Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
English Final Exam
Transcript of English Final Exam
Alpha Rodriguez Steps into Analyzing a Visual Analysis: This Visual is displaying a young man dressed formally in an elegant suit made by Giorgio Armani. The primary audience of this advertisement was meant to target wealthy businessmen or men that hold political positions. Identify: who is the primary audience,
Identify: The purpose of the visual
Identify: What is the image about?
Identify: techniques used to establish the appeals.
Identify: The type of appeals it has on the reader(ethos, logos, and pathos). What Is Ethos Logos & Pathos Ethos: A type of argumentation that depends on the degree of credibility and trustworthiness Logos: is a type of argumentation that depends on the reasoning and evidence Pathos: is a type of argumentation that depends on emotion Examples of Ethos: Celebrities, Endorsements, using well known figures that can be trusted, using a setting/situation content that is familiar.
For example, "Jamie Lee Curtis with Activia" Jamie Lee Curtis uses her celebrity endorsement to advertise Activia using Ethos. Examples of Logos: Facts, statistics, cause/effect, symbolism, irony, common sense, tradition, etc. Examples of pathos: This picture shows psyhcoicological appeal, showing that cigarettes are unhealthy for you. It encourages people to not smoke because it can lead to health complications. As we can see, the gun and the cigarettes as bullets, its a great visual that makes you understand that smoking actually kills. In a wealthy society, suits made by Giorgio Armani is worn to define their status as middle or high class people. It symbolizes money and elegance that not many social groups have. OF A PROPER VISUAL ANALYSIS To identify the primary audience
Correctly use rhetorical appeals, (ethos, logos and pathos)
Use visual models and explain the purpose of the advertisement
Know how the ad will appeal to your audience An example would be Robert Downey Jr., he is wearing a suit made by Giorgio Armani to the Golden Globe awards. This shows creditablity that makes the viewer want to buy Giorgio even more because one of the famous actors was wearing it in a award show. Another great current example of who the audience is, is Josh Hutcherson on one of The Hunger Games event. Since The Hunger Games is trending around the world, this was a great event to show off one of Giorgio Armani suits. Part 2: Teaching Rhethorical Analysis How to analyse (consider the following): Tone: The attitude of the author towards the subject.
Detail: facts the author uses/ what do they imply?
Purpose: The main purpose in the story
Diction: A word choice intended to convey a certain effect.
Rhetorical Devices: technique that an author or speaker uses to convey to the listener or reader a meaning with the goal of persuading him or her towards considering a topic from a different perspective. Part 3: Teaching to Write a Synthesis Essay
2. Rhetorical Strategies
Appeals (Ethos, Logos, Pathos)
Style (diction, syntax, details, imagery, tone, etc.)
3. Why did the author choose these strategies for the particular audience, occasion, and/or purpose?
This is the analysis part! Without this, you are merely summarizing the text.
Think about these questions:
I. HOW do the rhetorical strategies help the author achieve his/her purpose?
II. WHY does the author chose those strategies for that particular audience and for
that particular occasion? HOW TO WRITE: AP Rhetorical Analysis Paragraphs and Essays
Things you must know in order to accurately analyze a text: Now its Your turn! Try to find the Rhetorical Devices in the following... Were they pressed hard enough, most men would probably confess that political freedom— that is to say, the right to speak freely and to act in
opposition—is a noble ideal rather than a practical
necessity. As the case for freedom is generally put
to-day, the argument lends itself to this feeling. It is made to appear that, whereas each man claims his freedom as a matter of right, the freedom he accords to other men is a matter of toleration. Thus, the
defense of freedom of opinion tends to rest not on its substantial, beneficial, and indispensable consequences, but on a somewhat eccentric, a rather vaguely benevolent, attachment to an abstraction.
It is all very well to say with Voltaire, ‘I wholly
disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the
death your right to say it,’ but as a matter of fact most men will not defend to the death the rights of other men: if they disapprove sufficiently what other men say, they will somehow suppress those men if they
So, if this is the best that can be said for liberty of opinion, that a man must tolerate his opponents because everyone has a ‘right’ to say what he pleases, then we shall find that liberty of opinion is a luxury.
safe only in pleasant times when men can be tolerant because they are not deeply and vitally concerned.
Yet actually, as a matter of historic fact, there is a much stronger foundation for the great constitutional right of freedom of speech, and as a matter
of practical human experience there is a much more compelling reason for cultivating the habits of free men. We take, it seems to me, a naïvely self-righteous view when we argue as if the right of our opponents to speak were something that we protect because we
are magnanimous, noble, and unselfish. The compelling reason why, if liberty of opinion did not exist, we should have to invent it, why it will eventually have to be restored in all civilized countries where it is now suppressed, is that we must
protect the right of our opponents to speak because we must hear what they have to say.
