+
RHETORICAL ANALYSIS
Analyze This!
+
What is Rhetoric?

Google: The art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially
the use of figures of speech and other compositional techniques;
Language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its
audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful
content.

Wikipedia: The art discourse, an art that aims to improve the capability of
writers or speakers to inform, persuade, or motivate particular audiences
in specific situations.

Merriam-Webster: Language that is intended to influence people and that
may not be honest or reasonable; The art or skill of speaking or writing
formally and effectively especially as a way to persuade or influence
people.

Dictionary.com: (in writing or speech) The undue use of exaggeration or
display; bombast; The art or science of all specialized literary uses of
language in prose or verse, including the figures of speech; the study of
the effective use of language; The ability to use language effectively; the
art of prose in general as opposed to verse; The art of making persuasive
speeches; oratory; (in classical oratory) the art of influencing the thought
and conduct of an audience.
+ Aristotle’s Rhetorical Triangle
+ What is analysis?
Breaking a whole into its parts to
see why the specific parts were
chosen and how those parts work
together to create the whole.
Does this sound familiar?
It should. 
+
Analysis vs. Reverse Engineering
Analysis
1. Read text… identify the purpose
2. Evaluate the merits— What stood
out to you while you read? (visually,
structurally, functionally)
3. Break the text into its parts
4. Analyze choices the author
made in regard to those parts
5. Write down your thoughts using
evidence from the text to back
up/prove those thoughts
6. Think about your own writing style
and how you would do things
differently
2. Evaluate the structure’s merits—
(visually, structurally, functionally)
3. Break the structure into its parts
4. Analyze the parts to see how they
work together to create the whole
5. Document your ideas, using
specific evidence from the structure
6. Redesign the structure, using
your own ideas
+
Rhetoric + Analysis =
Rhetorical Analysis
1. Read the text and identify the purpose or argument. Ask yourself,
“WHAT is the argument being made?”
(WHAT?)
2. Identify the strategies and devices used. Ask yourself, “HOW do
those strategies/devices help the argument?”
(HOW?)
3. Analyze the strategies/devices used and ask yourself, “WHY were
they successful?” What was their purpose or role in the success of
the argument?
(WHY?)
+
Can you be more specific?
The goal of a rhetorical analysis is to articulate HOW and
WHY the author writes, rather than WHAT they actually wrote.
To do this, you will analyze the strategies the author uses to
achieve his or her goal or purpose of writing their piece.
Keep in mind that writers of different disciplines often use
varying writing strategies in order to achieve their goals. So, it
is okay to analyze a scientific article a different way than you
would a humanities writer. These authors have very different
goals in mind, and thus will use different writing strategies.
+
Audience: Who is the
audience? How does the
writer appeal to them?
Syntax: repetition,
rhetorical questions,
pacing, headings, types
of sentences, etc.
Logical Appeals (Logos):
Does the message make
sense? Is it based on
facts & evidence?
Purpose: What is the
writer's main purpose in
creating this piece? Does
he/she want the reader to
do something?
Diction:
1. Formal vs. Informal 2.
Denotative vs.
Connotative (figurative
language)
Emotional Appeals
(Pathos): Do the words
evoke feeling? Does the
writer appeal to the
audience's sympathies?
Message: What is the
main message the writer
is trying to get across to
his/her audience?
Tone: angry, satirical,
accusatory, critical,
objective, reverent,
earnest, etc.
Credibility (Ethos): Does
the writer refer to
differing view? What is
the writer's reputation?
Rhetorical Modes:
expository, narrative,
descriptive,
argumentative
Organization: spatial,
chronological,
cause/effect, compare &
contrast, division, etc.
Types of Evidence:
personal experience,
refuting counter
arguments, expert
testimony, analogy, etc.
+ Rhetorical Devices
With your group, take 5 of the devices on the list
and create a poster for each.
(Group 1, take the first 5; Group 2, take the next 5;
and so on…)
Your posters should include
1.
The word
The definition
2.
3.
4.
An example
A picture
You will present your posters to the class and they
will be hung up in the room for reference.
+ GROUPS
Group
1- Mohamed, Khodja, Marianna,
Tarik
Group
2 –Darrinton, Vanessa HQ, David,
Nina
Group
3 –Precious, Dominick, Nicole,
Jahdese
Group
4- Godwin, Anisa, Vanessa K.,
Tinesse
+ Assignment:
 Let’s
reread Florence Kelley’s speech
 While
you read, annotate for rhetorical strategies
and devices. Also annotate for hints of the purpose,
audience, and occasion
 Discuss
 Using
 Write
our findings with your group members
the overhead, let’s discuss as a class
a rhetorical analysis—Remember, we will be
looking for the what, how and why!
+ THE AP LANG. & COMP. EXAM—
Rhetorical Analysis

