Transcript gerunds and infinitives

Introduction:
 In this unit we will be looking at how English is used as an
instrument of persuasion, not only in public areas, but also in
private sphere of people’s relationships and interactions with one
another. The way it is seen in this unit as a means of making
decisions, or getting other people to agree with us and do the
things we want them to do.
 Persuasion is everywhere in human communication. It happens at
every stage of life, and in every kind of encounter, from the most
intimate to the most public.
 Just as with any other language, persuasion is a major part of what
we do with English. Understanding persuasion is therefore an
essential part of your exploration of the worlds of English; it
permeates all the uses of English, whether old or new, formal or
informal, juvenile or adult. We find it every time we speak to
others, switch on a TV, or read a newspaper or book.
 Main learning points include:
 The idea that convincing other people to think and act as we want





them to is one of the main uses of language.
Links between the art of rhetoric and the development of
democracy in Ancient Greece.
The range of attitudes towards the ways that persuasive techniques
are used, especially for commercial and political purposes.
The continuum between forms of persuasive language used in the
public sphere and those used in personal relationships.
The question of what makes a good, valid argument in different
historical, cultural and institutional context.
Persuasion begins very early in life, well before the point when
infant behaviour starts to diverge into different cultures and
languages. A baby’s first sounds are instinctive, expressing inner
states involuntarily: hunger, discomfort, tiredness or fear.
 The baby begins to seek attention deliberately. She or he cries
in order to be fed, entertained or reassured. She or he uses
signals artificially, to manipulate, to control, to persuade. At
this early stage, it is not language but sound and body
movement which are used to persuade. When the infant starts
to speak, however, these channels of communication are not
replaced by language. They work alongside it, and for this
reason are known in linguistics as paralanguage.
 Paralanguage figures in persuasion throughout life. Adults can
still use tears, smiles and raised voices to get their way, and
such behaviour is more important than what they actually say.
 Saying Nice to see you in a morose way is likely to be less
convincing than using body language which communicates an
overall feeling of connection and warmth. This chapter
concentrates on the language of persuasion rather than the
paralanguage.
 Closer to our own time and concerns, think of the extensive
use of music and images in advertising. In such examples,
language may seem to play only a partial role. Nevertheless,
it is through language that persuasion takes on its most
complex forms.
 Persuasion, then, is of great academic interest in the study of
any language as it is one of language’s major uses. It is also
of great personal concern to all of us.
 This chapter explores different forms, purposes and effects
of persuasion through consideration of examples from a
variety of contexts and media.
 We deal first with examples of persuasion in the public
sphere, and from there move on to its use in more personal
encounters. In a final section we look briefly at how
persuasive language can be evaluated.
 In figure 6.2 (p. 228), you might think that the demonstrators are
trying to persuade the Myanmar government, but in this case,
why are they using English rather than Burmese? It seems more
likely that they want to influence world opinion to bring pressure
on the Myanmar government, and for this purpose, English has
more chance of carrying their message effectively around the
world. Their verbal messages are accompanied by paralanguage,
including raised fists and voices.
 Classical Rhetoric:
 The importance of persuasion is that its study has a very long
history, predating modern linguistics and discourse analysis by
many centuries.
 In Europe, enquiry into rhetoric (the art of persuasion) dates
back at least to the fourth century BC, and was pursued first in
Ancient Greece and then in Ancient Rome.
 There are also traditions from outside Europe, such as Indian
rhetoric, dating from the fifth century BC, and Buddhist debating,
formalised by the sixth century AD, but in this chapter we will
focus on Graeco-Roman ideas.
 The early studies of rhetoric had the very practical purpose of
teaching people how to construct and execute a convincing and
effective case, and they arose in two institutional contexts which
are still with us today: adversarial law and political campaigning.
The most systematic and influential early formulation of the
principals of rhetoric was Aristotle’s composed during the 4th
century BC, probably in Athens.
 Some scholars, such as Vickers (1998), have argued that it is no
coincidence that an interest in rhetoric emerged in Athens at the
same time as democracy. In this political system, where decisions
were taken through votes in the Athenian marketplace, it was
necessary for the proponents of a policy to win over their fellow
citizens.
 Rhetoric and democracy are perhaps necessarily linked.
