University of Sulaymaniah

College of language
School of English

Rhetorical analysis

Supervisor: Mrs.Wazha

Represent by:
Sana Bakhtiyar
Soran hasan
Brwa Mahmoud

Academic year: 2021-2022

 Rhetorical analysis

1. Definition:

A rhetorical analysis requires you to apply your critical reading skills in order to “break
down” a text. In essence, you break off the “parts” from the “whole” of the piece you're
analyzing. The goal of a rhetorical analysis is to articulate HOW the author writes, rather
than WHAT they actually wrote.
1.1 What about the meaning of the{ rhetorical analysis}?

The quote at the start of the chapter seems to be a comment on the first definition given here.
Politicians perform ‘acts of rhetoric'. That is, they organize discourse to be persuasive.
Rhetorical scholars, however, seek to unpack such discourses and ask why they are persuasive,
thus adopting the second definition of rhetoric. This seems simple, but an analogy from a
different context is useful here to more clearly articulate some blurred boundaries. We refer to
those people who commit crimes as criminals. Those who study criminals and their behavior
are called criminologists. The discourse of criminologists in sociology journals is never referred
to as a discourse of criminality. Rhetoric, by comparison, is different. The big issue is
that'rhetorical'discourses can be analyzed by rhetoricians, and rhetoricians are also responsible
for producing rhetorical discourse. This might seem to be a problem of semantics, but it is also a
rather interesting methodological issue. At what point does the" analysis' of persuasion not
become persuasive itself? A close example is the text that you are currently reading. At what
point am I laying out some ground-rules for rhetorical analysis, and at what point am I trying to
persuade you that rhetorical analysis is a valuable tool for social analysis? This issue of
reflexivity comes up in many social science research methods, but it is arguable that it is most
transparent here in the realm of rhetoric. Finally, there is a sense in which rhetoric is also a
worldview, a belief in the power of language and discourse to fundamentally structure our
thinking, our systems of representation, and even our perception of the natural world. This last
issue brings rhetorical analysis very close to ideological analysis, ethical analysis and other
issues in social theory.
If we foreground the analysis of persuasion or rhetoric II, some background to this area is
useful. It was the classical Greeks who first had an interest in analyzing discourses to know why
they were persuasive, and they did so both in speaking and in writing (Cole, 1991; Poulakos,
1995). Aristotle and Plato both concerned themselves with this art, and were anxious to
distinguish good ‘rhetoric from'bad'rhetoric as well as to create categories of persuasive
discourse and rules for creating ‘good ‘rhetoric. Indeed, this classical argument about good
versus bad rhetoric underlies many of Plato's dialogues. It is also Plato who begins to talk about
rhetoric as if it were a tainted subject. Some of Plato's key concerns plague rhetorical analysis
to this day. First, Plato suggested that rhetoric was somehow different from the ‘truth'. That is,
what people say in their lived world may not be how things really are in his world of ideals. This
notion stays with us, and makes us sceptics in the face of individuals trying to persuade us to
one view or another. Secondly, Plato asserted that rhetoric was unteachable. This assertion was
in response to a group of teachers, called sophistai (sophists), who professed to be able to
teach young students the ability to speak persuasively, as well as to analyses others' speech for
successful and unsuccessful techniques. Plato held the position that rhetoric could not be
taught, because ‘good rhetoric'was related to individual virtue. If the person was not virtuous,
then they could never be taught rhetoric as an art, nor would their analysis ever come to
anything.

2. An introduction to biblical rhetoric

The analysis of biblical rhetoric has been developed only in the last 250 years. The first half of this book
outlines the history of the method known as rhetorical analysis in biblical studies, illustrated by
numerous texts. The work of Lowth (who focused on'parallelism'), Bengal (who drew attention
to'chiasmus'), Jebb and Boys (the method's real founders at the turn of the nineteenth century) and
Lund (the chief exponent in the mid-twentieth century) are all discussed, as is the current full blooming
of rhetorical analysis. The second half of the book is a systematic account of the method, testing it on
Psalms 113 and 146, on the first two chapters of Amos, and many other texts, especially from Luke.
Translated by Luc Racaut.

