Rhetorical
Analysis
A Ladder Approach
to Text Analysis
The ladder is leaning up
against my house…
Exigency
Audience
Big Picture
Purpose
Appeals
Ethos
Ethos
Pathos
Logos
Pathos
Logos
Foundation
Scheme
Tropes
Exigency
A
need or lack of something
that needs doing.
Audience
 Reader
or group of
readers capable of acting
on this exigency.
• Primary
• Secondary
Purpose
 What
the author intends for the
reader (s) to do while and after
they read the text.
• Action, change minds, clarify,
informative—Never singular
Appeals
1.
Ethos—Appeals to the
character of the writer or
persona.
Appeals--Ethos
a. Good Will
• Do they have you on their side?
Appeals--Ethos
b. Good character
• Yes, I can trust this person
Appeals--Ethos
c. Good sense
• Have they done their
homework?
“What is an Essay?”
 Ethos:
• Fallacy
Ad Hominem (p. 26)
Appeals--Pathos
 Appeals
readers
to emotions or interest of
• Self-interest
“What is an Essay?”
 Pathos:
• Fallacies
Bandwagon (p. 30)
Appeal to Tradition (p.31)
Appeal to Pity (p. 31)
Appeals--Logos
 Appeals
to the structure of an
argument
• Body of text/structure
Appeals--Logos
 Syllogism
• Minor premise
• Major premise (fact)
• Conclusion
• Transitive Property
• A=b and b=c :.a=c
Appeals--Logos
 Enthymeme
• A syllogism in which the major premise is an
assumption that the audience may already
believe
• Frequently unstated existing tacitly in argument
• Minor Premise
• Major Premise (often assumed)
• Conclusion
Appeals--Logos
 Toulmin’s
Informal Structure
•Type of enthymeme on its side
(same as an enthymeme, but now in a
diagram format with new terms)
DATA/GROUND
(Minor Premise)
Claim
Warrant or Bridge
(Major Premise)
(Conclusion)
Toulmin
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~digger/305/toulmin_model.htm




Data/Ground: reasons or supporting
evidence that bolster the claim.
Warrant: the principle, provision or chain of
reasoning that connects the grounds/reason
to the claim of the argument.
Claim: the position or claim being argued for;
the conclusion
(Actually has 6 parts, but we concentrate on 3.)
Paradigms
 Pattern
of examples
• Repeated and often historical
Common Warrants
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~digger/305/toulmin_model.htm

There are 6 main argumentative strategies via
which the relationship between evidence and claim
are often established. They have the acronym
“GASCAP.”


Generalization (Inductive Fallacy)
Analogy (Inductive Fallacy)
Sign
Causality (Deductive Fallacy)
Authority

Principle



Common Warrants
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~digger/305/toulmin_model.htm
These strategies are used at various different levels
of generality within an argument, and rarely come in
neat packages - typically they are interconnected and
work in combination.
1. Argument based on Generalization
A very common form of reasoning. It assumes that
what is true of a well chosen sample is likely to hold
for a larger group or population, or that certain things
consistent with the sample can be inferred of the
group/population.

2. Argument based on Analogy



Extrapolating from one situation or event based on
the nature and outcome of a similar situation or
event.
Has links to 'case-based' and precedent-based
reasoning used in legal discourse.
What is important here is the extent to which
relevant similarities can be established between 2
contexts. Are there sufficient, typical, accurate,
relevant similarities?
3. Argument via Sign/Clue

The notion that certain types of evidence are
symptomatic of some wider principle or outcome.

For example, smoke is often considered a sign for
fire. Some people think high SAT scores are a sign
a person is smart and will do well in college.
4. Causal Argument



Arguing that a given occurrence or event is the
result of, or is effected by, factor X. Causal
reasoning is the most complex of the different
forms of warrant. The big dangers with it are:
Mixing up correlation with causation
Falling into the post hoc, ergo propter hoc
trap. Closely related to confusing correlation and
causation, this involves inferring 'after the fact,
therefore because of the fact').
5. Argument from Authority



Does person X or text X constitute an authoritative
source on the issue in question?
What political, ideological or economic interests
does the authority have?
Is this the sort of issue in which a significant
number of authorities are likely to agree on?
6. Argument from Principle
Locating a principle that is widely regarded as valid
and showing that a situation exists in which this
principle applies. Evaluation:





Is the principle widely accepted?
Does it accurately apply to the situation in question?
Are there commonly agreed on exceptions?
Are there 'rival' principles that lead to a different claim?
Are the practical consequences of following the principle
sufficiently desirable?
“What is an Essay?”
 Logos:
• Valid v Sound Argument
• Deductive v Inductive Reasoning
• Deductive Fallacies
(p. 16-17)
non sequitur (p. 21)
Red Herring (p. 22)
False cause (GASCAP) (p. 23)
Begging the Questions (p. 24)
Either or Fallacy (p. 24)
(p. 16)
“What is an Essay?”
 Logos:
• Inductive Fallacies
Hasty Generalization (GASCAP) (p. 25)
Anecdotal Evidence (p. 25)
False Analogy (GASCAP) (p. 25)
Special Pleading (p. 26)
Schemes and Tropes
 Scheme=Variation
of norm
words and sentences
 Trope=Variations from idea
construction (Ideation)
Schemes
Schemes of words




Prosthesis
Epenthesis
Proparalepsis
Aphaeresis
 Syncope
 Apocope
 Metathesis
 Antisthecon
Schemes of
construction
Schemes of balance

Parallelism

Antithesis
Schemes of unusual or
inverted word order
Hyperbaton
 Anastrophe
 Parenthesis
 Apposition
Schemes of Omission


Ellipsis
Asyndeton
Schemes of Repetition




Alliteration
Assonance
Anaphora
Epistrophe
 Analeptic
 Anadiplosis
 Climax
 Antimetabole
 Polytoton
Tropes








Metaphor
Paronomasia
Simile
Metonymy
Synecdoche
Antanaclasis
Syllepsis
Puns
Tropes




Puns
Antanaclasis
Paronomasia
Syllepsis
Tropes





Anthimeria
Periphrasis
Personification
Hyperbole
Litotes
Tropes




Rhetorical question
Irony
Onomatopoeia
Oxymoron
Top Down=Big Picture
Exigency
Audience
Purpose
Middle Up or Down
Appeals
Bottom Up
Schemes and
Tropes
Exigency
Audience
Top Down
Purpose
Appeals
Middle Up or Down
Schemes & Tropes
Bottom Up