Linguistics Being supposedly made up on the spot, Noah S. Sweat did not have time to compose an eloquent speech about a controversial topic. He instead spoke a purely unfactual and highly descriptive banter using doublespeak to voice his opinion of whiskey. Both sides of his argument include impactual adjectives to describe the drink. Or as Mr. Sweat would say on line 6, “the devil’s brew,” or on line 12, “the philosophic wine”. Each side of his argument is entirely one sentence long, implying that he emotionally fuels his speech as he works out his thoughts with the audience as one thought flows to the other. He uses metaphors also to describe whiskey; he sets situations which one could “feel” how whiskey affects the person. Mr. Sweat …show more content…
Whiskey is doing the impossible by helping those who are literally helpless. He also states it to be what helps make a person more than himself, to be a better person with grand thoughts and ease of communication. Whiskey is being made a “wonder drug” in its abilities based upon his positive argument. His final statement of, “This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise,” can either prove that he is still unsure of his stand of the drink and will not show his falter through further discussion, or that he truly is entirely firm in his oddly neutral beliefs. But, since he was a state representative he likely didn’t want to ruin any support he had with either side. His single sentence grammatical structure also emphasises the strong will and emotion he feels about the subject, further pushing the audience to believe Mr. Sweat is confident of what he is saying; it is in the rush of the moment when one slurs together sentences. 3. Structural The speech ends on the approval of whiskey, implying that Mr. Sweaty does believe in the legalization of whiskey due to it being his most “recent” and final thoughts. The arguments are connected by descriptors and humorous situations and metaphors. Each side starts with simple phrases that then