40 minutes

You will either be asked to analyze the argument being made or how the
argument is developed in a given text .

Commit to an idea and be explicit (State the purpose clearly & concisely)
+ Rhetorical Analysis Scoring Guidelines

9: Essays earning a score of 9 meet the criteria for a score of 8 and, in addition,
are especially sophisticated in their argument, thorough in their development, or
impressive in their control of language.

8 Effective: Essays earning a score of 8 effectively analyze∗ the rhetorical
strategies the author uses to achieve his/her purpose. They develop their analysis
with evidence and explanations that are appropriate and convincing, referring to
the passage explicitly or implicitly. The prose demonstrates a consistent ability to
control a wide range of the elements of effective writing but is not necessarily
flawless.

7 Essays earning a score of 7 meet the criteria for a score of 6 but provide more
complete explanation, more thorough development, or a more mature prose style.

6 Adequate: Essays earning a score of 6 adequately analyze the rhetorical
strategies the author uses to achieve his/her purpose. They develop their analysis
with evidence and explanations that are appropriate and sufficient, referring to
the passage explicitly or implicitly. The writing may contain lapses in diction or
syntax, but generally the prose is clear.

5 Essays earning a score of 5 analyze the rhetorical strategies the author uses to
achieve his/her purpose. The evidence or explanations used may be uneven,
inconsistent, or limited. The writing may contain lapses in diction or syntax, but it
usually conveys the student’s ideas.
+
Rhetorical Analysis Scoring Guidelines

4 Inadequate: Essays earning a score of 4 inadequately analyze the rhetorical strategies
the author uses to achieve his/her purpose. These essays may misunderstand the
passage, misrepresent the strategies the author uses, or may analyze these strategies
insufficiently. The evidence or explanations used may be inappropriate, insufficient, or
less convincing. The prose generally conveys the student’s ideas but may be less
consistent in controlling the elements of effective writing.

3 Essays earning a score of 3 meet the criteria for a score of 4 but demonstrate less
success in analyzing the rhetorical strategies the author uses to achieve his/her purpose.
They are less perceptive in their understanding of the passage or the author’s strategies,
or the explanations or examples may be particularly limited or simplistic. The essays
may show less maturity in control of writing.

2 Little Success: Essays earning a score of 2 demonstrate little success in analyzing the
rhetorical strategies the author uses to achieve his/her purpose. These essays may
misunderstand the prompt, misread the passage, fail to analyze the strategies the author
uses, or substitute a simpler task by responding to the prompt tangentially with
unrelated, inaccurate, or inappropriate explanation. The prose often demonstrates
consistent weaknesses in writing, such as grammatical problems, a lack of development
or organization, or a lack of control.

1 Essays earning a score of 1 meet the criteria for a score of 2 but are undeveloped,
especially simplistic in their explanation, or weak in their control of language. Indicates
an off-topic response, one that merely repeats the prompt, an entirely crossed-out
response, a drawing, or a response in a language other than English.

