• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

English Works

  • Home
  • Our Shop
    • Books
    • Year 12 Frameworks Crafting Texts
    • Argument Analysis
    • Year Level Packages
  • Years 7 – 10
    • Techniques of Persuasion Program
    • Become an Expert Program
      • The English Works Analytical Vocab Builder
    • Better Essays & Persuasive Techniques
    • Grammar & Language (Blue)
    • English Works Classic Short Stories by the masters
  • Years 11-12
    • Oedipus the King by Sophocles: an essay-writing guide
    • Sunset Boulevard : How to Write an A+ Essay
    • Rainbow’s End by Jane Harrison: an essay-writing guide
    • English Works Reader Blue Book
    • Year 11 & 12 Argument Analysis
      • VCE Argument Pack
      • The English Works Analytical Vocab Builder
      • VCE Section C: Suggested Responses
    • Year 12 Frameworks About Country
    • Year 12 Frameworks About Personal Journeys
      • Year 12 Frameworks About Play
      • Year 12 Frameworks About Protest
      • Crafting texts: Year 11 About Crisis
  • Classes
    • Our Classes 2026
  • Contact us

(Red) Exercise 32, Outright bans, p. 43

Exercise 32: Outright bans. (p. 43)

Task:

  • to “contextualise the persuasive language techniques around the argument”.
  • to show an awareness of both argument and persuasive language choices
  • use quotes to fit the grammatical construction of the sentence
  • embed metalanguage so as to avoid the trap of summarising.

Authors often use real-life, relatable examples; and professional observations. The task is to be as analytically specific as possible with regards to the list of examples and their purpose/impact of word choices.

Task:

  • to think about the audience of real-life examples; and how they are positioned to respond
  • identify the range of emotions as specifically as possible.

(Associated techniques: if more than one example, there is a comparison; and maybe attack; and an appeal.)

Key idea:   The author condemns a range of distractions among motorists. She contends that whilst it is a good idea to ban mobile phones whilst driving, we must also consider that there are also other distractions that can be just as harmful/dangerous

Argument: she sets up her argument/frames her viewpoint with a reference to statistics from the police report. These prove that mobile phones only account for half of accidents caused by distractions. The opening and the statistics prepare her audience (road users and policy makers) to recognise that there are other distractions that are just as dangerous. To encourage vigilance at all times, she suggests that we must be careful about / avoid scapegoating the mobile phone as a ban will not solve all accidents.

Persuasive techniques: real-life example/comparison/attack/appeals to duty of care

Real-life examples (be as specific as possible): Ms Abbey relies on her own experience whilst commuting on the bus and describes a string of relatable examples that are dangerous, but fearfully, “quite normal”. (The fact that these are “quite normal”, she expects, will enable members of the public, many unsuspecting motorists, to identify readily with the examples she offers, whilst alarming them at the same time.)

Ms Abbey refers to one driver who was “spooning food into his mouth” and another who was “applying makeup, fiddling with (their) mascara”.  Her exclamation, “not to mention smoking” invites her readers to share her frustration at yet another distraction to add to the long list.

Techniques: attack and appeal to safety standards/duty of care: She uses this example to show all road-users and police/policy makers that all distractions are just as insidious/irresponsible and dangerous.

Audience and purpose:   road users, police/ policy makers and specifically those road users who fail to show respect and concentrate on the road

Emotions: anger, fear, shame (be specific).

Specifically: Ms Abbey seeks to direct our anger towards motorists who are lighting up cigarettes, or putting on makeup.  (She invites us to share her frustration at those who fail to recognise how they are undermining the safety of all road users.)

Ms Abbey seeks to shame those drivers who are not concentrating on the road, and who may be eating breakfast or “applying mascara”.

She arouses fear among all road users who are aware that their safety is being undermined/compromised

Her exasperated comment, “too bad if they miss the lights” foreshadows the danger that may arise because they have not been watching the road. She anticipates that all road-users will recognise her original premise that mobile phones are not the only cause of serious accidents.

Task for homework

See below: please rewrite the sample paragraph, including more quotes and purpose.

Tone: high-minded; sarcastic; practical.

Ms Abbey asserts that drivers should not use their mobile phones or other distractions while driving. She presents herself as an eye-witness observer and using her own real-life experience, Ms Abbey describes the shameless and careless behaviour of many motorists. Accordingly, she adopts the high moral ground (she adopts a high-minded tone) and discredits (attacks) motorists who, she believes, are often reckless and irresponsible. For example, the fact that it is “normal” to eat breakfast, sarcastically implies that they are in a hurry and prefer to eat breakfast rather than watch the road. Her description of the details regarding smoking shows just how distracting this behaviour can be. Her purpose is to vex all readers, particularly motorists, who would be fearful at the careless attitude towards safety shown by such drivers.

Return to EAL : Exercise Program (Techniques)

Tweet

Primary Sidebar

View all Products in this Category

Cart

Search

Footer

For Sponsorship and Other Enquiries

Please contact English Works
Ph: (061) 0400 568 657
or email:jminter@englishworks.com.au
Original artwork by Kelly Bull

Keep in touch

Search

Copyright © 2026 English Works · Log in