The language change question (H470/02 Section C, 36 marks): comparing historical and contemporary texts, integrating cross-level analysis (AO1), change theory (AO2), context (AO3) and connections over time (AO4) into an evaluated response.

What this dot point is asking

OCR Component 02, Section C, the language change question, is worth 36 marks, the largest question on Paper 2, and it compares historical and contemporary texts. It is where the language change skills come together: cross-level analysis (AO1), change theory and processes (AO2), context (AO3) and connections across time (AO4), all integrated into an evaluated comparison. This dot point covers the question's demands, the integration of the four objectives, and how to manage the comparison under time.

The answer

The language change question succeeds when it integrates analysis, process, context and comparison into an evaluated argument across the texts. The unifying idea is integration plus comparison: the four objectives are strands of one comparison, and the texts must be in dialogue throughout, so the reader sees how the language has changed, by what processes, driven by what context, and in what direction.

Integrate the four objectives

The structural mistake is to write separate blocks for analysis, theory, context and comparison. The marks come from integration. Each comparative point should analyse a feature in both texts (AO1, AO4), name the process of change (AO2), and explain it by context (AO3). A spelling difference, for instance, is an AO1 feature, an example of orthographic change (AO2), explained by standardisation (AO3), and tracked across the texts (AO4).

Compare by idea, both texts live

As in any comparison, structure by idea, not text by text. Organise around points of comparison (how lexis has changed, how spelling has standardised, how attitudes have shifted), with both texts live in each paragraph. A text-by-text structure starves AO4, the more so because Section C makes connections across time central. The comparison is the spine.

Evaluate, do not describe

The command words ("compare", "analyse and evaluate") require judgement. Weigh the processes and causes, reach a conclusion about the nature and direction of the change, and, where attitudes are in play, assess how well-founded they are. Description of differences, however accurate, sits below an evaluated account of how and why the language has changed.

Examples in context

The texts in the exam are unseen, so the moves below are illustrative.

A model integrated paragraph. "Spelling is the clearest axis of comparison: where the earlier text spells the same word two ways within a paragraph, the present-day text is uniformly regularised. This is orthographic change (AO2), and the difference is explained by the standardising influence of print, dictionaries and prescriptive grammar that postdates the earlier text (AO3). Read across the two texts, the change tracks a clear trajectory from pre-standard variation to fixed modern orthography (AO4), so a single feature carries analysis, process, cause and comparison at once." This integrates all four objectives in one point.

A weak approach upgraded. A blocked answer might analyse the older text's features, then list change processes, then describe context, then compare. Upgraded, it integrates: each comparative point analyses both texts, names the process, explains the cause, and tracks the trajectory, building to an evaluated judgement about how and why the language has changed.

Try this

Q1. Which four objectives does the language change question assess? [2 marks]

• Cue. AO1 (cross-level analysis), AO2 (change theory and processes), AO3 (the contexts driving change) and AO4 (connections across time).

Q2. Why does a text-by-text structure underperform in Section C? [2 marks]

• Cue. It analyses the texts in turn rather than comparing them, starving AO4 (connections), which is central to a question about change across time.

Q3. Compare two texts, analysing how language has changed over the period between them and why. [18 marks]

• What the marker wants. An integrated, idea-led comparison weaving cross-level analysis (AO1), change processes (AO2), contextual causes (AO3) and connections across time (AO4) into an evaluated judgement, with both texts live.

A note on the task

This guide is AI-written and not individually human-reviewed. The exact format and mark allocation of Section C are set out in the current OCR H470 specification and its sample materials and past papers, so revise from those. The integrate-and-compare method transfers across every language change pairing.