Blog Post #30 - Draft of Rhetorical Analysis

For Blog Post #30 I am providing a link to my draft of Project 2.

Levers, Andreas. "Construction". 1/25/2009. via Flickr
Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic

The draft is extremely rough and I welcome any and all comments on making it more readable. My thesis is pretty set in stone but how I am attacking the analysis is open to suggestion. What I am trying for is an unbiased view and overall unbiased review of the text. I would ask that while reading, please pay attention to the voice and tense. I have read over it and sometimes it sounds "out of place" but appears grammatically correct.

Thank you for your time and any suggestions/comments.

Jason Wittler

Reflection:
Thanks again to Brandon for is comments during his review of my draft. I think my efforts to enact the four clarity topics I chose was fairly effective. I am still struggling within my style of writing to keep my sentence structure to something other than compound-complex. I'm not sure where I picked that up at but it gets wordy at times. My introduction and conclusion were both well received and that is in large part to short, concise, fact-filled emphasis sentences.

From my review of my peers I have selected a sample of something I've learned.

• Brandon Goldenberg's Project 2 Draft
• "As the previous factor suggested that newly brought-in species can affect the world due to their non-exposure of the world around them, these new species can be more harmful to an ecosystem where it lives than it is beneficial to it."
• Wordy Sentences. The one long sentence is crammed with information that needs to be broken into separate thoughts. One, for ease of clarity. Two, by shortening the sentences you will emphasize the points. Three, by shortening the sentences you will get rid of filler words that clutter the message.
• Mike Huebener's Project 2 Draft
• "To understand the way Dighe laid out his article, looking at the projected audience and context will inform us on which rhetorical strategies he uses and why."
• Who needs to be looking? There is no clear link connecting one idea to the other. To understand....WE need to look or YOU need to look.