/Rhetorical Analysis/

==Rhetorical Analysis==
===Overview===
Rhetorical analysis refers to analyzing a text or a given source. That text may be writing or some different sort of communication which includes the consideration of the rhetorical situations--purpose, audience, genre, stance, and media/design. In other words, the analysis explores not only what everything means in the given source (content), but also why the author wrote about it (the purpose), who the author is (background), how the piece was organized (structure), and where and/or when it was published (forum), etc. 
The rhetorical situation of a given source involves employing some reading strategies, being more specific, some critical reading skills, examining how and why a particular text is written in the first place, what kind of readers the text is intended for, and what the goal of the text is. Those goals may include context of issues, the writer, the publication, and other background information. The analyzer needs to observe the writer’s purpose and relationship to readers. The analyzer also needs to observe the writer’s language such as tone, denotation/connotation, figures of speech, and stereotypes.
Therefore, rhetorical analysis is one of the more challenging assignments in any writing class. Students often confuse a rhetorical analysis with a review: both analyzing a text thoroughly. However, a rhetorical analysis reserves judgment on whether they agree/disagree with the topic presented. A review, of course, invites the reviewer to critique how "good" or "bad" the content of an article, book, or movie is. The sole goal of a rhetorical analysis is to analyze the author's writing (or visuals, if one is engaging in a visual rhetorical analysis). How did the author craft his/her argument? This should be the guiding question during any rhetorical analysis.
===Critical Reading===
Critical reading is the first step for rhetorical analysis. In order to make a reasonable and logical analysis, you need to apply critical reading skills to a text that you are about to analyze. For example, when reading, you can break the whole text down into several parts. Then, try to determine what the writer is attempting to achieve and identify the writing strategies s/he is using. Use these findings to determine whether the argument is effective or not.
Reading critically does not simply mean being moved, affected, informed, influenced, and persuaded by a piece of writing; it's much more than that. It refers to analyzing and understanding how the writing has achieved its effect. Some specific questions can guide you in your critical reading process. You can use them in reading the text, and if asked to, you can use them in writing a formal analysis. The following is a list of suggested questions that you may find useful for your reading. However, you don't need to apply all of these questions to every text. You may use them selectively according to the specific reading at hand. This is simply one method for getting you started on reading (and then writing) more critically.
Questions to Ask in Critical Reading:
* What is the subject? Does the subject bring up any personal associations? Is it a controversial one? 
The "subject" is a topic that interests the author and is being explored by the author in the given text. The subject matter focuses on the author's interest and enthusiasm for it usually leads to a writing that is interesting. When you find the subject matter, think of it's "scope". How broad or narrow the author's approach to the subject is. You may consider the length in words in terms of the scope of the author's treatment of the subject. Then try to observe whether the author's topic associates you with your own personal related experience. What do you think of the subject? Do you think of it as a controversial topic? How? 
* What is the thesis (the overall main point)? How does the thesis interpret the subject? If asked, could you summarize the main idea?
An effective argument centers on a clear thesis. The main body of an argument, however long or divided, should be continually moving towards proving the thesis in the reader's mind. 
Good writers will usually unveil their thesis in the first or second paragraph. It's a good strategy to prepare the audience early, and set them up to properly filter the information that will follow. 
Often, an author will alert the reader to the fact that he/she is introducing a thesis with a signaling statement. When an author begins a phrase with something like "This article will demonstrate...", or "My analysis will show that...", he/she is preparing readers for the thesis. As a reader, when you see these signals, it's time to pay attention. The author is about to reveal something important about the argument. That said, this is not the only way to introduce a thesis. Authors often are much more subtle. It is important to closely read the first couple of paragraphs to get a good idea what the essay will be about. 
Here's an example of a research article that utilizes a signaling statement about its thesis. See if you can pick up on the cues that Stephen Fishman and Lucille Parkinson McCarthy provided in the first paragraph of their article, "Is Expressivism Dead?"
Fishman and McCarthy get straight to business and introduce the problem, (post-structuralist attacks on their pet theory, expressivism) and then introduce the main point of their article. They introduce their thesis with the signaling statement: "The purpose of this article," preparing the audience for the main points to follow.
Other authors leave clues about their thesis after it has been introduced. Here's an example from Emily Bazelon's article published in Slate magazine, "Forget Homework":
In this instance, the subject is a debate over homework. Japanese schools are cutting back while American schools are loading up. Which does Bazelon consider the best approach? She concludes paragraph one with the idea that she is at least leaning toward the Japanese method. But the reader can be certain that this is her position when she leads off the second paragraph with "Such is my conclusion...", a clear indication that the audience has just read a thesis.
* Who is the intended audience? What values and/or beliefs do they hold that the writer could appeal to?
