hey guys,
I am in year 10 and I would like to know if english is my strong suit and if it is, I'll probs do eng lit. I have attached my argument analysis that i wrote earlier in the year, please feel free to let me know.
Through the countless debates and solutions proposed to prevent the heavy road toll, Johnathan Sprinter puts forth his take on the issue. In his letter to the editor, ‘P – Plate extensions Overdue’, Sprinter confidently claims that extending a 7- year restriction on p – platers, is the answer to the ongoing conundrum. The author appeals to the general public – more specifically, anyone who has the qualifications to drive. By doing so, his desperate need to have a large crowd on his side is evident.
From the outset, the author highlights the necessity of a 7-year restriction, by linking it to one of the most widespread causes of road accidents – drink driving. Sprinter introduces his viewpoint and the expectation he has towards the reader by posing a rhetorical question ‘If there was just one solution to prevent the heavy road toll... isn’t worth a try?’ This influences the reader to subconsciously agree with Sprinter’s question and therefore, formulate opinions that most likely support his contention. Moreover, Sprinter’s reference to the assistant commissioner of traffic control, not only makes his arguments seem more credible but also, creates a tone of seriousness within the reader, further advocating the importance of the matter at hand. Overall, Sprinter uses drink driving to attract the reader’s attention, simultaneously, underlining the need for an extension.
In the body, the author criticizes the irresponsible nature of p-plate drivers, continuously emphasizing the instability they hold. ‘Such irresponsible drivers… destroy their own lives (and) the lives of their families’. Sprinter paints a view that p-platers are a threat to not only themselves but also the lives of others, thus, positioning the readers to see p-platers as something dangerous. Building on this, Sprinter uses expert evidence from Professor Barton, a neurosurgeon at Coolabar Hospital, to state that ‘young adults are more likely make poor-split-second decisions on the road… since their brains aren’t fully developed’, the author denigrates the capabilities of p-plater drivers and portrays them as unstable. Further, influencing the reader to devalue p-platers as a subject. In a similar manner, Sprinter discloses an incident involving Emma Richardson- a teenage p-plater, who crashed her car after partying all night. The account of Emma severs as a closing evidence to proving Sprinter’s argument, where he once again, reinforces the idea that, p-platers are reckless and unstable. Essentially, Sprinter depicts p-platers in a negative light, in the hopes of the reader agreeing with him and therefore supporting the necessity of an extension.
In the closing, the author emphasis the urgency in taking measures by further disparaging p-plate drivers. Sprinter appeals for action by showcasing what Sweden - a highly sustainable and technically advanced country, has achieved by reducing their alcohol levels. ‘… lowering the alcohol levels from 0.5 to 0.2 Sweden registered a distinct decrease in fatal accidents.’ Sprinter invites the reader to visualize the potential outcome of a 7-year restriction, as well as, emphasizing the moral responsibility the readers hold to minimize ‘drink driving tragedies. ’This is accompanied by the author’s tonal shift from logical to undermining as he claims, ‘this mix (alcohol and drink driving) can be particularly fatal for young adults’ Although, some might interpret this as Sprinter feeling cautious for young adults, he’s in fact, reinforcing the idea that p-platers are irresponsible. Backing up on this, the imagery with a severely damaged car, strengthens his argument and therefore, compelling the audience to side in favor with Sprinter. The author concludes with a rhetorical question ‘Isn’t worth a try?’, which fosters the idea of unification, as if Sprinter is directly asking the reader to join forces with him, which in result, may make the reader more inclined, to respond to his call for action. Ultimately, the author appeals for action by portraying himself as the more sensible option.
Home
Help
Search
Login
