Analysis of Rhetoric in Your Discipline

Purpose

This assignment is designed to introduce you to the rhetorical conventions that are related to the various ways of knowing and valuing in your discipline. Your goal is to examine a few representative samples of scholarly writing--articles from academic journals--and produce a rhetorical analysis, employing the rhetorical conventions that are valued by members of your disciplinary discourse community.

Your paper should demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of the conventions you have identified in your research sample, supplemented by what you have learned about writing in your discipline from your research. There are two ways in which you should demonstrate your rhetorical knowledge:

- By writing about the specific conventions of your discipline (how are ethos, pathos and logos created?)

- By performing (using) these conventions to write your paper
The paper you will write will become part of your disciplinary community; it will look, read and act like your research tells you it should. Therefore, your paper will not only tell you how to function in your discipline, it will actually be operating as part of it.

Assignment requirements for assessment:
The assignment requires you to collect three peer-reviewed articles, from your field for analysis, written in the past 5-7 years. When complete, your rhetorical analysis should be approximately 4-5 double-spaced pages in length, along with a works cited.

Rhetorical analysis content:

1. Find common rhetorical strategies (*SPECIFIC ways ethos, pathos and logos are constructed)

2. Discuss specifically how different pieces are using these strategies similarly or differently

3. Explain effects of strategies

To avoid vague use of ethos, pathos, and logos, always explain HOW and WHY an emotional appeal, logical appeal, or sense of credibility is created and for what purpose. Think of ethos, pathos, logos as EFFECTS--what creates these effects? Formal language? Organization?

Rhetorical analysis format:

The format and style of the paper should be consistent with those used in scholarly journals published within your discipline--you should attempt to mimic the style, tone, and organization of the articles you analyzed. In addition,

- The document must be clearly structured, with appropriate transitions between ideas

- Ideas and sentences should be clearly expressed and easy to follow

- The document should be free of grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors

Remember that you are to analyze the rhetorical structures and conventions of the articles, and NOT the arguments or information contained therein. This assignment is designed to help you understand the structures that support the unstated values and expectations of your discipline, and is therefore not a summary or evaluation of the individual messages you find through your research.

In analyzing HOW authors are constructing their arguments, and avoiding WHAT they are saying, you can find similarities and differences among the articles in the ways ideas are conveyed:
- Do the pieces use a specific emotional appeal (pathos) in similar ways?
- Do the pieces use a specific emotional appeal in different ways?
- Do the pieces differ in how they emphasize similar ideas?
- Are pieces similar in how they emphasize different ideas?
- How is credibility (ethos) created? Compare and contrast techniques to find convergences and divergences.
- Is there similar or contrasting logical organization (logos)?
- What kind of language is being used? Visuals? Fonts?

Attachment:- Anthropology analysis.rar