Best method to use for analysing persuasive texts?

[ktrah]

Structuring body paragraphs by:
1. Main ideas/arguments
2. Sections of the text (beginning, middle, end)
3. Language strategies

Which method do you think works the best?

[pi]

Is this regarding language analysis?

[ktrah]

Is this regarding language analysis?

Yes

[pi]

Well, I always liked doing my paragraphs by argument (so your option #1). So each paragraph would focus on a specific argument, and from there I would pick quotes from the article/blog/etc. that support that argument and how they serve to position the reader in an intended way or persuade them somehow to support the overall contention. I'd also discuss any tonal shifts that may occur per argument (eg. a common one is sympathetic -> aggressive). With regards to an image, I may or may not include it in an "argument" paragraph. If it fits in with one, I'll include it there, if not then I'll have a new para for it. So in all, my LA would structure something like this for a single article analysis:
Intro: contention, author, source, dates, title, introduction on tone, introduction to accompanying image
4 x Argument paras (as discussed above)
1 x Image para (if needed, otherwise will be included with and argument para)
Conclusion: very small, maybe 2-3 lines max


As for your other options, I would strongly recommend NOT doing the chronological option #2 (unless arguments are sequentially chronological - a rare exam case). It is far too easy to miss out on things as you will find that you will end up writing a lot more and a lot more on "crappier" parts of the article

[ktrah]

Thanks for the advice! It's interesting because I've always done it chronologically, structuring the paragraphs on the shifts in tone. Our class was told that that was the easiest option and the one most people did. But I think you're right about the problems with it. I'll try out using arguments and see how that goes.

[Chris_Hancock]

Here's the method I found worked quite well:

- Intro (typical stuff, ie. title, author, date, audience, general tonal use etc)
- Para 1: Detail the construction of the piece (eg. are the paragraphs spaced out in a specific way with subtitles, the images, is a specific word in the title in bold text)
- Para 2, 3, 4....: Go through it chronologically whilst taking keen notice of the tone. The task is language analysis, not argument analysis, so splitting it up in terms of the tone shows you are being very explicit about what you are analysing.
- Conclusion: This really should be 2-3 sentences since long conclusions can often just sound like you are recycling some of the points already made. Just restate the target audience and pinpoint the major persuasive techniques used.

ON IMAGES:
As for analysing the images, you may choose to do them in the 1st paragraph, but linking them with a specific line in the text can be a smooth transition between your visual analysis and textual analysis. Take notice when reading through a new piece of whether the images really link with a line or is it a general introduction to the debate (eg. I found that in the 2011 exam that I couldn't really make a link with a specific line so I just put it in the construction paragraph). 

Also, you've probably seen past exams, but if not, the pieces can be kinda big. So there is skill to be learnt in picking and choosing the important words or phrases to analyse.

I hope this gives you some help on the task.