0 Indicates an entirely blank response.
+ Understanding the Rubric

8/9Impressive control of language; keep writing crisp—thorough
and concise
*Be careful of too much quoting/paraphrasing/summarizing (why?) You do not need
to quote directly; you can paraphrase or refer to the text, but be aware of too much
and irrelevancy.
*The way we use language matters… Scores are paired but higher score depends on
control and sophisticated language

6/7Effective (applying skills) vs. adequate (just enough)
* This is a writing course, so criticism may seem harsh, sorry, it’s to help language
become more crisp and clear.
*Need a 5 to pass (Many colleges accept a 5 but more and more, you will need a 6 or
higher)
*May have the what or why, but don’t explain the how of the strategies’ purpose in
the argument (or vice versa)

4Not understanding the what or the why
+ Now what?
 Unit
1: Creating Identity Through Rhetoric
Journal Entry:
What makes one a master rhetorician?
Who do you know whose identity was
based on their skill of rhetoric?
Let’s discuss…
+ Master Rhetorician

Engages the audience

Convinces people/persuasion

Translates their point regardless of audience (Is aware of their
audience)

Connects to their audience (Doesn’t sound “Preachy”)

Appeals to ethos, pathos and logos
+
Poet
Romeo & Juliet
England
Pervert
Tragedy
Man
Flaw
Controversy
Macbeth
William Shakespeare!
+
I
Iago!
My favorite rhetorician, an evil genius… I’d like to introduce…
IAGO!
What does it take to be a master rhetorician?
Is Iago a master rhetorician? Why or why not?
What can you identify in his speech as effective rhetoric?
+ What’s going on in there?
DO NOW:
Choose a character from Othello. In your journal, answer the
questions below.

What is the character’s purpose in his rhetoric? Is the character
speaking for good or evil? How do you know?

Why does that character speak the way he does? What is the
character’s motivation? (The occasion)

What words stand out to you? Why did he choose that particular
diction?

What quotes truly define the character?

How does the character’s rhetoric affect the other characters?

Does the character achieve his purpose? How?

Why was the character’s rhetoric successful?
+ Assignment:

Choose one of the following to answer in a 3-5 page essay.
1. Iago is a master rhetorician.
(Support or negate that statement.)
2. Who is the better rhetorician—Iago or Lady Macbeth?
(I have copies of Macbeth. Remember, Lady Macbeth had to use an awful
lot of rhetoric to convince Macbeth to kill King Duncan!)
VS.
*Remember, a claim MUST always be arguable, provable by
evidence and answer the question being asked!
+ RUBRIC
Claim
Is your claim arguable, provable, does it answer the question and most
importantly, do you follow through with your claim throughout the essay?
Evidence
Do you use reasonable evidence from the texts to prove your claim? Do you
include reasoning to your evidence?
MLA Format
Is your paper set up according to MLA Guidelines? Are your textual
references cited properly?
Mechanics
Are your sentences complete and varied throughout? Are errors in
spelling and punctuation limited? Do you use transitions between
paragraphs? Do your paragraphs flow logically?
+

MLA Format
Formatting your paper & The first page
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/1/

In-text citations
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/02/

Formatting quotations
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/03/

Works cited page
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/05/

*Extra notes on analyzing rhetoric
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/725/02/

Search this site for more info. on everything from how to
research to grammar! 
+
Transitions

What does the word transition mean?

Why are transitions important in an essay?
https://www.msu.edu/~jdowell/135/transw.html
http://www.smart-words.org/linking-words/transitionwords.html
+

Woolf vs. Walker vs. Ruskin
While we’re waiting for the Ruskin book to come in, check
out the links below and be prepared to discuss the situation
presented. Think about Walker’s message in In Search of Our
Mother’s Gardens. Does it jive with this? Which side do you
believe? Why?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1021293/Howmothers-fanatical-feminist-views-tore-apart-daughter-TheColor-Purple-author.html
http://alicewalkersgarden.com/2013/03/taking-care-of-thetruth-embedded-slander-a-meditation-on-the-complicity-ofwikipedia/
+ Do now

