Rhetorical Analysis Of The Case For Semicolons

In Lauren Oyler’s article “The Case for Semicolons”, she persuasively argues the merit and use of semicolons in a time where the grammatical symbol of punctuation is used sparingly by the literary community and broader public by extension. Oyler accomplishes this by successfully integrating various rhetorical strategies and modes of thought to appeal to her audience. Likewise, Oyler attempts to further her argument first by providing a personal experience from her own life, and how the philosophy she gathered from it could be applied to the semicolon. From there on, Oyler argues that the semicolons’ ambiguity and flexibility make them useful for setting near any tone one desires. Oyler concludes her article by arguing that the semicolon asserts

All in all, Oyler successfully integrates a wide variety of rhetorical arguments and strategies for her opinion to persuade her audience by appealing to their logic, emotion and ethics.
Importantly, Oyler efficiently uses a variety of rhetorical strategies under the lens of logos(logic) to critically examine the importance of the semicolon, primarily through using a rational chain of logic and mentions of relevant literary experts. Likewise, in her pursuit of a persuasive logical rhetorical strategy, Oyler frequently engages in efficient critical thinking throughout her article. For example, in the last paragraph of her article, Oyler makes use of critical reasoning in an attempt to persuade those in her literary audience who remain skeptical of the use of the semicolon in spite of her previous arguments, she states “the semicolon conveys a very specific kind of connection between ideas that is particularly useful now – it asserts a link where the reader might no necessarily see one while

Vitally, at the beginning of her article, Oyler uses her own individual experience to great effect to convincingly relate a metaphor to her overall argument. Oyler states that consistently she returns to a memory of an article from a woman’s magazine where it is suggested it would be beneficial for one to consume dessert every meal, she proceeds to further illuminate that “The darkly pragmatic angle was that regular indulgences head sugar cravings off at the pass. The spiritual angle, and the better one, was that harmless indulgences are good and you shouldn’t overthink them – even after breakfast.”. Through the recounting of this personal experience, Oyler associates this metaphor with the overall argument of her article, that the semicolon as what she considers her own harmless indulgence, is a useful, creative, and demonized piece of punctuation. Moreover, by establishing this authentic personal experience with her audience Oyler and explaining how she relates her experience with her conclusion on semicolons, thoroughly enhances her literary credibility rather than appear as biased. Furthermore, Oyler as part of her persuasive rhetorical strategy