In regards to Hart and Daughton, the role of analysis in rhetorical criticism plays an important role in a variety of ways. From persuasion, to structure and form, to syntax, each showcases a significant faction of analysis in rhetorical criticism.
Persuasion, relates to several differential logic forms – human and informal, which tie together arguments considered thin, and those considered higher in class. In analyzing, persuasively, it is important that an individual does not immediately classify a reasoning put forth by a rhetor, to be not credible. This is due to the assumptions, or biases people bring with them in daily life; such as, the idea that people have reasons for doing what they do, and the idea that persuasion is generally credible. Comparisons, in analysis of rhetoric, can
…show more content…
In dealing with the structure of something, you must decide how the words must flow, and how much attention each part must receive. Analyzing words, the rhetor is drawn to what is highlighted as important, firstly, and what is deemed not as important secondly; however, in looking at the text as a whole, the analysis is key to this. This could be illustrated in listening to a political speech, as they put forth the most important pressing issues first, and subsequent smaller issues next; this pairs with the form, in how the words are put together for the audience to interpret. In all, the form and genre are productive to persuasion, and in what form the rhetor analyzes text. The type of the message, is also important to how analysis of rhetorical criticism takes place; more so, how the individuals writing, or speaking, and how they deliver the argument, is up for analysis; “whoever controls the shape of the discussion controls its consequences as well. (ch.6)” In analyzing, the rhetor is able to view the patterns that emerge when they criticize the form of a