Another topic that relates to rhetorical analysis is {part}s,And the parts are (Logos, ethos, and pathos),
which they are important components of all writing, whether we are aware of them or not. By learning
to recognize logos, ethos, and pathos in the writing of others and in our own, we can create texts that
appeal to readers on many different levels.

2.1 Logos: Appeal to logic/

logic. Reason. Rationality. Logos is brainy and intellectual, cool, calm, collected, objective. When an
author relies on logos, it means that he or she is using logic, careful structure, and objective evidence to
appeal to the audience. An author can appeal to an audience’s intellect by using information that can be
fact checked (using multiple sources) and thorough explanations to support key points. Additionally,
providing a solid and non-biased explanation of one’s argument is a great way for an author to invoke
logos.For example, if I were trying to convince my students to complete their homework, I might explain
that I understand everyone is busy and they have other classes (non-biased), but the homework will
help them get a better grade on their test (explanation). I could add to this explanation by providing
statistics showing the number of students who failed and didn’t complete their homework versus the
number of students who passed and did complete their homework (factual evidence). Logical appeals
rest on rational modes of thinking, such as Comparison – a comparison between one thing (with regard
to your topic) and another, similar thing to help support your claim. It is important that the comparison
is fair and valid – the things being compared must share significant traits of similarity. Cause/effect
thinking – you argue that X has caused Y, or that X is likely to cause Y to help support your claim. Be
careful with the latter – it can be difficult to predict that something “will” happen in the future.
Deductive reasoning – starting with a broad, general claim/example and using it to support a more
specific point or claim Inductive reasoning – using several specific examples or cases to make a broad
generalization Exemplification – use of many examples or a variety of evidence to support a single point
Elaboration – moving beyond just including a fact, but explaining the significance or relevance of that
fact Coherent thought – maintaining a well-organized line of reasoning; not repeating ideas or jumping
around. Pathos:

2.2 Pashas: Appeal to emotions/

When an author relies on pathos, it means that he or she is trying to tap into the audience’s emotions to
get them to agree with the author’s claim. An author using pathetic appeals wants the audience to feel
something: anger, pride, joy, rage, or happiness. For example, many of us have seen the ASPCA
commercials that use photographs of injured puppies, or sad-looking kittens, and slow, depressing music
to emotionally persuade their audience to donate money.

Pathos-based rhetorical strategies are any strategies that get the audience to “open up” to the topic, the
argument, or to the author. Emotions can make us vulnerable, and an author can use this vulnerability
to get the audience to believe that his or her argument is a compelling one.

Pathetic appeals might include

Expressive descriptions of people, places, or events that help the reader to feel or experience those
events

Vivid imagery of people, places or events that help the reader to feel like he or she is seeing those
events

Sharing personal stories that make the reader feel a connection to, or empathy for, the person being
described
Using emotion-laden vocabulary as a way to put the reader into that specific emotional mindset (what is
the author trying to make the audience feel? and how is he or she doing that?)

Using any information that will evoke an emotional response from the audience. This could involve
making the audience feel empathy or disgust for the person/group/event being discussed, or perhaps
connection to or rejection of the person/group/event being discussed.

2.3 Ethos: Appeal to values/Trust

Ethical appeals have two facets: audience values and authorial credibility/character.

On the one hand, when an author makes an ethical appeal, he or she is attempting to tap into the values
or ideologies that the audience holds, for example, patriotism, tradition, justice, equality, dignity for all
humankind, self-preservation, or other specific social, religious or philosophical values (Christian values,
socialism, capitalism, feminism, etc.). These values can sometimes feel very close to emotions, but they
are felt on a social level rather than only on a personal level. When an author evokes the values that the
audience cares about as a way to justify or support his or her argument, we classify that as ethos. The
audience will feel that the author is making an argument that is “right” (in the sense of moral “right”-
ness, i.e., “My argument rests upon that values that matter to you. Therefore, you should accept my
argument”). This first part of the definition of ethos, then, is focused on the audience’s values.