We miss the whole point when we imagine that we tolerate the freedom of our political opponents as we tolerate a howling baby next door, as we put up with
the blasts from our neighbor’s radio because we are too peaceable to heave a brick through the window. If this were all there is to freedom of opinion, that we are too good-natured or too timid to do anything about our opponents and our critics except to let them talk,
it would be difficult to say whether we are tolerant because we are magnanimous or because we are lazy, because we have strong principles or because we lack serious convictions, whether we have the hospitality of an inquiring mind or the indifference of an empty
mind. And so, if we truly wish to understand why freedom is necessary in a civilized society, we must begin by realizing that, because freedom of discussion improves our own opinions, the liberties of other men are our own vital necessity. The passage below is from “The Indispensable Opposition,” an article by Walter Lippmann; it appeared in The Atlantic Monthly in 1939. Read the passage carefully. Then write an essay in which you analyze the rhetorical strategies Lippmann uses to develop his argument. Rhetorical Analysis: Claim: That man who wishes freedom, would tolerate the freedom of other men who oppose him. However, he would fight for his right but not for rights of others and if man had a choice, would suppress those who oppose him.
Purpose: To inform the audience that we all tolerate the rights of others due to the freedom of the constitution that allows us to excercise them as we please.
Audience: Young adults to older gentlemen
Evidence: In line 14, Walter Lippmann said, "It is all very well to say with Volitaire, 'I wholly disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.' but as a matter of fact most men will not defend to the death the rights of othermen: if they disapprove sufficiently what other men say, they will somehow suppress those men if ey can".
Ethos: Lippman uses ethical appeals by using debates as an example. " Each man claims his freedom as a matter of right, the freedom he accord as a matter of toleration" Here he states that the rights of other people that argues against you is an act of toleration rather than acceptance.
Logos: Lippman uses logical appeal by stating that "I wholly disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it, but as a matter of fact most men would disapprove sufficiently what other men say, but will somehow suppress those men if they can" Here, Lippmann states that we as men would tolerate peoples rights, however if we had a choice, would supress them for their own benefits.
Pathos: He appeals to the readers emotion, by explaining to them that they are not stepping up and defending their right like they should be.
Main Idea: Every person having a right to their own opinion and no matter the thought, they are entitled to it
Cause/Effect: Everyone has the freedom to voice their own opinion and have rights. Due to this, they are allowed to agree or oppose you without the fear of being prosecuted or supressed by someone in higher power. Steps on How to Write a Synthesis Essays hi Mrs cano me la pela pinche vieja cara de pito mal cojido hahaha Rhetorical Devices Find Rhetorical Devices Introduction:
1. Open with an engaging hook.
2. Identify/clarify the issue at hand.
3. Present a cear, direct thesis statement
1. Topic sentence: give one reason in support of your thesis.
2. Explain as necessary
3. Present specific supporting evidence (quotes from the provided sources)
4. All sources documented.
5.The writer explains the significance of the specific supporing evidence
1. Drawing further signigicance from the reasons and evidence presented
2. Bring the paper to a thoughtful ending.
1. Read Closely: You will be given 15 minutes to read and write on your cover sheet. Use this time to go over all the sources and make commentary.
2. Analyze the argument: What claims is each source making about the issue? What date or evidence does the source offer? What assumptions, beliefs or biased are evident?
3. Establish your position: Generalize your potentia stands but keep an open mind. The stronger, more mature writer wil resist the temptation to oversimpify the issue. The best responses will have considered the tone and complexity of the topic.
4. Acknowledge both sides: create an imaginary conversation between yourself and the author of the source. Would they agree or disagree with you? Why? How?
5. Create your thesis: Create a thesis that is as complex as the topic demands. The thesis should appear after a sentence or two that consider the idea with everything relating to the topic.