Ancient rhetorical theory and practice was much preoccupied
with categorising rhetorical types, purposes and devices. Over
the last two and a half thousand years, the techniques of
persuasion have remained essentially the same.
 Contrasting persuasive strategies:
 We can gain insight into contrasting persuasive techniques by
considering two famous speeches from Shakespeare’s Julius
Caesar. Although this play was written over 400 years ago
about events 1500 years earlier, its central event dramatises
two approaches to persuasion still highly relevant today.
(mentioned pages 230-231).
 Activity 6.2: These two speeches by Brutus and Antony
encapsulate two opposite approaches to persuasion and two
ways of relating to an audience. How would you summarise
the key differences between them? Can you think of any
modern examples of these approaches?
 One strategy is to set out the evidence and the reasons for
holding a point of view, but let the audience decide. It implies an
optimistic, respectful view of public opinion. The other strategy
is an appeal to emotion and self-interest, clouding the listeners’
judgment and reason.
 This second strategy implies a lack of respect and low opinion of
the audience, but it can be presented by its proponents as
realistic and necessary. In the modern media, newspapers
provide good examples of both approaches to rhetoric.
 Rhetorical styles and strategies:
 These contrasting approaches reflect categorisations of rhetoric
which were widely accepted in both Caesar’s and Shakespeare’s
time. Aristotle distinguishes three strategies of persuasion:
 a. reasoned proof (logos)
b. emotional appeal (pathos)
 c. appeal to the good reputation of the speaker (ethos).
 Logos, pathos and ethos are still the basis of prevalent types of
persuasion today. Thus, modern science aspires to carry a point by
logos alone. Many charity advertisements use pathos when
exhorting people to give money.
 Other useful categories formulated in ancient rhetoric concern the
style of persuasion. Is its use of language grand, or plain, or
somewhere in between? Does it seek to overwhelm its hearers, or to
be sparse and economical, or to create a perfect balance between
the two? And what are its purposes: to judge past events (as in law),
to determine the course of future events (as in politics), or for
ceremony (as in wedding speech)?
 Within classical rhetoric, a good deal of attention was paid to
rhetorical figures and devices which could be used by the successful
speaker. One of these-the so-called (1) rhetorical questionsimulates dialogue by taking an interrogative form, but does not
expect a response, either because the answer is too obvious or
because the speaker proceeds to answer the question him or herself.
You ask, what is our aim? I can answer that in one word: victory.

 (2)Repetition is also an obvious, well-known and apparently
effective rhetorical figure.
 King Luther uses a device known as a rhetorical triplet, using the
phrases ‘This is the faith’ repeated 3 times. That is to say, they
repeat the same construction with different words.
 Try to answer the following questions:
 Listen to a politician talking or making a speech on radio,
television, or You Tube. What rhetorical features do you notice?
To what extent are they appealing to reason (logos), or to
emotions (pathos) or using the prestige of their position or
reputation to reinforce their arguments (ethos)? Can you
categorise their rhetorical style as being either (grand) or (plain),
or does it lie somewhere in between?
 Notice: in clip 13.2 and clip 13.3
 Kennedy’s rhetorical style leans more towards what the Greek
called the (grand) style and Obama’s speech leans more towards
the (plain) style.
 Attitudes towards rhetoric:
 An underlying assumption in Greek and Roman rhetorical
theory was that the art of rhetoric can and should be
taught. Rhetoric was seen as a virtuous activity for the
public good. In many places this educational tradition
continues-USA- where public speaking is taught and
examined in high schools, and promoted by numerous
organisations and publications as well.
 Like rhetoric itself, the view of professional persuasion also
dates back to classical times. According to Plato, Socrates
equated all rhetoric with deceit, arguing that honest
speakers should do no more than simply state their
evidence and reasons, and then let the audience decide on
that basis. If justified, this distrust of professional has
important implications.
 In our time, one reason for a negative view of professional
efforts to persuade is the discredited political propaganda
associated with totalitarian regimes in the mid-twentieth
century, particularly Nazi Germany and the Stalinist USSR.
 The negative associations of propaganda means that those
professionally engaged in persuasion no longer wish to have
their activities equated with it. Contemporary attempts to
influence opinion –such as advertising, public relations PR
and election campaigning- are seen as quite different.
