Speech

PATHOS:In this speech i am going to convince you that I should be allowed an extra $20 per week pocket money.

I should be allowed an extra $20 per week pocket money because now that i am older i want more expensive things and $10 per week is not enough. All of my friends now earn over $30 per week and are buying things that wold take me 4 months to buy but it only takes them 1 month to buy. This puts me way behind some of my friends and it can be very embarrassing. Also by the time that i have the money to buy the item they will all have other thing and i will not be able to buy all the things i want. They also have enough money to buy smaller things, such as food and going out.

As a conclusion I think that I should be allowed an extra $20 per week so I am not stuck spending my whole life saving for things that i want instead have more money to spent going out with my friends. 

LOGOS: Have you ever felt like you had nothing compared to your friends? Well I know how that feels, compared to my friends i have nothing.

$10 per week is not even enough to go to out on the weekend with your friends plus save up for things that i want. While all my friends go out on the weekend and still saving up for expensive things that they want at the same time. I can find this very frustrating and embarrassing as all my friends call me poor and not even having enough money to go out on the weekends.

As a conclusion I think that i should be allowed $30 per week pocket money so i can go out on the weekend and stop asking for handouts when i want to buy something or go out. 

Wednesday 23/02 Abraham Lincoln Speech

Make sure your post on Patrick Henry's 'Give Me Liberty of Give me Death' speech are all ready and posted.

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate - we cannot consecrate - we cannot hallow - this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us - that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion - that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain - that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

President Abraham Lincoln - November 19, 1863

HW: Look at the speech by Abraham Lincoln at the bottom of this post. Answer the following questions about it in another post titled 'Abraham Lincoln: The Gettysburg Address'

1. What do you notice about the length of the speech? This speech is a lot shorter than most other speeches but it is still persuasive
2. What do you notice about the organisations? I notice that there are three main parts of this speech Intro, Body and Conclusion   
3. What do you think is the thesis of the speech? I think that the thesis of this speech is about going into the the civil war
4. Name two techniques (with quotes) which you feel are successfully employed and discuss why you feel they are so effective. Two techniques used in this speech was repetition  eg. "
    we cannot dedicate - we cannot consecrate - we cannot hallow","
   

   of the people, by the people, for the people" 

   and  he uses emotive language eg "
   Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."
5. Why do you think that the concluding statement is considered so important and powerful by many Americans to this day? The concluding statement is considered so important and powerful by many Americans to this day because it states how sacred and honorable their country is that they live on. It also says how Americans should be proud to be apart of that country.

Monday 21/2: Patrick Henry - Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death

Pathos

Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who,having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

• Repetition
• Exaggeration/Hyperbole
• Generalizations
• Clichés
• Statistics/Distortion of facts
• Imperatives
• Emotive words
• Use of imagery/symbolism
• Puns
• Use of endorsements/testimonials
• Rhetorical questions
• Inclusive language
• Euphemism 

(LATE BECAUSE I WAS SICK) Julius Ceasar III.ii.82–96

1. Logos
Mark Antony: 
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him;
The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones,
So let it be with Caesar ... The noble Brutus
Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Caesar answered it ...
bodyHere, under leave of Brutus and the rest,
(For Brutus is an honorable man;
So are they all; all honourable men)
Come I to speak in Caesar's funeral ...
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Brutus says he was ambitious;
And Brutus is an honourable man….
He hath brought many captives home to Rome,
Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?
When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
And Brutus is an honourable man.
You all did see that on the Lupercal
I thrice presented him a kingly crown,
Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
And, sure, he is an honourable man.
I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke,
But here I am to speak what I do know.
You all did love him once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you then to mourn for him? 
endO judgement! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason…. Bear with me;
My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar,
And I must pause till it come back to me.

• Repetition
• Exaggeration/Hyperbole
• Generalizations
• Clichés
• Statistics/Distortion of facts
• Imperatives
• Emotive words
• Use of imagery/symbolism
• Puns
• Use of endorsements/testimonials
• Rhetorical questions
• Inclusive language
• Euphemism 

Susan B Anthony, Rights For Women

In the 1800s, women in the United States had few legal rights and did not have the right to vote. This speech was given by Susan B. Anthony after her arrest for casting an illegal vote in the presidential election of 1872. She was tried and then fined $100 but refused to pay.

1. Read the following speech and determine what form of logical reasoning (from Aristotle) she is using in her argument. Give quotes to support your decision.

In this speech Susan Anthony uses Logos in her argument because she uses emotion to persuade her audience into being onto her side "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

      2. What is the 'thesis' (main point) of her speech. Give the sentence you feel serves as            

The thesis of this speech is to persuade her audience into allowing voting for women 

