Module Code and Title:       LAN304          Language and the Power of Ideas

Programme:                          BA in English Studies

Credit Value:                         12

Module Tutor:                       Sonam Deki, Ivor Hanson, Yesodha Chauhan, Poonam Chettri

Module Coordinator:            Sonam Deki

General objective: This module aims to provide students with exposure to the ideas of contemporary thinkers, writers, and speakers whose works have influenced and continue to influence global thinking, through the medium of English language. Rather than focusing on established literary greats and conventional literary concepts and elements, the module explores sample rhetoric (including letters, essays, articles, and speeches) that addresses real-world issues and challenges. Students will have to read rhetorically, and will learn about the rhetorical analysis approach to examining influential short contemporary works.

Learning outcomes – On completion of this module, learners should be able to:

1. Describe the basic canons of rhetoric.
2. Identify the context/rhetorical situation that gives rise to an opportunity for a persuasive work.
3. Identify how a rhetorical work reflects the cultural/societal milieu from which it derives.
4. Explain how an author/speaker may (or may not) successfully establish credibility, reputation, or authority to communicate on a particular topic.
5. Analyse the intention/purpose of a particular discourse, e.g., to persuade, teach, entertain, attack, defend, praise, blame, etc.
6. Describe how a rhetorical work effectively addresses the intended audience.
7. Summarize the main content of a rhetorical work: the main idea/thesis and principle lines of reasoning.
8. Analyse the structure/arrangement of a rhetorical work, including elements of style, tone, and figures of speech.
9. Analyse the relationship between form and content in a rhetorical work.
10. Evaluate the potential and actual effectiveness of a rhetorical work on the intended audience as well as society at large.
11. Lead a discussion based on an original rhetorical analysis.

Learning and Teaching Approach: 

Assessment Approach:

A. Written assignment: Portion of Final Marks: 20%

Students will complete two rhetorical analysis essays of 500-800 words each, based on any two tutor-led rhetorical works presented in the class. Students may improve on each submission once based on feedback given, and resubmit if desired, or attempt a new analysis on a different work. Each essay, worth 10%, will be assessed based on the ‘Analytical Writing’ rubric.

B. Group rhetorical analysis: Portion of Final Mark: 25%

Students will be responsible for working in groups of 3-4 to lead a class discussion about a particular rhetorical work of their choice (produced within the past year), as approved by the tutor. The discussion will be expected to last most of a class period, or at least 45 minutes. The tutor may take up the last ten minutes of class (or spend time in the next class) going over questions, confusions or inaccuracies, but will largely be a silent observer during the discussion. During the discussion students will be responsible for taking the selected discourse through a rhetorical analysis, involving (1) summarizing the work in their own words, including identifying and explaining key terms and concepts, (2) preparing discussion questions to stimulate class discussion, and (3) facilitating a clear and helpful discussion based on the principles of rhetorical analysis that will help the class as a whole to both understand the reading and engage more critically with its main arguments and ideas. Before the discussion, each group will meet with the tutor to discuss the reading, clarify any confusions or questions they have about the reading and share their strategy for leading the discussion including potential discussion questions. Within a week after the discussion, groups will submit a written rhetorical analysis of 1000 words.

3%       Pre-discussion meeting (preparedness)

3%       Quality and accuracy of summary (focus should be on arguments)

3%       Thoughtfulness and effectiveness of discussion questions        

3%       Quality and effectiveness of facilitation of discussion (including balance between facilitator and class participation)

3%       Individual mark (meaningfulness of each member’s participation)

10%     Written rhetorical analysis of the work, submitted within a week after the class discussion; assessment will be based on the ‘Analytical Writing’ rubric

D. Class participation and preparedness: Portion of Final Mark: 10%

Students will be expected to participate substantially in class discussions, with contributions reflecting adequate preparation for topics under discussion. Assessment will be based on the ‘Participation and Preparedness’ rubric.

E. Midterm Examination: Portion of Final Mark: 15%

Students will take a written exam of 1.5 hr duration covering topics up to the mid-point of the semester.

Pre-requisites: LAN101: Grammar, Vocabulary, and Phonology in Context, ACS101: Academic Skills, and LAN203: Creative Writing

Subject matter:

1. Essentials of Rhetoric – brief introduction, with examples
   • Close reading of George Saunders’ address at the 2013 Syracuse University Commencement on the importance of kindness, as context for an introduction to the field of rhetoric
   • Basic definitions – What is Rhetoric?; The “What” and “How” of persuasive appeals
   • Rhetorical context
     • Kairos – opportune occasion, situation, and context for making a persuasive appeal
     • Audience – importance of tailoring discourse in light of the intended audience (as opposed to discourse aimed at conveying pure objective truth)
     • Decorum – ensuring appropriate fit of the language of the discourse to the subject matter, the occasion, the audience, and the speaker/writer
   • Types of persuasive appeals
     • Logos – appeal to reason
     • Pathos – appeal to emotion
     • Ethos – appeal of one’s character
   • Basics of the Five Parts/Canons
     • Invention – Finding what to say/convey; lines of thinking, e.g., cause and effect, comparison, relationships
     • Arrangement – Ordering of the common parts of a work of persuasive speech or writing
     • Style – How ideas may be expressed effectively
       • Virtues (and vices) of style, e.g., correctness, clarity, evidence, propriety, ornateness
       • Levels of style – high (grand), middle, or plain
       • Qualities of style – general rhetorical strategies
       • Common figures of speech
     • Memory – value of maintaining a store of multiuse anecdotes, examples, data, etc. to aid in effective improvisation or as called for in a particular occasion
     • Delivery – the public presentation of discourse, oral or written
   • Basic review of rhetoric terminology and common rhetorical devices
2. Introduction to Rhetorical Analysis
   • Potential components of a rhetorical analysis, with examples
     • Identification of the context/rhetorical situation
     • Background of the author/speaker; establishment of ethos
     • Analysis of the intention/purpose of the discourse, e.g., persuade, teach, entertain, attack, defend, praise, blame, etc.
     • Analysis of the intended audience
     • Summary of the content, principle lines of reasoning, topics of invention
     • Analysis of the structure/arrangement of the communication
     • Analysis of the relationship between form and content
     • Evaluation of the effectiveness of the discourse
     • Observation of how the communication reflects the cultural/societal milieu
   • Sample analysis: Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”
3. Tutor-led discussions and rhetorical analyses
   • Nandan Nikelani’s chapter Ideas to Anticipate from his book Imagining India
   • Severn Cullis-Suzuki’s talk at the 1992 Rio Summit
   • Arundathi Roy’s Sydney Peace Prize Lecture Peace & The New Corporate Liberation Theology
   • Kishore Mahbubani’s talk on Asia in Today’s World at the RIGSS 6^th Friday Forum, October 2014
   • Nadine Gordimer’s essay The Essential Gesture
   • Steve Jobs’ address at the 2005 Stanford University Commencement
4. Student-led discussions and rhetorical analyses
   • In groups of 3-4, students will select, assign readings/viewings for, and lead hour-long class discussions on a rhetorical work of their choosing produced within the past year

Reading List:

1. Essential Reading
   • Burton, G.O. (nd). Silva Rhetoricae. Brigham Young University. Retrieved from http://rhetoric.byu.edu/
   • Cullis-Suzuki, S. (1992). Speech at Rio Summit 1992. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Retrieved from http://climatechangeforfamilies.com/2013/05/20/the-12-year-old-girl-who-silenced-the-world/
   • Gordimer, N. (1989). The Essential Gesture 285-300. The Essential Gesture: Writing, Politics, and Places. Ed. Stephen Clingman. London: Penguin.
   • Heinrichs, J. (2013). Thank You For Arguing, Revised and Updated Edition: What Aristotle, Lincoln, And Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion. Three Rivers Press.
   • Jobs, S. (12 Jun 2015). 2005 Stanford Commencement Address. Stanford University. Retrieved from http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505.html
   • Leith, S. (2012). You Talkin' to Me?: Rhetoric from Aristotle to Obama. Profile Books Ltd.
   • Longaker, M.G., and Walker, J. (2010). Rhetorical Analysis: A Brief Guide for Writers. Longman.
   • Mahbubani, K. (31 Oct 2014). Asia in Today’s World. RIGSS 6^th Friday Forum. RIGSS Bhutan. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olDxUti8g28
   • Nilekani, N. (2010). Imagining India: The Idea of a Renewed Nation. Penguin Publishing Group. (selected excerpts).
   • Roy, A. (2004). Peace & The New Corporate Liberation Theology. Sydney Peace Prize Lecture, Sydney Foundation. Retrieved from http://sydneypeacefoundation.org.au/peace-prize-recipients/2004-arundhati-roy/
   • Saunders, G. (11 May 2013). 2013 Syracuse Commencement Address. Syracuse University. Retrieved from http://www.syracuse.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2013/08/george_saunders_commencement_speech.html
   • Tharoor, S. (28 May 2015). “This House Believes Britain Owes Reparations to her Former Colonies”, Speaking for the motion - Dr. Shashi Tharoor. Oxford Union. Retrieved from http://www.shashitharoor.in/speeches-details.php?id=335
   • The University Writing Center. (nd). Rhetorical Terms. Texas A&M University. Retrieved from http://writingcenter.tamu.edu/Students/Handouts-Guides/Guides-(What-Are-You-Writing-)/Academic-Writing/Analysis/Rhetorical-Terms
2. Additional Reading
   • (2012 edition). The Art of Rhetoric. Harper Collins Publishers.
   • McGuigan, B. (2007). Rhetorical Devices: A Handbook and Activities for Student Writers. Prestwick House, Inc.
   • Fletcher, J. (2015). Teaching Arguments: Rhetorical Comprehension, Critique, and Response. Stenhouse Publishers.

Date: December 20, 2015