 We have two distinct views of contemporary persuasion and
its relation to totalitarian propaganda. One would see the
two as quite separate, and indeed claim that operations such
as advertising and PR are an important component of
market-oriented economics and liberal democracies
promote choice between alternatives and allow healthy
competition.



Proponents of this view would point to the multiplicity of
views current in democracies, and use of similar techniques
both by ruling interests and by campaigners against them,
including non-governmental organisation (NGOs) such as
Greenpeace.
They would also insist on distinguishing between arguments
which aim to persuade, and those which set out to distort
facts, as malign propaganda does.
The opposite view would see contemporary persuasion as
essentially similar in kind to classic propaganda, as it uses
subtler and more effective techniques. Such critics point to
the disproportionate funds and resources available to
politicians and corporations. For example, the philosopher
Habermas suggests that public relations and propaganda are
equally manipulative and oppressive, and quite antithetical
to genuine democratic decision making.
 Advertising:
 As we have seen in the example of Luther King, political




rhetoric is prone to repetition at the micro level of words,
phrases and grammatical constructions within the same
speech. There is also the phenomenon of wholesale
repetition, where an entire message is repeated many times.
Propaganda relies heavily on such wholesale repetition, as a
kind of substitute for reasoned argument. This is part of a
general elevation of emotion over evidence, making
propaganda very much argument by pathos rather than logos.
In addition to this wholesale repetition, advertisements also
employ a range of rhetorical devices to attract attention and
make the message memorable.
Activity 6.4
Pick out two advertisements that catch your attention. What
devices do they use to do so? Why do you think they are
effective?
 For example, one memorable advertisement from the 1980s
was unusual in that it had no words at all, not even the name
of the product. This is a good example of a visual pun, where
the image itself calls up the name of the product, Silk Cut
Cigarettes.
 Advertisements, like propaganda, rely heavily on emotion
expressing and influencing the values of the society in which
they occur.
 Many of the devices and uses of language taught in classical
rhetoric, and still occurring in political oratory today, have
also been deployed in political propaganda campaigns and are
the stock-in-trade too of contemporary advertising.
 Thus, advertisers are inordinalitely fond, not only of
repetition, whether wholesale or internal but also of figures of
speech such as hyperbole, punning, paradox, irony, metaphor
and metonymy.
 Public relations:
 Advertising can be seen as a branch of a more general
phenomenon of persuasive self-presentation, public relations
(PR), in which organisations of all kinds seek to portray
themselves in a favourable way, both to outsiders (customers)
and to insiders (their own employees).
 Recent decades have witnessed an exponential growth in PR.
It has its own theory, a burgeoning workforce, a growing
literature, thriving academic courses. Indeed, it is hard to find
people or organisations engaged in public life who are not also
engaged in PR.
 This very ubiquity makes PR extremely hard to define and
therefore vague. Moloney regards PR as: ‘mostly a category of
persuasive …… communications done by interests in the
political economy to advance themselves materially and
ideologically through markets and public policy-making.’
 Moloney also lists discourse features which are typical of PR.
Sources, purposes are often undeclared, and therefore
unclear. Points are asserted rather than argued or supported
by evidence. Information is factually accurate, but partial in
both senses of the word.
 The language of PR is often as vague as the content and
favours, for example, general quantifiers (many people),
hedges (tend to), and lack of detail (a poll in 2005). The false
friendless has been dubbed synthetic personalisation or
conversationalisation, defined as a ‘tendency to give the
impression of treating each of the people handled as an
individual’ (Fairclough, 2001, p.52).
 Synthetic personalisation means that PR is by no means
confined to the public sphere, but extends into face-to-face
encounters between individuals.
 Personal persuasion:
 So far we have dwelt very much on persuasion in the public
sphere- in politics and advertising, PR and service
encounters- rather than in intimate relations and everyday
encounters. While few people make major speeches or
launch propaganda campaigns, everyone has had
disagreements at home and tried to persuade those close to
them to see things differently.
 These everyday acts of persuasion do not have the expertise
and extensive preparation that goes into advertising or
political campaigning or service training. They are more
likely to be spontaneous and untutored.
 Erftmier and Dyson (1986) examined the persuasive
strategies of children, comparing their informal strategies
in speech with those are taught or develop more formally in
writing.
