Rhetorical Analysis Of Politics And The English Language

George Orwell is the author of, “Politics and the English Language”, an article in which he attempts to persuade the reader to believe his claim that politics are influencing modern writing, in turn causing lazy and vague writing. Orwell says that, “Political language-...is designed to make lies sound truthful”(539). Essentially, his main point is that the habit of writing fancily for little reason, or with little purpose, is reversible with significant effort. Orwell’s goal is to get his readers to follow an “elementary” set of rules listed near the end of the article. He believes that there can be no good writers that do not follow the rules stated. George Orwell uses a great deal of rhetoric devices in order to make his argument as persuasively as it can

He even goes as far to translate a passage from Ecclesiastes to the confusion that is modern writing. In translation it becomes more vague and less impactful, with all imagery having been stripped away. These examples are pieces of evidence that persuade the readers through logic and procedural reasoning. For syntax, parallel structure is used by George Orwell in a way to keep readers from getting swept up in sea of his countless examples (seen in Logos) and arguments. There are many examples of this in “Politics and the English Language”. However, one unique use of syntax is seen when Orwell uses a Chiasmus, “But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought”(537). This simple reversal of a larger idea, makes the impact of the idea much greater. It also draws attention to the phrase itself, causing the reader to take a second look, increasing persuade-ability. Orwell’s disgusted tone pushes the readers towards guilt, therefore using tone and ethos in one fowl sweep. The readers feel responsible as their