Brittany Boyd
Ms. Mobley
EN 101 Unit 1
June 9, 2015
Immigrant: A Rhetorical Analysis
November, 2012 brought up a great deal of discussion about immigration. This was around the time President Obama was elected into his second term in office and immigration was increasing. Michael Jones-Correa, the professor of government at Cornell University, and Louis Mendoza, chairman of the Department of Chicano and Latino Studies at the University of Minnesota, wrote articles in New York Times about the subject. Mendoza’s purpose was to persuade his audience in his article “No Longer an Outsider, but Sill Distinct”. On the other hand, in Jones-Correa’s article “How Immigrants Are Marked as Outsiders” his purpose was to inform his audience that a lack of …show more content…
He not only uses empathy to connect with immigrants on an emotional level, he uses his knowledge to persuade his audience. He states that we as Americans should not fear immigrants, but “… understand the connectedness of our past, present, and future” to them (pars.4).By this being something that has occurred over and over again for decades, we should be able to relate to this logic. This stirs feelings in his audience and evokes them to take a second look at how they may view immigrants by putting themselves in their shoes. When immigrants come to America they are expected to learn our language and culture. According to this logic, Mendoza says that, “we now know that one can truly live bilingually, biculturally and transnationally” (par.2). What Mendoza is saying, is that, we can live together as an equal group of people with a diverse language and culture, but also to compromise with each other to better …show more content…
By him being a professor of government he obtains the knowledge to give accurate insight on immigration. He establishes his logic by characterizing being an outsider in the U.S. with three markers: a lack of citizenship, shared language, and social acceptance. The reason he defines these factors as being considered an outsider, is that when they no longer effect immigrants they have potential to become insiders, or citizens (pars.3).The rhetor also establishes credibility by mentioning the march in the United States for immigrants’ rights. This was appropriate for his characterization of lack social acceptance because he gave insight on how immigrants reacted when they felt threatened by the United States. This allows Jones-Correa to build his situated ethos because they could have stayed in the shadows of society, but instead they stood up for
Ms. Mobley
EN 101 Unit 1
June 9, 2015
Immigrant: A Rhetorical Analysis
November, 2012 brought up a great deal of discussion about immigration. This was around the time President Obama was elected into his second term in office and immigration was increasing. Michael Jones-Correa, the professor of government at Cornell University, and Louis Mendoza, chairman of the Department of Chicano and Latino Studies at the University of Minnesota, wrote articles in New York Times about the subject. Mendoza’s purpose was to persuade his audience in his article “No Longer an Outsider, but Sill Distinct”. On the other hand, in Jones-Correa’s article “How Immigrants Are Marked as Outsiders” his purpose was to inform his audience that a lack of …show more content…
He not only uses empathy to connect with immigrants on an emotional level, he uses his knowledge to persuade his audience. He states that we as Americans should not fear immigrants, but “… understand the connectedness of our past, present, and future” to them (pars.4).By this being something that has occurred over and over again for decades, we should be able to relate to this logic. This stirs feelings in his audience and evokes them to take a second look at how they may view immigrants by putting themselves in their shoes. When immigrants come to America they are expected to learn our language and culture. According to this logic, Mendoza says that, “we now know that one can truly live bilingually, biculturally and transnationally” (par.2). What Mendoza is saying, is that, we can live together as an equal group of people with a diverse language and culture, but also to compromise with each other to better …show more content…
By him being a professor of government he obtains the knowledge to give accurate insight on immigration. He establishes his logic by characterizing being an outsider in the U.S. with three markers: a lack of citizenship, shared language, and social acceptance. The reason he defines these factors as being considered an outsider, is that when they no longer effect immigrants they have potential to become insiders, or citizens (pars.3).The rhetor also establishes credibility by mentioning the march in the United States for immigrants’ rights. This was appropriate for his characterization of lack social acceptance because he gave insight on how immigrants reacted when they felt threatened by the United States. This allows Jones-Correa to build his situated ethos because they could have stayed in the shadows of society, but instead they stood up for