Extract 2 is aimed at the younger child, despite the longer sentences and more complex language because it is more literal in its description; it goes into more detail to pain the scene. Extract 1, whilst still descriptive, desotn’ have as much information about the pig as what is happening around it within its environment; the light, the noise.
Differences between the description of Mrs Barleylove in extract 2 and Napoleon and Snowball in extract 3 is that Mrs Barleylove’s appearance is discussed and her breed mentioned. You get a real sense, as the reader, of what the pig really looks like. Extract 3 discusses the personality of the animals; there is little physical description leaving more for the reader to imagine.
I felt extract 4 was targetted at adults because it has more complicated language and expects the reader to understand sentences such as “twitching her snout at my scent” – if this was written for children this would have been written as “wiggled her nose when she smelt me”. There was another sentence that caught my attention; “they could see the wind blowing”. This is not a literal statement.
One cannot see the wind blowing but by using this phrase, the writer is suggesting to the reader that the pig has exceptional eyesight; they are assuming that the reader can understand the level of emphasis placed on making such a statement.
Extract 5 is more suitable for children than 4 and 6 because the words are shorter, the sentences are structured with simpler rhythm (not subdivided by commas) and the syntax is therefore easier. The words are by comparison very short.
Extract 6, in my opinion, is not a children’s book. It feels too grown up with its imagery and the language is complicated.
Extract 4 from “Pig” seems the most sophisticated in content and style. It shows but doesn’t tell which is good and it engages the senses.