted government resources so the mention of the zanbezi river in africa as well as congo these locations show that these men have faced far more dangerous situation this is more specifically relating to mr brooks furthermore we learned that mr brooks is a qualified mechanical engineer and pilot and these pre modifiers show his qualification as well as his wealth and privilege moreover the pronouns the third person pronoun he and his and of course it's relating to both himself but also his wife show that his wife is one of his possessions and of course again this is really the availed way of the journalist showing just how much privilege and wealth and power that these men have but still they are abusing this in of course using government resources the journalist highlights that they went they spent their honeymoon flying the helicopter from alaska to chile and of course the litteration emphasizes the class and privilege they have this really fancy honeymoon in a helicopter and they go to exotic destination they go to both alaska and chile and of course this again emphasizes these people are people of means now the alliteration have hit the headlines hit and headlines emphasizes the notoriety of both men and of course all this is doing is really making us as readers have a negative opinion of these two men so really we're getting a case being built up of these men we're getting a composite picture of their backgrounds and how they're just carelessly flaunt their privilege but also they carelessly use resources that are limited they're using government resources when they have a lot of personal wealth which they could have used to rescue themselves furthermore the mention of specific jargon as i mentioned throughout this article the journalist uses a lot of jargon so in this case amphibious vehicles know about the six shows that the journalist knows exactly what he's talking about and exactly what these men have used furthermore when he mentions ironically one of the main aims of the expedition was to have and to show good relations between east and west this injects the writers criticism it shows just how these men have this grandiose view of themselves how amazing they are and they have a lot of power to even globally unite the east and the west and of course west and east this is cynic doke this is a work these are two words that represent of course countries like russia from the east and of course the uk and the us from the west and politically speaking both of these sides have not necessarily historically gotten on so these men had these grandiose views of trying to create world peace by doing all of these different expeditions but of course this is a generous way of mocking them and of showing just how out of touch they really are let's carry on the wisdom of the team's latest adventure was questioned by among others gunter endress editor of jane's helicopter markets and systems said i'm surprised to use the r44 i won't use a helicopter like that to go so far over the sea it sounds as if they were pushing it to the maximum a spokesman for the pair said it was not known what had gone wrong the flying conditions had been excellent the ministry of defense said the taxpayer would pick up the bill as was normal in rescues in the uk and abroad the spokesman said it was highly unlikely it would recover any of the money last night the men were on their way to the chilean naval bus eduardo fray where h ms andoreans was to pick them up mrs vesti said they've been checked and appeared to be well i don't know what will happen to them once they have been picked up by h ms endurance they'll probably have the bottoms kicked and be sent home the long way so now the journalist repeats the abstract noun wisdom so this word was used actually in line 12 and this is repeated again and of course this shows just how actually what these men did was the opposite of wisdom it was actually very silly and full hardy so of course this critical this article is extremely critical of the actions furthermore the idiom the taxpayer picking up the bill this emphasizes how angry most ordinary people are for picking up the bill for something that very rich people have done these men have caused chaos they've caused problems and they won't really have to be accountable for it they don't have to pay for this because it's taxpayers that will pay for their rescue and of course their privilege is even emphasized in line 60 they have a spokesman these are people who have a lot of resources to be able to do entity even rescue themselves but they're not going to do so and of course also the cynic doke here the bill of course this refers to the government resources and the money that the government has expended in rescuing them the article ends by citing what one of the wives says she states they'll probably have the bottoms kicked and of course this colloquial language really highlights that the punishment that these men face is probably going to be quite light and they are probably highly likely to commit other future transgressions if they're likely to continue what they keep on doing and therefore you know taxpayers are just going to have to suck it up and accept their actions for what it is so thank you so much for listening I hope you found this video useful in your learning and do make sure you check out our website www.firstreadteachers.com there you will find lots of useful revision resources for your work in English and indeed other subjects thank you so much for listening