6. Argue your Claim: Develop the claim by incorporating your own ideas into the conversation with the other sources. Writing steps Synthesis Essay Steps to Creating a Convincing Argument 1. You will have to choose between defending, challenging, or qualfying the claim. 2. Choose at least two or three sources to add to your essay 3. Add a quote to each body paragraph and state from which source it was. For example: In Source A, "quote of at least six or seven words"
or This states, "quote of at least six or seven words" (Source J) As we all know, the media has always broadcasts presidental elections. There are many skeptics that believe that television influences the way people think about the presidental nomanees. We quality that television does indeed influence the presidental election because of human nature to judge men by their (appearance, believes, and postition) that they make on t.v. hi Television influence the minds of people in presidental elections. For Example, In January 5, 2004, Louis Menand wrote a following passage in the "Masters of Matrix" and stated that "Holding a presidental debate on television triumphs the canidates image over content". Also, Menand states that "Our national politics has become a competition for images or between images, rather than between ideals" (Source C) Here, he basicly says that people focus on images, rather than debates. That we, as people who view televison want the ideal president to not only have brains but looks as well. In both of these statements, Menand believes that images through the media does indeed influence the people in presidental elections. In addition, Angus Campbell states " The advent of television in the late 1940's gave rise to the belief that a new era was opening"(Source A) This show that Campbell thinks that television is important and gives a new immediate contact with political events. Campbell also writes famous words spoken by Dr. Stantos stating "The people have once more become the nation, as they have not been since the days when we were small enough each to know his elected representatives. As we grew, we lost this feelings of direct contact-television has now restored it"(Source A) This shows how Campbell belives that television opened the nation to a new way of fully understanding the debates over presidential elections. That immediate news of debates and politics have opened the minds of the american people and Campbell see's the positive affects of television. However, in a colum by Ted Kroppe, "Private Thoughts Made Public" New York: Vintage Books, 2001 wrote, "It is a joke to call an event on television a debate. Two reporters qive questions in which every man is only given a minute and thirty second to answer, only for the next candidate to have a chance to address himself to what one of his rivals said". (Source F) Here, Ted referes to the presidental election, in which canidates have to debate about issues on televison. He strongly believes that television is giving an unfair trial to presidental nomanees and thus influencing people to choose more quickly the future president. As a result television has had a influenced a positive, yet negative impact on presidental election by giving us the power to witness national nominating elections and gives the public a chance to witness political events. In 1939 Walter Lippmann wrote, "The Indispensable Opposition" In which he claims that men who wishes freedom, would tolerate the freedom of other men who oppose him. However,if he had a choice, would suppress those who oppose him. We qualify that men would indeed suppress the rights of others if it would benefit them, however would tolerate the rights of others if it wasn't possible.
As we all know everybody has a right to excersise the amendments that we are given due to our laws in our justice system. Those laws gives us the rights to voice are opinion and oppose others without the fear of prosecution. However, if we had a choice we would like to suppress those who oppose us. For example Lippmann says,"I wholly disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it, but as a matter of fact most men would disapprove sufficiently what other men say, but will somehow suppress those men if they can" Here, Lippmann states that we as men would tolerate peoples rights, however if we had a choice, would suppress them for their own benefits if it opposes our beliefs in anyway.
In addition, Lippmann states that "Each man claims his freedom as a matter of right, but he accords the freedom of others as a matter of toleration". What Lippmann stated here provides evidence that men does indeed tolerate the opposition of others because he doesn't have a choice. However, Lippman also says that "The freedom of discussion improves our own opinions. The liberties of other men are our own vital necessity." Lippmann states here that because of the opposition of other men, we can reflect upon are beliefs and better improve our opinions. The toleration and opposition of others are important to society.
We believe that the right to oppose others is important. But the toleration of others in situations such as debates, beliefs, ect. we would like to suppress them or influence them to go over our side. The appeal here is ethical, it is using Matt Damon as a sponsor for giving clean water to Africa, as creditability. When the audience is told or reading in this case that Matt Damon is helping the people in Africa to get clean water, knowing that Matt Damon is a famous actor and is a role model in a selected few of his movies the audience will want to help and join Damon in the attempt to give water to Africa. By also quoting Matt Damon " As a matter of fact, the water you drink does make a difference." Shows that Africa may have water but that is contaminated or is not good to drink. So the water you drink does make a difference, when it comes to health. That is the idea that the visual is trying bring across to others if Matt Damon is worried about the drinking water of Africa, then maybe others should do the same. The Ethos Appeals With this picture we will be starting a body paragraph describing the appeal that is shown.
The visual above is using pathos to get to the audience emotion on how it feels when someone's heart gets ripped out of your chest. As well as the emotion that comes with it, sadness, hurt, and loneliness. This visual connects with those who more than likely experienced a break up, a lost of someone close, or even a type betrayal. The visual uses pathos to bring a connection with hard emotion of depression, and loneliness. It brings the expression "You ripped my heart out" to life and allows a connection to those who have experienced the expression to a degree. The audience are mainly those who and have witness this feeling. Below we will using three different visual each contain an appeal and wring a body paragraph for each The Pathos Appeal Essay