On the other hand, this sense of referencing what is “right” in an ethical appeal connects to the other
sense of ethos: the author. Ethos that is centered on the author revolves around two concepts: the
credibility of the author and his or her character.

Credibility of the speaker/author is determined by his or her knowledge and expertise in the subject at
hand. For example, if you are learning about Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, would you rather learn from
a professor of physics or a cousin who took two science classes in high school thirty years ago? It is fair
to say that, in general, the professor of physics would have more credibility to discuss the topic of
physics. To establish his or her credibility, an author may draw attention to who he or she is or what
kinds of experience he or she has with the topic being discussed as an ethical appeal (i.e., “Because I
have experience with this topic – and I know my stuff! – you should trust what I am saying about this
topic”). Some authors do not have to establish their credibility because the audience already knows who
they are and that they are credible.

Character is another aspect of ethos, and it is different from credibility because it involves personal
history and even personality traits. A person can be credible but lack character or vice versa. For
example, in politics, sometimes the most experienced candidates – those who might be the most
credible candidates – fail to win elections because voters do not accept their character. Politicians take
pains to shape their character as leaders who have the interests of the voters at heart. The candidate
who successfully proves to the voters (the audience) that he or she has the type of character that they
can trust is more likely to win.

Thus, ethos comes down to trust. How can the author get the audience to trust him or her so that they
will accept his or her argument? How can the the author make him or herself appear as a credible
speaker who embodies the character traits that the audience values?
In building ethical appeals, we see authors.

2.4 Elements:
And we have 5 elements of rhetorical analysis and Each individual rhetorical situation shares five
basic elements with all other rhetorical situations:

A text (i.e., an actual instance or piece of communication)

An author (i.e., someone who uses communication)

An audience (i.e., a recipient of communication)

Purposes (i.e., the varied reasons both authors and audiences communicate)

A setting (i.e., the time, place, and environment surrounding a moment of communication)

These five terms are updated versions of similar terms that the ancient Greek thinker Aristotle
articulated over two thousand years ago. While Aristotle’s terms may be familiar to many people, his
terminology more directly applied to the specific needs and concerns of his day. This resource uses more
current terminology to more accurately identify the kinds of rhetorical situations we may encounter
today. But since Aristotle’s work in rhetoric has been so influential, below is a brief discussion of
Aristotle’s terms and how they relate to the terms in this resource (text, author, audience, purposes,
and setting).

Considering the methods of rhetorical, it means the {Rhetorical Modes} we can mention that, Rhetorical
Modes The term rhetorical modes refers to the different styles and techniques we use when we write.
This chapter will discuss different modes, explaining the specific aspects and techniques involved in
these methods of communication. As you read about these, remember that the rhetorical mode a writer
chooses depends on his/her purpose for writing. Some assignments ask students to use a specific
rhetorical mode, such as writing a descriptive passage or contrasting two concepts, but most essays
incorporate several different rhetorical modes to express an idea. Overall, the rhetorical modes are a set
of tools that allow you different methods to effectively communicate information to your audience.

Rhetorical modes include eight terms, such as:

1. Narrative

2. Description

3. Process analysis

4. Illustration and exemplification

5. Cause and effect

6. Comparison and contrast

7. Definition

8. Classification
1.Narrative:
The purpose of narrative writing is to tell stories. This is a form we are familiar with, as any time we tell a
story about an event or incident in our day, we are engaging in a form of narration. In terms of writing,
narration is the act of describing a sequence of events. Sometimes this is the primary mode of an essay
—writing a narrative essay about a particular event or experience, and sometimes this is a component
used within an essay, much like other evidence is offered, to support a thesis. This chapter will discuss
the basic components of narration, which can be applied either as a stand-alone essay or as a
component within an essay.

2.Description:
is the tool writers use to make things come alive for their readers, to make sure that their audience is
fully immersed in the words on the page. Every time you tell a story to someone, or tell someone about
something, you use description even if you don’t know it. Description can be as basic as, “I have a blue
car” or “That is such a cute baby” or as detailed as “The flowers soak up the golden sun’s rays and begin
to show their vibrant colors.” Descriptive words are used to provide more information and provide
added insight. In fact, description is the one tool that most allows writers (and speakers) to show
instead of just tell, which enables us to exemplify our points to our readers.

