The Ancient Origins of Dieting
Nicola Twilley and Cynthia Graber Authors Nicole Twilley and Cynthia Graber composed a short article over the beginnings of diets and an "idealized body type". Throughout the article, there is a casual tone, the article gives the feeling of a conversation. For example, "the West’s preoccupation with the “d” word, and why do strange fads such as chewing each bite hundreds of times stick around for centuries? This episode, we explore the history of diets, before asking a scientist: Does anything actually work?" with the use of phrases such as "the 'd' words" authors establish a laid back and casual tone to explain the start of the famous diet. Twilley and Graber relied strongly on ethos and logos, as seen in the article. The two authors establish credibility by explaining the Greek origins of the word “diet”. In another sentence, the women decide to quote the writer of the book “Calories & Corsets” to show that they have received legitime information about the origins of diets. Overall, the ladies establish good credibility and engage an audience with their casual/conversational tone. The short article introducing the podcast series accomplished its mission of hooking the audience to tune into their newest podcast.
0 Comments
The Problem With 'Asians Are Good at Science'
Joan C. Williams, Marina Multhaup, & Rachel Korn The three authors of the article, "The Problem With 'Asians Are Good at Science'' decided to write about the higher expectations that Asian Americans, especially women, face in STEM fields. Throughout the article, the authors' diction is informative yet casual, there is not much loaded language or elevated diction, overall it was very casual. The authors' emotions towards the topic were expressed through the facts and information they chose to include in their article. The information that was chosen to be in the article to sway the audience in favor of their argument. The authors appeal strongly to ethos and logos by providing information from surveys conducted by highly educated and respected individuals. For example, "In recent years, the authors of this article, alongside our colleagues at the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law, have investigated gender and racial biases that pervade stem professions" not only does mentioning the university that the team worked with give credibility to the research, it also gives them credibility. Later on in the article, the authors used research such as, "Among 741 postdocs who have children, Asian scientists were twice as likely as white postdocs to report being discouraged from taking maternity leave by their principal investigators." to appeal to logos, by doing so, they literally made discrimination a fact. The authors had a well rounded argument full of evidence that for sure convinced me. Nazis Are Just Like You and Me, Except They're Nazis
James Hamblin James Hamblin wrote an article briefly describing the life of an American nazi. Under his title, "Nazis Are Just Like You and Me, Except They're Nazis" he wrote "... despite what you may have read in The New York Times". Throughout the article, Hamblin's diction was very informal, using day-to-day language to document Steve Stevenson's, an American nazi's, day. Hamblin did not portray his emotions in his article through words, his emotions were expressed in the article as a whole. The article was meant to depict nazis as normal people, just with very controversial ideals. James Hamblin appealed to the audience's pathos by giving Steve Stevenson removing his "nazi" label. He began his article by saying, "Steve Stevenson dispenses wisdom freely, though he is not a chef. He is 32 years old, and he drinks whole milk, and his tattoos are nonviolent. The kitchen spice rack contains only garlic powder. He wears jeans made of denim.". By using short relatable descriptions appeals to pathos because anyone could easily relate to one of the sentences that describes Stevenson. The reader then realizes that nazis can live a typical American life. A Presidential Speech Steeped in Hypocrisy
David Frum David Frum wrote an article criticizing President Trump for bringing religion into his speech sending condolences to the victims and the victim's families of the horrific Las Vegas shooting on Sunday. Frum had a very strong opinion in his article, he argued that Trump should not bring religion in his speeches if he has not expressed religious affiliation before his presidency. David Frum opposed Trump's actions strongly, he came off as angry and annoyed in the article. He used the word "steeped" (in hypocrisy) instead of "full" to convey how passionate he is. He also described Trump's speech as "shifty, nervous, and false.", and sent advice to Trump's Cabinet telling them sarcastically to "not make him better". David Frum used sarcasm in addressing Trumps Cabinet, "You can’t make him better, and you can’t make him different. Let him be the man he is, just tidied up a little. Cut the God talk. It’s insulting to those who believe, and no comfort to those who grieve." to ridicule them. He utilized the sarcasm to try to convey that the Cabinet tries too hard to make Trump add up to a good person, who David thinks he is not. The device is intended to convince the reader that Trump should not be mentioning religion, his Cabinet is attempting to make him someone he isn't by adding religious statements into his speech to clean his image up. Essentially, Frum is trying to debunk President Trump's religiosity. He tries to prove that Trump only uses religious statements to try to appeal to a larger audience, and convince others that he is a good person, when in fact, he states that it is offensive to Christian and extremely annoying to others. Frum succeeded, his loaded language and angry sarcastic tone brought his point across. |
Archives |