In your journal, reflect on the analyses you did this summer.
How would they be different now? What have you learned so
far about your writing and writing a rhetorical analysis? What
do you feel you still need to work on?
Class discussion:
 Think
about Walker’s message in In Search of Our
Mother’s Gardens. Does it jive with this? As Nicole
suggested, does she lose credibility? Which side do
you believe? Why?
 What
are some important things to consider when
comparing rhetoric? (Let’s take a look-see!)
+
Audience: Who is the
audience? How does the
writer appeal to them?
Syntax: repetition,
rhetorical questions,
pacing, headings, types
of sentences, etc.
Logical Appeals (Logos):
Does the message make
sense? Is it based on
facts & evidence?
Purpose: What is the
writer's main purpose in
creating this piece? Does
he/she want the reader to
do something?
Diction:
1. Formal vs. Informal 2.
Denotative vs.
Connotative (figurative
language)
Emotional Appeals
(Pathos): Do the words
evoke feeling? Does the
writer appeal to the
audience's sympathies?
Message: What is the
main message the writer
is trying to get across to
his/her audience?
Tone: angry, satirical,
accusatory, critical,
objective, reverent,
earnest, etc.
Credibility (Ethos): Does
the writer refer to
differing view? What is
the writer's reputation?
Rhetorical Modes:
expository, narrative,
descriptive,
argumentative
Organization: spatial,
chronological,
cause/effect, compare &
contrast, division, etc.
Types of Evidence:
personal experience,
refuting counter
arguments, expert
testimony, analogy, etc.
+ Let’s Get a Man’s Perspective…
 Read
from Ruskin’s lecture series Sesame and Lilies
http://www.bartleby.com/28/6.html
 First, let’s
analyze his rhetoric
 Then, let’s
Walker…
compare it to the arguments of Woolf and
 Assignment: Choose
one of the women’s essays and
write a comparative analysis between her rhetoric
and that of Ruskin.
But before you start, let’s review a few things…
+ Writing a claim

DO NOT START YOUR ESSAY WITH…
“So and so used rhetorical strategies in her essay.”
OR
“So and so’s use of rhetorical strategies helped him prove his point.”
DUUUUUUHH!
(Everyone’s rhetorical strategies helps him/her prove his/her point. That is
the use of rhetorical strategies!)
You need to be more specific!
For example:
Florence Kelley’s use of imagery, as well as her distinct appeal to the pathos
of her all-woman audience, helped her make her argument that if women
had the right to vote, the child labor laws would improve. And moreover,
being aware of her audience, Kelley called those women to action by trying
to convince them to sway their husbands into voting for women’s suffrage.
+ Now you try…

Using either of the essays we read last week (Woolf or Walker),
write an analytical claim.
*When you’re done writing your claim, ask yourself these questions:

Is my claim arguable?

Is my claim provable?

Does it answer the question?

Does it make sense?

Did I include the WHAT and HOW in my claim?
*You must answer YES to all of the questions in order for your claim
to be PERFECT!
+ Now, let’s get cRaaaZy!!
When writing a comparative analysis, your INTRODUCTION should:

Introduce the background of the speech topics and time periods

Introduce the two speeches (author, title, brief summary)

Show how the two pieces are connected (by topic or rhetorical
strategy)

Come to a conclusion about which piece is stronger and why
Claim templates:
1.
While both _________________ and ______________ discuss
________________________, ultimately, ____________________’s
piece makes a stronger argument because…
2.
_____________________ and ____________________ focus their lines
of reasoning on ________________________ (appeals? a call to
action?); however, in the end, ______________________ produces a
stronger argument because…
+ Other

Points
Do you know how to properly quote a text? (MLA Format)
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/03/

Organization—Option 1: First 1-2 body paragraphs on rhet.
devices of first article; last 1-2 body paragraphs on rhet. devices of
second article Option 2: Each body paragraph focuses on one
rhet. device for both articles (Review the rainbow Rhet. Strat. Chart
to help you select which to use.)

Topic sentences; wrap-up sentences that connect back to your
claim

Does your textual evidence actually contain the rhet. device you’re
discussing?

Do you AVOID writing about your own personal opinion on the
topic?

Did you proofread?
+ Give it a whirl…
 While
you read speeches given by Presidents Bush
and Obama, fill in the graphic organizer to help
you organize your thoughts. We will discuss your
comparisons and then you will write an essay in
which you compare the two speeches.
For homework:
Read Ruskin’s lectures. Then, write an analysis
comparing Ruskin’s rhetoric to that of either Woolf or
Walker.