3. Process analysis:
The purpose of a process analysis essay is to explain how to do something or how something works. In
either case, the formula for a process analysis essay remains the same. The process is articulated into
clear, definitive steps.

Almost everything we do involves following a step-by-step process. From riding a bike as children to
learning various jobs as adults, we initially needed instructions to effectively execute the task. Likewise,
we have likely had to instruct others, so we know how important good directions are—and how
frustrating it is when they are poorly put together.

4. Illustration and exemplification:

To illustrate means to show or demonstrate something clearly through the use of evidence. To
exemplify means to demonstrate through the use of examples. This is a technique that can stand alone
but is most often used within an essay to demonstrate the various points that an essay is offering as it
supports it thesis. Effective illustration clearly demonstrates and supports a point through the use of
evidence.

5. Couse and effect:

It is often considered human nature to ask, “why?” and “how?” We want to know how our child got sick
so we can better prevent it from happening in the future, or why our colleague received a pay raise
because we want one as well. We want to know how much money we will save over the long term if we
buy a hybrid car. These examples identify only a few of the relationships we think about in our lives, but
each shows the importance of understanding cause and effect.cause is something that produces an
event or condition; an effect is what results from an event or condition. The purpose of the cause-and-
effect essay is to determine how various phenomena relate in terms of origins and results. Sometimes
the connection between cause and effect.

6. Comparison and contrast:

Comparison in writing discusses elements that are similar, while contrast in writing discusses elements
that are different. A compare-and-contrast essay, then, analyzes two subjects by comparing them,
contrasting them, or both.

7. Definition:
DEFINITION

The purpose of a definition essay may seem self-explanatory, to simply define something. But defining
terms in writing is often more complicated than just consulting a dictionary. In fact, the way we define
terms can have far-reaching consequences for individuals as well as collective groups. Ultimately, a
definition essay will share your special understanding about your chosen topic.

8. Classification:
The Purpose of Classification in Writing, purpose of classification is to break down broad subjects into
smaller, more manageable, more specific parts. We classify things in our daily lives all the time, often
without even thinking about it. It is important, however, to be sure to use a single basis for the division
of categories; otherwise, you may end up with items that fall into multiple categories. Cell phones, for
example, have now become part of a broad category. They can be classified as feature phones, media
phones, and smartphones.
References:
Mapping:

1:
1.https://researchguides.njit.edu/communication/rhetoric

2.{ (By Joan Leach) Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound: A Practical Handbook for ... -
Google Books}.

1.1:
https://books.google.iq/books?
id=UQewQ4FzHowC&pg=PA207&lpg=PA207&dq=rhetorical+analysis+of+joan+leach&source=bl&ots=lby
24fP1KO&sig=ACfU3U2w_468DcRY6KDRqodcr19TzsRR8A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY75XQ7dT0AhXS
SvEDHdKfBQ0Q6AF6BAgDEAI#v=onepage&q=rhetorical%20analysis%20of%20joan%20leach&f=false

2:
{By Ronald maynat, in 1988, in his book(Rhetorical analysis)}

https://www.amazon.com/Rhetorical-Analysis-Introduction-Biblical-Testament/dp/1850758700

2.3:
{In the book:{A GUIDE To RHITORIC, GENRE, And Success IN FIRST_YEAR WRITING} in chapter By Melanie
Gagich & Emilie Zickel}.

https://pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu/csu-fyw-rhetoric/chapter/rhetorical-strategies-building-compelling-
arguments/

2.4:
{Purdue Online Writing Lab, College of the Liberal Arts}

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/rhetorical_situation/elements_of_rheto
rical_situations.html

point 8:
{ By Jennifer Kurtz In the book (Let’s Get Writing), chapter five}.

https://vwcceng111.pressbooks.com/chapter/chapter-5-rhetorical-modes/