Audience is vital to the rhetorical success of any text, speech, or effort to persuade. A writer must consider what type of audience he/she is writing for, and evaluate the values and beliefs that the audience is likely to have. The writer should take into account any assumptions held by his/her audience.
 
* What is the tone of the text? What is your reaction to the text, emotional or rational (think of pathos)? Does this reaction change at all throughout the text?
Paying attention to your individual reaction at different points throughout the text will help you critically assess the writer's goals in the piece. If you feel anger at what the writer is stating, make a note of why you feel it. Pay attention to the vocabulary the writer uses. It may be negative or positive. 
* What is the writer's purpose? To explain? Inform? Anger? Persuade? Amuse? Motivate? Sadden? Ridicule? Attack? Defend? Is there more than one purpose? Does the purpose shift at all throughout the text?
If the writer's purpose is to simply explain something, chances are the text will contain scientific language or statistics. An example would be a flight manual or owner's manual for an automobile. Political ads are good examples of how writers will attempt to anger or persuade their audience about something. Using the voting histories of other candidates, audiences are encouraged to be angry or upset, and the result is a vote for the candidate the ad is supporting. 
* What methods does the writer use to develop his/her ideas? Narration? Description? Definition? Comparison? Analogy? Cause and Effect? Example? Why does the writer use these methods? Do these methods help in his/her development of ideas?
* 'What pattern does the author use for the arrangement of ideas?' Particular to general, broad to specific, spatial, chronological, alternating, or block? Does the format enhance or detract from the content? Does it help the piece along or distract from it?
* Does the writer use adequate transitions to make the text unified and coherent? Do you think the transitions work well? In what ways do they work well? 
* Are there any patterns in the sentence structure that make the writer's purpose clear to you? What are these patterns like if there are some? Does the writer use any fragments or run-ons?
* Is there any dialog and/or quotations used in the text? To what effect? For what purpose is this dialog or quotations used?
* In what way does the writer use diction? Is the language emotionally evocative? Does the language change throughout the piece? How does the language contribute to the writer's aim?
* Is there anything unusual in the writer's use of punctuation? What punctuation or other techniques of emphasis (italics, capitals, underlining, ellipses, parentheses) does the writer use? Is punctuation over- or under-used? Which marks does the writer use where, and to what effect? 
* Are there any repetitions of important terms throughout the text? Are these repetitions effective, or do they detract from the text?
* Does the writer present any particularly vivid images that stand out? What is the effect of these images on the writer's purpose?
* Are there any tropes--similes, metaphors, personification, hyperbole, comparisons, contrasts, etc. that are employed by the writer? When does he/she use them? For what reason(s)? Are those devices used to convey or enhance meaning?
* Are there any other devices such as humor, wordplay, irony, sarcasm, understatement, or parody that are used in the text?' Is the effect comic relief? Pleasure? Hysteria? Ridicule?
* Is there any information about the background of the writer? Is the writer an acceptable authority on the subject? How do you know?
===Persuasive Appeals===
One of the first steps in rhetorical analysis is to determine what persuasive appeals the author is employing. There are three persuasive appeals (or rhetorical strategies): logos, pathos, and ethos. A good argument will combine all three; however, not all pieces of writing (scholarly included) utilize all three appeals. 
Logos:
Logos relies on logic or reason and depends on deductive and/or inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning begins with a generalization and then applies it to a specific case. The generalization you start with must be based on a sufficient amount of reliable evidence. Inductive reasoning takes a specific representative case, or facts, and then draws generalizations or conclusions from them. Inductive reasoning must be based on a sufficient amount of reliable evidence. In other words, the facts you draw on must fairly represent the larger situation or population.
Pathos:
Pathos appeals to an audience's needs and/or values. It is a highly emotional appeal. Though argument emphasizes reason, there is usually a place for emotion as well. Emotional appeals can use sources such as interviews and individual stories to paint a moving picture of reality, or to illuminate the truth. For example, telling the story of a specific child who has been abused may make for a more persuasive argument than simply stating the number of children abused each year. The story provides the numbers with a human face. However, a writer must be careful not to employ emotional appeals which distract from the crux of the debate, argument, or point trying to be made.
Ethos:
Ethos gives the author credibility. It is important to build credibility with your audience because without it, readers are less inclined to trust you or accept the argument presented to them. Using credible sources is one method of building credibility. A certain amount of ethos may be implied solely from the author's reputation, but a writer should not rely only on reputation to prop up his/her work. A sure way to damage your ethos is by attacking or insulting an opponent or opposing viewpoint. The most effective ethos should develop from what is said, whether it is in spoken or written form. The most persuasive rhetoricians are the ones that understand this concept.