1. Divide the speech into three parts: Intro, Body, Conclusion

INTRO: Friends and fellow citizens: I stand before you tonight under indictment for the alleged crime of having voted at the last presidential election, without having a lawful right to vote. It shall be my work this evening to prove to you that in thus voting, I not only committed no crime, but, instead, simply exercised my citizen's rights, guaranteed to me and all United States citizens by the National Constitution,beyond the power of any state to deny.
BODY: The preamble of the Federal Constitution says:"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union. And we formed it, not to give the blessings of liberty, but to secure them; not to the half of ourselves and the half of our posterity, but to the whole people - women as well as men.And it is a downright mockery to talk to women of their enjoyment of the blessings of liberty while they are denied the use of the only means of securing them provided by this democratic-republican government - the ballot.For any state to make sex a qualification that must ever result in the disfranchisement of one entire half of the people, is to pass a bill of attainder, or, an ex post facto law, and is therefore a violation of the supreme law of the land. By it the blessings of liberty are forever withheld from women and their female posterity.To them this government has no just powers derived from the consent of the governed. To them this government is not a democracy. It is not a republic. It is an odious aristocracy; a hateful oligarchy of sex; the most hateful aristocracy ever established on the face of the globe; an oligarchy of wealth, where the rich govern the poor. An oligarchy of learning, where the educated govern the ignorant, or even an oligarchyof race, where the Saxon rules the African, might be endured; but this oligarchy of sex, which makes father, brothers, husband, sons, the oligarchs over the mother and sisters, the wife and daughters, of every household - which ordains allmen sovereigns, all women subjects, carries dissension, discord, and rebellion into every home of the nation.Webster, Worcester, and Bouvier all define a citizen to be a person in the United States, entitled to vote and hold office.
CONCLUSIONS: 
The only question left to be settled now is: Are women persons? And I hardly believe any of our opponents will have the hardihood to say they are not. Being persons, then, women are citizens; and no state has a right to make any law, or to enforce any old law, that shall abridge their privileges or immunities. Hence, every discrimination against women in the constitutions and laws of the several states is today null and void, precisely as is every one against Negroes.

Highlight the text where you see the techniques below being used in the speech. When highlighting the text in the speech where one of these techniques is used.
• Repetition
• Exaggeration/Hyperbole
• Generalizations
• Clichés
• Statistics/Distortion of facts
• Imperatives
• Emotive words
• Use of imagery/symbolism
• Puns
• Use of endorsements/testimonials
• Rhetorical questions
• Inclusive language
• Euphemism 
HOMEWORK: Due Monday 21/2
Go to the post with the video and text of for the important speech in Julius Ceasar.
Determine the thesis or goal of the speaker (what is he trying to persuade of the audience?)
What mode of persuasion is used?
Highlight the techniques he uses using the list (with colours) below.

Books Are Better Than TV

Books Are Better Than TV


Books are better than TV because reading helps you to improve your language skills, it helps you to recognize words better and it can also help you to understand complex topics better. Where as Watching TV, Especially for 8-18 year olds TV will not be education and will not help you with your school work at all, but for most TV watches it Will either involve playing games or watching trashy television shows.
Reading for 30 minutes every day, even when you are not at school will help with your English and it is relaxing. Most people say that watching TV is relaxing but it actually makes you feel tired and depressed, and within 30 Seconds of watching TV a critical part of your brain shuts down and people will act less "human" like after watching TV. TV is like a hypothesizer if you watch too much TV it makes you fat and lazy and you feel like you don't want to go outside and be active.
Where as if you spend 1 hour reading a book instead of watching TV you feel more relaxed and you are ready to go out and do things rather than feeling depressed and tired
As a conclusion I think that Books are much better for you brain and body than watching TV and i would suggest to anyone that asked to spend more time reading than watching TV

William Wallace's Speech to His Army From Braveheart

"I am William Wallace. And I see a whole army of my countrymen,
here in defiance of tyranny! You have come to fight as free men. And
free man you are! What will you do without freedom? Will you fight?"
"Two thousand against ten?" - the veteran shouted. "No! We will
run - and live!"
"Yes!" Wallace shouted back. "Fight and you may die. Run and you
will live at least awhile. And dying in your bed many years from now,
would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for
one chance, just one chance, to come back here as young men and tell
our enemies that they may take our lives but they will never take
our freedom!"




William Wallace is persuading his army that they should go into battle and fight the British army freedom. He persuades them by saying that if they leave now and let the British army win they will no longer be free men. "Fight and you may die. Run and you
will live at least awhile. And dying in your bed many years from now,
would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for
one chance, just one chance, to come back here as young men and tell
our enemies that they may take our lives but they will never take
our freedom"

In this speech he William uses Pathos to persuade his army into battle by telling them about what they may think in back to in many years.

HomeWork

Pathos (Emotional): Pathos is getting the emotions of the audience, you can get it from a metaphor or story telling, experience - may happen
Logos (Logic): Is a reasoned discourse, it relates to the speech itself and emotional appeals that have no bearing on the issue.(factual information, academic situations - political-business , objective- absence of emotion), 
Ethos (Experience): Ethos relates to expertise and knowledge in a speech. It relates to the speaker, power of the speaker, Credibility - using your own experience.

Queen Elizabeth: Speech to the Troops at Tilbury

My loving people,

        We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit our selves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear, I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good-will of my subjects; and therefore I am come amongst you, as you see, at this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live and die amongst you all; to lay down for my God, and for my kingdom, and my people, my honour and my blood, even in the dust. I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realm; to which rather than any dishonour shall grow by me, I myself will take up arms, I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field. I know already, for your forwardness you have deserved rewards and crowns; and We do assure you in the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean time, my lieutenant general2 shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble or worthy subject; not doubting but by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and your valour in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over those enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people.

Q1
Queen Elizabeth talks about herself in this speech as one of the soldiers and that she would fight with them and die with them "Therefore I am come amongst you, as you see, at this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live and die amongst you all"


Q2
This is an effective way to refer to her self because it shows that she is willing to die with her soldiers and for her country "But I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear, I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good-will of my subjects"