These worksheets are free forever. Want lessons that adapt to your child as they learn, plus progress tracking? Try Ignition Learning free.

Sign up free

Ignition Learning — Activity Sheet

Language, power & relationships

English · Year 9

Name: ______________________Date: ____________

Word choice doesn't just describe a relationship — it can actively shape and reinforce who holds power within it. A boss who only ever gives commands ("Have this done by Friday") versus one who frames requests collaboratively ("Could we get this done by Friday?") is using language to construct very different working relationships, regardless of their actual job title. Writers use this deliberately: a character speaking in short commands to everyone around them is being constructed as domineering, while a character who consistently defers or hedges is being constructed as less powerful — even if the plot never states this directly.

Example

In a workplace drama, a manager who says "I need this on my desk by 5" versus "Would you mind having this ready by 5, if that works for you?" reveals two very different approaches to power in the same role — the first asserts authority directly through command, the second maintains authority while softening it through collaborative phrasing.

Key terms

Power dynamic:
How language choices reveal or construct who holds authority in a relationship.
Directive language:
Language that gives commands or instructions directly.

Questions

  1. 1. Word choice can:

    • Actively shape and reinforce power within a relationship
    • Never have any connection to power
    • Only ever describe events, never relationships
    • Have no effect on how a relationship is perceived
  2. 2. A direct command like "Have this done by Friday" tends to signal:

    • Authority or power
    • Complete powerlessness
    • No relationship at all
    • A question rather than an instruction
  3. 3. A collaborative phrasing like "Could we get this done by Friday?" tends to:

    • Soften an instruction while maintaining authority
    • Remove all authority from the speaker
    • Have an identical effect to a blunt command
    • Only ever be used by someone with no power
  4. 4. A character who consistently defers to others in dialogue is likely being constructed as:

    • Less powerful in that relationship
    • The most powerful character in the story
    • Completely unrelated to any power dynamic
    • Someone with no personality at all
  5. 5. Directive language means language that:

    • Gives commands or instructions directly
    • Only ever asks questions
    • Has no grammatical structure
    • Can never appear in dialogue
  6. 6. Power dynamics revealed through language can exist:

    • Even if never directly stated in the plot
    • Only if a narrator explicitly announces them
    • Only in nonfiction texts
    • Only when characters hold different job titles
  7. 7. Two characters with the same job title can still reveal different amounts of power through:

    • Their language choices
    • Nothing, job title always determines power exactly equally
    • Their handwriting only
    • Font choice in the text
  8. 8. Why might a writer choose to reveal a power imbalance through dialogue rather than stating it directly in narration?

    • Showing it through language choices is often more engaging and realistic than simply telling the reader
    • Dialogue can never reveal anything about power
    • Direct narration is always the only valid technique
    • Power imbalances cannot be conveyed through word choice
  9. 9. A character who abruptly shifts from formal, deferential language to blunt commands partway through a scene is likely signalling:

    • A shift in confidence or power within that moment
    • A printing error in the text
    • Nothing meaningful at all
    • That the scene has ended
  10. 10. Why might hedging language ("I was just wondering if maybe...") often be associated with less powerful positions in a conversation?

    • It softens a request in a way that reduces perceived directness or authority
    • Hedging always signals the most powerful person in a conversation
    • Hedging has no connection to how assertive language sounds
    • Powerful characters always speak exactly the same way as less powerful ones
  11. 11. Why might analysing power through dialogue be a useful skill when studying a play or screenplay, where there is little narration to rely on?

    • Dialogue is often the primary tool available for revealing character relationships in these forms
    • Plays and screenplays never reveal any character relationships
    • Only novels can ever show power dynamics
    • Power dynamics are irrelevant to dramatic writing
  12. 12. A parent who says "We're going to the shops now" versus "Do you want to come to the shops?" is making a choice about:

    • How much power or choice to extend to the listener
    • Nothing meaningful about the relationship
    • Only the destination, with no other implication
    • Grammar rules with no social meaning
  13. 13. Why might recognising power dynamics in language help a reader understand a text's themes about authority or control?

    • These themes are often expressed through how characters actually speak to each other, not just through plot events
    • Themes about authority can only ever be expressed through plot summary
    • Language choices are always irrelevant to a text's themes
    • Power and authority are never actually explored through dialogue
  14. 14. Why might a character's language toward their boss differ noticeably from their language toward a close friend?

