Rhetoric
Definitions and a Structure for
Better Analysis
Adapted from AP Collegeboard
A Formal Definition of Rhetoric
● the way a person uses language to create
a message
● “the faculty of observing in any given case
the available means of persuasion”
(Aristotle)
In Other Words
Rhetoric is something you already use
everyday. It is in general conversation,
movies, advertisements, books, art, and
even body language. We use it when we
speak and write, and being able to recognize
such elements in reading will boost your own
analysis.
The Big Five
Syntax
Diction
Imagery
Figurative Language
Details
Syntax
● the set of rules in a language used to
convey a complete thought
● helps to develop the tone, mood, and
rhythm of a piece
o
o
o
o
Simple or Declarative
Formal vs. Informal
Long or Convoluted
Nontraditional
Diction
● the words used by the author
● it should be accurate and clear, given the
writer’s purpose
● with syntax, develops tone, mood,
connotation, characterization
o
o
o
Formal vs. Informal
Flowery vs. Direct
Simple vs. Complex
Details
The details included within a piece of writing
develop a writer’s tone, the mood of a piece,
and the overall theme and style.
What is included? What is omitted? How
are the details structured or revealed?
Imagery
● the use of figurative language to represent
objects, actions, and ideas in a way that
appeals to the senses
● this allows the reader to better understand
the story concepts
Figurative Language
● metaphors, similes, personification, onomatopoeia,
allegories, symbols, ironies, etc., that, through word
or structure create a figure or illustrative
representation of something
● either makes a claim about something or reveals
emotions and thoughts of the author/characters
o these are both intended (author’s choice) and unintended
(subconscious choices that reveal author’s psyche)
The Rhetorical Triangle
We’re drawing this. Yay!
Draw a triangle in the middle of your paper.
Then circle the triangle.
Aristotle’s Elements- Speaker
At the bottom left point of your triangle write
the word “speaker”.
Notes to add to the section:
● consider your own experiences, knowledge, and
feelings to determine your attitude towards a subject
and your understanding of the audience
● language, tone, style
Aristotle’s Elements- Subject
At the top of your triangle write the word
“subject”.
Notes to add to the section:
● evaluate what you know/need to know
● investigate perspectives
● determine needed evidence and proof
Aristotle’s Elements- Audience
At the bottom right of your triangle write the
word “audience”.
Notes to add to the section:
● determine reader’s expectations,
knowledge, attitude towards your subject
● you consider this an assignment
Context
Inside your circle, write “context”.
Add the following notes to this section:
● consider the circumstances or situation in which
writing or speaking occurs
● examine the way context can lead to a writer’s
rhetorical choices
“We can’t know what writers mean...but we have rhetoric
to help us interpret.” (Ann Berthoff)
Aim, Intention, or Purpose
On the edge of your circle write the word “Intention”.
Notes to add to the section:
● the reason for a writer’s decisions
● effective writing analysis connects a writer’s purpose
with a reader’s understanding
● often found within the thesis statement then carried
throughout an entire piece
Aristotle’s Appeals- Pathos (Emotion)
● Considering readers’ emotions and
interests
● Shaping appeal for audience
● Using personal stories and observations
● Using figurative language to create drama
and emotional reactions
o
imagery, metaphors, similes, analogies, etc.
Pathos- What Not To Do
● Bandwagon
o everyone else is doing it
● Flattery
o sweet talk used to persuade
● In-crowd
o if you adopt certain beliefs or values, you are cool
● Veiled threats
o adverse consequences will occur if prescribed action is not taken
● False analogies
o assuming that if two things are true in some ways, they are similar in
other ways, without proof
● Weasel words
o
misleading, meaningless words or phrases
Aristotle’s Appeals- Logos (Logic)
● Offering clear, thoughtful positions and
support
● Developing ideas with appropriate details
● Using inductive and deductive reasoning
● Establishing cause and effect
● Providing examples, citing authority, using
testimony
Logos- What Not To Do
● Begging the question
o statement based on something that hasn’t been proven
● Post hoc fallacy
o assuming that one event caused another event when it could be
coincidence
● Non sequitur
o linking two unrelated ideas together
● Either-or
o Simplifying a complicated situation to suggest there are only two
outcomes
Logos- More No-Nos
● Hasty generalization
o utilizing stereotypes in an argument by making sweeping
generalizations with little evidence
● Oversimplification
o careless reasoning that is ignorant of all issues involved
● Slippery slope
o assumption that one step will lead to a second, much more
terrible, step
● Straw man
o a diversionary fallacy that draws attention away from the argument
Aristotle’s Appeals- Ethos (Credibility)
●
●
●
●
●
Establishing common ground
Demonstrating personal knowledge
Providing credible support that is cited
Demonstrating fairness
Appealing to audience’s ethical or moral
beliefs
Ethos- What Not To Do
● Ad hominem
o
character attack (insulting person or cause
instead of addressing argument or issue)
● Guilt by association
o
attacking a person’s associates to make person
appear guilty or discredited (this is possible with
ideas as well, by assuming an idea is flawed
based on the creator or other associated ideas)
Further explanation of the three appeals:
Logos
Logos: An appeal to logic.
When a writer today employs logos, s/he might draw upon statistics,
credible sources, arguments premised on reason, and the inherent logic of
a situation. Consider this claim in a student paper about heart disease and
pork-rind consumption:
The information about the risks of eating pork rinds comes from no
fewer than seven scientific studies published in respected journals. Each
study was reviewed by a panel of readers who did not know the authors.
The journals receive no outside funding except from their subscribers.
Based on these factors, one must conclude that unless other studies come
forward, pork-rind consumption poses health risks.
Further explanation of the three appeals:
Pathos
Pathos: Appeals to emotion are common in non-academic writing but tend
to distort factual evidence.
From our pork-rind paper:
When you see someone reaching for the pork rinds in the
supermarket, you should slap it out of their hands and tell them the terrible
story of these crunchy death-bags full of poison. Oh, consider the children
who will grown up addicted to these vile things, unless we all act now!
Pathos-based appeals can play on fears or other emotions. Advertising has
elevated the use of pathos to a very fine art.
Further explanation of the three appeals:
Ethos
Ethos: Can rely on reputation or experiences to prove a point. Credibility is key to winning an
audience's belief and support for one's argument.
Again, from the same paper:
Darleen Diggler of Greasy Bottom, VA, was the first to testify at the Congressional hearing
on pork rinds. Ms. Diggler, who had suffered four heart attacks, needed assistance getting into
the chair provided her by the Congressmen. As she testified, "see what a pound of rinds a day
will do to you! I've been eating them for thirty years! Now it is too late." She broke down, sobbing,
at this point. Ms. Diggler's testimony was followed by Dr. I.M. Smarte, an award-winning
cardiologist from the Medical College of Virginia. Dr. Smarte presented evidence from his four
decades of practice, and he noted the high levels of saturated fat, trans-fat, and cholesterol found
in pork rinds and urged Congress to pass the legislation outlawing the snack.
Both Ms. Diggler and Dr. Smarte use ethos to make their claims; Smarte also employs logos (the
claims about what the rinds contain). Diggler's plea could be seen as employing pathos to sway
the lawmakers.