 The first thing to notice here is the dialogic nature of the
argument (chapter 1). In other words, this encounter
(conversation between mother and her son) is not pre
planned, or rehearsed, or informed by theory, as public
rhetoric generally is. In the course of an argument, people
often find that they have persuaded themselves as much as
others.
 It is not the case, that personal persuasion is dialogic in this
way while public rhetoric is entirely monologic. Even the
most public persuasion draws on some of the features of faceto-face encounters. Even when there is no actual response
from the audience, the shape of a speech is determined by the
responses which are assumed by the speaker or writer.
 There are also formal and public instances of persuasion
which are structured in dialogue form. These include
adversarial justice.
 The distinction between public and personal persuasion is by
no means straightforward. There are many face-to-face
encounters which play out in public spaces, such as
supermarkets and law courts, and in which some participants
speak on behalf of organisation, rather than individuals.
 Internet forums are full of exchanges where a point made by
one participant is encountered by another as each writer seeks
to persuade their fellow discussants of a point of view in
process.
 There is a sense in which the more public formal genres of
persuasion evolve out of the more personal ones, both
ontogenetically (in our individual lives) and phylogenetically
(in society at large).
 With some important caveats, we might posit two opposite
types of persuasion, each with a cluster of characteristics; we
could then locate particular instances of persuasion along
continua between the two extremes.
 At one extreme we have persuasion which is carefully
planned, formal and serious, and delivered as a monologue,
without significant adjustment to interjections from the
audience. At the other extreme, we have persuasion which is
unplanned, informal and interactive or dialogic.
 There are plenty of instances of planned and formal speech
on the one hand, and unplanned informal writing on the
other especially in online and mobile communication.
 Dimensions of persuasion:
 Intimacy and affection can determine the ability of the
speaker to persuade and the propensity of the listener to be
persuaded. There are dimensions here (activity 6.7 p.248)
which are likely to be lacking in more public and formal
persuasion. It is a sense of closeness which public persuaders,
particularly advertisers and PR people, try to emulate- but of
which their audiences should be wary.
 Evaluating persuasion:
 No other species approaches this ability to share ideas across
time and space, or make joint decisions in such large
groupings. Language is the unique attribute of our species
which underpins these abilities, and some linguists have seen
language, and a child’s propensity to acquire the particular
language around him, as shaped by these two requirements:
to share information and experience, and to form
relationships with others (Halliday, 1973).
 If we take this view of persuasion as an inevitable
consequence of a need for collaboration and reaching the best
conclusion, then we might also be interested in how to
identify the best arguments. We might make a simple contrast
between good and bad persuasive arguments. Good
persuasion appeals to reason and evidence, laying out its
arguments as clearly and elegantly as possible to facilitate the
judgment of the audience.
 Bad persuasion is driven by a lust of power rather than a
quest for the general good. It lacks logic and evidence, and
confuses and distract its audience with appeals to emotion.
In reality, actual instances are likely to combine elements of
both extremes.
 An attempt to understand the processes of argument is
found in the enterprise of argumentation theory- which
studies how humans do and should reach conclusions
through collaborative reasoning (Grootendorst et al., 1996).
 Thus, an argument can be broken down into components
such as the initial claim, the evidence for it, the warrant for
making it, exceptions to the claim, and the degree of the
commitment in the argument.
 The criteria for assessing what constitutes a good argument
are therefore subject to variation. Another source of
variation is cultural difference.
 The way that cultural differences affect writing is studied
under the heading of contrastive rhetoric, which focuses
in particular on how students and scholars writing in a
second language may be disadvantaged by unfamiliarity
with the relevant rhetorical conventions.
 The best contrastive rhetoric does not simply identify
features of texts from a particular place or in a particular
language, but relates those features to complex ideologies,
values and attitudes that are present in and across
cultures.
 Acknowledgement of contextual and cultural variation in
persuasion recognises that attempts to formalise and
calculate what makes a good argument are in danger of
omitting from analysis a sense of the humanity of
persuasion and the role within it of factors other than
reason and evidence.
Conclusion:
 In this chapter we have explored the ubiquity of
persuasion in human life, in both the most public
and the most private of situations, and in different
ages, media and cultures.
 We have seen how many of the issues and
strategies in persuasive discourse remain largely
unchanged.
THANK YOU