    • Register and directness often shift depending on the relative power and familiarity in each relationship
    • Language never changes based on who a character is speaking to
    • All relationships require identical language regardless of context
    • Only fictional characters ever change how they speak to different people
  15. 15. Why might a screenwriter give a nervous, less powerful character more filler words and unfinished sentences than a confident, dominant character?

    • Hesitant, fragmented speech patterns can construct an impression of uncertainty or lower perceived power
    • Filler words and unfinished sentences are always randomly distributed with no purpose
    • Speech patterns never reveal anything about a character's confidence
    • Only a narrator's direct commentary can reveal a character's confidence level
  16. 16. Why might a subordinate character who begins speaking more directly and less deferentially over the course of a story suggest a shift in the story's power dynamics?

    • A change in how a character speaks can mirror and signal an underlying change in their confidence, status or authority
    • Changes in speech patterns are always coincidental and carry no narrative meaning
    • Power dynamics in a story can never shift or develop over time
    • Only explicit plot statements can ever reveal a change in power
  17. 17. Why might it be too simplistic to assume that whoever speaks the most in a scene automatically holds the most power?

    • Power can also be expressed through concise, confident directness, while more talkative characters might be nervously over-explaining
    • Whoever speaks most in any scene always holds the most power with no exceptions
    • Talkativeness and power are always identical and interchangeable
    • The amount someone speaks has no possible connection to power at all
  18. 18. Why might understanding language and power be useful for analysing real-world texts, like transcripts of interviews or negotiations, not just fiction?

    • The same patterns of directive versus hedging language reveal power dynamics in real spoken exchanges, not just invented dialogue
    • Real-world spoken language never reveals anything about power dynamics
    • This analytical skill only applies to invented literary dialogue
    • Interviews and negotiations never involve any observable power dynamics
  19. 19. Why might a writer deliberately give TWO characters of unequal social status surprisingly similar, direct language, subverting a reader's expectations?

    • It can challenge assumptions about how power "should" sound, or hint at a role reversal or unconventional relationship
    • Subverting expected speech patterns is always simply a writing mistake
    • Readers never form any expectations about how power should be expressed in dialogue
    • Language choices can never be used to challenge social expectations
  20. 20. A film script has a CEO character speak in short, clipped sentences to employees but long, warm, elaborated sentences to their own mentor. What does this contrast in sentence length across relationships suggest?

    • The character adjusts their language style depending on their relative power and comfort in each specific relationship
    • Sentence length in dialogue never has any connection to a character's relationships
    • A character must always speak in an identical style to everyone regardless of relationship
    • This contrast is a scripting error with no intended meaning
  21. 21. Understanding how language shapes power and relationships mainly helps you to:

    • Analyse how word choice constructs and reveals authority and status between characters or speakers
    • Assume power in a relationship is always stated directly and never implied
    • Ignore how dialogue reveals character relationships
    • Treat all speech patterns as having identical meaning regardless of context

Answer key (parent copy)

  1. 1. Actively shape and reinforce power within a relationship
  2. 2. Authority or power
  3. 3. Soften an instruction while maintaining authority
  4. 4. Less powerful in that relationship
  5. 5. Gives commands or instructions directly
  6. 6. Even if never directly stated in the plot
  7. 7. Their language choices
  8. 8. Showing it through language choices is often more engaging and realistic than simply telling the reader
  9. 9. A shift in confidence or power within that moment
  10. 10. It softens a request in a way that reduces perceived directness or authority
  11. 11. Dialogue is often the primary tool available for revealing character relationships in these forms
  12. 12. How much power or choice to extend to the listener
  13. 13. These themes are often expressed through how characters actually speak to each other, not just through plot events
  14. 14. Register and directness often shift depending on the relative power and familiarity in each relationship
  15. 15. Hesitant, fragmented speech patterns can construct an impression of uncertainty or lower perceived power
  16. 16. A change in how a character speaks can mirror and signal an underlying change in their confidence, status or authority
  17. 17. Power can also be expressed through concise, confident directness, while more talkative characters might be nervously over-explaining
  18. 18. The same patterns of directive versus hedging language reveal power dynamics in real spoken exchanges, not just invented dialogue
  19. 19. It can challenge assumptions about how power "should" sound, or hint at a role reversal or unconventional relationship
  20. 20. The character adjusts their language style depending on their relative power and comfort in each specific relationship
  21. 21. Analyse how word choice constructs and reveals authority and status between characters or speakers