English literature or English language (A level)

[Barmi]

the coursework for language is well good!
well for mine i had to write an article and descriptive story, both which i find easy todo anyway so i enjoyed em. my friends who do lit just write essays which would bore me to death.

The essays are a necessary evil, though they are formulaic and it's really just a big rehearsal. The essays shouldn't be much of a chore if you enjoy the texts. I remember when we read The Great Gatsby and half of the class cried at one point. Gatsby was a real person. Writing about The Great Gatsby was enjoyable.

For my second year coursework, it was essentially an open option on what we wanted to write about. We could construct any suitably-appropriate essay question and write a comparative essay about two texts. I remember comparing Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four with Atwood's Oryx and Crake, theme being dystopian societies. I enjoyed it sooooooo much. (Freak!)

[Virgin Mary]

Both are similar apart from what you're looking at, which is why you get the Lit/Lang joined course. In lit it's novels, poetry and plays and you analyse them using literary techniques e.g. tropes. In language it's texts like transcripts and adverts, you analyse them using the language frameworks e.g. semantics and grammar. In both you have to sometimes take the historical context of the text into account - in lit you look at the writer's life, in language you take into account different language theorists. It just depends which is more appealing to you and what you want to do in the future really.

[ReviewDude]

As I have found it in my experience, and from numerous discussions with classmates from both subjects, English Language to be the more natural a choice. It takes a dislike of literature, and books (ironically) to be truly good at Literature. You need to be able to hide all emotion, texture, and depth of a story, to examine its bear bones - very hard to do if you can't detach yourself from it, ruining the point somewhat anyhow.

[Barmi]

As I have found it in my experience, and from numerous discussions with classmates from both subjects, English Language to be the more natural a choice. It takes a dislike of literature, and books (ironically) to be truly good at Literature. You need to be able to hide all emotion, texture, and depth of a story, to examine its bear bones - very hard to do if you can't detach yourself from it, ruining the point somewhat anyhow.

Can I ask how you came to that conclusion? I love literature, loved The Great Gatsby, and yet managed to get full UMS on that exam? I can't remember exactly how many modules I got full UMS on in literature, but that wasn't the only one. You do not need to remove yourself from the text; you can be fully immersed and emotionally attached while still examining it analytically.

You need to rely on your own emotion to achieve the highest grade boundaries. It is important to understand the feelings the writer is trying to evoke. If you are emotionally removed from a text, this is likely to be a less natural assessment. I have also found that you do not strive to examine the 'bare bones' of a text, but rather the little intricacies.

Again, I ask how you managed to reach that conclusion.

[Immenseman]

The essays are a necessary evil, though they are formulaic and it's really just a big rehearsal. The essays shouldn't be much of a chore if you enjoy the texts. I remember when we read The Great Gatsby and half of the class cried at one point. Gatsby was a real person. Writing about The Great Gatsby was enjoyable.

For my second year coursework, it was essentially an open option on what we wanted to write about. We could construct any suitably-appropriate essay question and write a comparative essay about two texts. I remember comparing Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four with Atwood's Oryx and Crake, theme being dystopian societies. I enjoyed it sooooooo much. (Freak!)

It so isn't right we both chose the exact same dystopian novels.

[Barmi]

It so isn't right we both chose the exact same dystopian novels.

I know, it's weird!

Out of a free choice of any novels and any theme, we both picked the same. I think I already told you this but I was initially going to use The Handmaid's Tale until my teacher lent me her copy of Oryx and Crake to read. I had to rejig my question (because the jump words and links other than dystopian societies didn't match up), but it was worth it. It's a relatively new text (I think it was published in 2003?) so was by no means a standard comparative text at that point. Freaky. Freaky.

But still, lots of love for both of those books. Two of my favourite books of all timeeeee.

[ReviewDude]

Can I ask how you came to that conclusion? I love literature, loved The Great Gatsby, and yet managed to get full UMS on that exam? I can't remember exactly how many modules I got full UMS on in literature, but that wasn't the only one. You do not need to remove yourself from the text; you can be fully immersed and emotionally attached while still examining it analytically.

You need to rely on your own emotion to achieve the highest grade boundaries. It is important to understand the feelings the writer is trying to evoke. If you are emotionally removed from a text, this is likely to be a less natural assessment. I have also found that you do not strive to examine the 'bare bones' of a text, but rather the little intricacies.

Again, I ask how you managed to reach that conclusion.

It's just what I've found from experience (and, to be fair, a detest of the works of F. Scott Fitzgerald), that when you reach the higher echelons of literature, it becomes increasingly difficult to write reams on books based on feelings you can't put into words.

I'm not saying people who love books can't do it, merely that it's more difficult.

[Immenseman]

I know, it's weird!

Out of a free choice of any novels and any theme, we both picked the same. I think I already told you this but I was initially going to use The Handmaid's Tale until my teacher lent me her copy of Oryx and Crake to read. I had to rejig my question (because the jump words and links other than dystopian societies didn't match up), but it was worth it. It's a relatively new text (I think it was published in 2003?) so was by no means a standard comparative text at that point. Freaky. Freaky.

But still, lots of love for both of those books. Two of my favourite books of all timeeeee.

Yeah, it was published in 2003, I only wrote mine a few months ago, so I remember . Have you ever read Brave New World or The Collector, they're wicked too :8

[5,5]

literature = books
language = grammar
go for language.
by the sound of it youll enjoy it more.

[Supersam]

My friend does drama and lit and i did drama and lang.

Drama is almost completely unrelated to lit and/or lang. Drama is more about practitioners and their influence and mainly performance.

When it came to doing the written part (which im unsure you will do in drama as its often not done anymore) lang helped but not to the extent in which i had an advantage.

Infact, history probibly helped more due to the nature of essay writing being a neccesary skill.


I have a friend who did both at AS and she has only carried on with lit. I however carried on with language.

If you want it simpified then it comes down to 2 things:
-Language is a science. At uni it is called BSc Linguistics.
-Literature is an art. At uni it is called BA English

So if your more of an arts type who can do essay writing well and can be creative then do lit.

If you are more of a scientific type and can analyse things well in your research then choose lang.