This blog will be filled with data analysis samples created by students in my COMM 274 class at TLU. You will see a variety of types of rhetorical analysis methods on display here.
Links to rhetorical tools:
Here are links to the rhetorical tools used in this class:
I think you have some good stuff here! There is a lot of evidence that is connected to Bigfoot only because the reporter wants it to be Bigfoot. Why do you think he wants it to be Bigfoot so bad? Why did he automatically assume this instead of an animal? I know that's what I would think it was. All of the devices that he uses give me a feeling that something is off. Everything that you have identified I agree with so I definitely think you're on the right track!
I agree with what Hannah said, you have good things! A lot of what you pulled out is facts to the author but based off of little proof. Do you think that the author usually jumps to conclusions from little evidence or is making an exception for Bigfoot? If so, does the author also make exceptions to jump to conclusions for other creatures that are legends?
I think that there are some good thoughts here. Something you could look at for a little extra that I've suggested to some others is the "follow up investigations" at the end of your Bigfoot post. There's some interesting information there. There's also a lot of explanation points that are very exaggerating!!!!
I think you have some good stuff here! There is a lot of evidence that is connected to Bigfoot only because the reporter wants it to be Bigfoot. Why do you think he wants it to be Bigfoot so bad? Why did he automatically assume this instead of an animal? I know that's what I would think it was. All of the devices that he uses give me a feeling that something is off. Everything that you have identified I agree with so I definitely think you're on the right track!
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Hannah said, you have good things! A lot of what you pulled out is facts to the author but based off of little proof. Do you think that the author usually jumps to conclusions from little evidence or is making an exception for Bigfoot? If so, does the author also make exceptions to jump to conclusions for other creatures that are legends?
ReplyDeleteI think that there are some good thoughts here. Something you could look at for a little extra that I've suggested to some others is the "follow up investigations" at the end of your Bigfoot post. There's some interesting information there. There's also a lot of explanation points that are very exaggerating!!!!
ReplyDelete