Please purchase the workbook for maximum use. 
Special Price: Techniques of Persuasion: $14.95 (incl. postage)
Revision Exercise 44: Give a puppy a chance (p. 60)
- Anecdotal evidence (first-hand experience) Purpose: to evoke sympathy and draw attention to the sad plight of the puppy who is extremely vulnerable and likely to be killed on “death row”.
- Rhetorical question: Tone: provocative and incredulous; outraged, indignant.
- Attack: characterising the puppy factory owners as heartless and careless; they are greedy and prioritise profits over welfare.
- Expert comments and statistics: The purpose is to show that this author is well informed and has done adequate research. The purpose of the statistics is to show us the size and extent of the problem. The author seeks, thereby, to spark our anger at those who are responsible for an excess in demand.
- Tone: peremptory, strident, blunt, terse, emphatic. The author leaves us in no doubt that if we care, we would agitate for change.
- Appeal to duty of care: This is also an indirect criticism of parents who allow children to buy puppies but do not provide adequate support and an environment of care. They are indirectly feeding the supply chain which enables the puppy factories to find a constant market for the animals.
- Similes (figurative language): The use of figurative language and emotive terms draws attention to the fact that the puppies are being treated disgracefully.
- Alliteration: draw attention to the luck of some of the puppies and the goodwill of the volunteers.
- Emotive language, “animal scandal”, and appeal to law and order/ regulations: Ms Snare draws attention once again to the shameful treatment of the animals. The words with positive connotations, “right controls and political will” are used to show readers that something can be done if we show courage and determination. AT the same time, Ms Snare criticises those who fail to change the laws to protect the animals.
Short paragraph:
Adopting an indignant tone throughout her letter, Ms Snare contends that there should be stricter controls placed on puppy factories. Using a combination of evidence, the author seeks to arouse our sympathy for the “forlorn” puppies while directing our anger towards the “profiteering puppy factories.” Specifically, Ms Snare’s reference to her own first-hand experience used as anecdotal evidence depicts the sorry plight of the animals that are abandoned. Figurative terms such as “like homeless tramps” and “like disposable commodities” reinforce her view that they are treated shamefully and encourage people to think about their own treatment of animals. The statistics as quoted by the RSDA present Mr Jeff Tomlinson also help to depict the extent of the problem and prove a need for regulation. On the other hand, Ms Snare agitates for change and tighter controls by directing our anger towards the “profiteering puppy factory” owners. She characterises them as “hard-hearted” and shames them for their apparent disregard of the plight of the puppies. (She also suggests that families are also irresponsible because they fail to provide appropriate care.)
Through her word choice and appeals, Ms Snare expects concerned members of the public to agitate and pressure the authorities to implement greater control.
PROSE PASSAGE
Adopting an indignant tone throughout her letter, Ms Snare contends that there should be stricter controls placed on puppy factories. Using a combination of evidence, the author seeks to arouse our sympathy for the “forlorn” puppies while directing our anger towards the “profiteering puppy factories.”
Specifically, Ms Snare’s reference to her own first-hand experience clearly depicts the sorry plight of the animals who are abandoned. Figurative terms such as “like homeless tramps” and “like disposable commodities” reinforce her view that the puppies are treated shamefully. These terms also encourage people to think about their own treatment of animals. The statistics as quoted by the RSDA present Mr Jeff Tomlinson help to depict the extent of the problem and prove a need for regulation.
On the other hand, Ms Snare agitates for change and tighter controls by directing our anger towards the “profiteering puppy factory” owners. She characterises them as “hard hearted” and shames them for their apparent disregard of the plight of the puppies. (She also suggests that families are also irresponsible because they fail to provide appropriate care.)
Through her word choice and appeals, Ms Snare expects concerned members of the public to agitate and pressure the authorities to implement greater control.
- Return to Red Workbook Tasks: An Overview
- Return to Lesson 6: Revision exercises 41-44, pp 57-70