The Written Argument:
Copy the following key terms and definitions related to the written argument
Copy the following key terms and definitions related to the written argument
Claim: Your basic belief about a particular topic, issue, event, or idea
Counterclaim: A solid and reasonable argument that opposes or disagrees with your claim
Rebuttal: A written or verbal response to a counterclaim.
The object of the rebuttal is to take into account the ideas presented in the counterclaim and explain why they aren’t persuasive enough, valid enough, or important enough to outweigh your own claim.
Support: Your specific facts or specific evidence used to support why your claim is true
Refute: Argue against a position or prove it to be wrong
Qualify: A “partly agree” stance in which you agree (in part) with another person’s
argument or position but also disagree with part of it.
________________________________________________________________________
**Select one of the following speeches below
(from the website: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/)
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barackobama/barackobamasyrianation.htm
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/richardnixoncheckers.html
1. Read and listen to the speech.
2. Use the SOAPSTone strategy to identify the speaker, occasion, audience, purpose, subject and tone of the speech.
3. Respond to the following questions regarding the speech:
*What is the speaker's claim? What does he/she want you to believe?
*What reasons does he/she give for the claim?
What type of appeal does the author use? (emotional, authority, logic)
What devices does the author use to create the appeal? (diction, syntax, repetition)
*What facts, quotations, evidence and specific details does he/she provide to support the claim? Cite at least three examples from the text.
Please email your response to: aplangkhs@gmail.com by Tuesday December 2, 2013, subject: Last name_Argument blog
2. Use the SOAPSTone strategy to identify the speaker, occasion, audience, purpose, subject and tone of the speech.
3. Respond to the following questions regarding the speech:
*What is the speaker's claim? What does he/she want you to believe?
*What reasons does he/she give for the claim?
What type of appeal does the author use? (emotional, authority, logic)
What devices does the author use to create the appeal? (diction, syntax, repetition)
*What facts, quotations, evidence and specific details does he/she provide to support the claim? Cite at least three examples from the text.
Please email your response to: aplangkhs@gmail.com by Tuesday December 2, 2013, subject: Last name_Argument blog
Megan Devin
ReplyDeletePeriod 1
Speaker- Barack Obama
Occasion- Use of Chemical weapons in Syria
Audience- People of America
Purpose- To convince the people of America that a military strike in Syria is a good thing
Subject- Syria
Tone- Persuasive/Serious
The speakers Claim is that US intervention in Syria is necessary because of their use of Chemical Weapons. He believes this is the right thing to do because people are getting hurt and dying. Also if we don’t act then other countries will think its ok to use chemical weapons. Also if the Assad Regime continues the use of Chemical weapons then they could eventually hurt our allies. The speaker uses an emotional appeal when he describes how people are being killed and small children are dying alone and on the cold hard ground. He describes parents weeping over their children and hospitals filled with sickly people. The devices that he uses are diction. He uses very powerful words to appeal to people emotions like “Gasping” for a breath, or “Clutching” his dead children. These words are filled with passion and emotion. To support his claim he used facts like “Over 100,000 people have been killed.” He also gave evidence about other times chemical weapons were used and what it did when he said “In World War II, the Nazis used gas to inflict the horror of the Holocaust.” He also gave another facts about what we have already done to ban chemical weapons when he said “And in 1997, the United states senate overwhelmingly approved an international agreement prohibiting the use of chemical weapons, now joined by 189 governments that represent 98 percent of humanity.
IDEAS
Speaker- President George W. Bush
ReplyDeleteOccasion- Attack of the World Trade Center
Audience- American citizens
Purpose- To comfort Americans and let them know that America is strong and that the intentions of the terrorists failed.
Subject- 9/11
Tone- Very serious and mourning
In Bush’s address to America, he attempts to instill hope and comfort in the citizens of America after the destruction of the Twin Towers. His reasoning is that America is leading the world in freedom opportunities so they are strong and united. Bush uses a very emotional appeal. Since this is a hard time for everyone, especially for those who have lost loved ones, he uses pathos and is very sympathetic towards the people so the people will embrace his words better. To encourage the people Bush says, “Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America,” and, “Our first priority is to get help to those who have been injured.” Bush also says, “I’ve directed the full resources of our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and to bring them to justice.”
Kai Harrison
IDEAS
Kassandra Iloreta
ReplyDeletePeriod 1
Speaker: Richard Nixon
Occasion: “Checkers” speech
Audience: American People
Purpose: To set the record straight on the allegations/political misunderstandings against him and give the people his side of the story
Subject: Accused of stealing 18,000 dollars from his campaign fund and using it for personal use
Tone: Serious
Richard Nixon’s address to the people with his theory of how to handle misunderstandings by not denying it with no details, so in his speech Nixon says “ The best and only answer to a smear or an honest misunderstanding is by telling the truth”. Nixon then went on to talking about his own personal experience. For Nixon was accused of an action that made mostly everyone questioned his integrity. Nixon did use a lot of logic when giving examples using morals. For Nixon kept saying that it is morally wrong for any of those 18,000 dollars to go into Richard Nixon’s personal usage. Nixon then explained the truth that the funds were to defray any charges that the government shouldn’t be charged with. Due to the fact that he wanted people to stop questioning his integrity and to respect the presidents integrity.