Rhetorical Analysis On Language Broditsky
Boroditsky asks the audience rhetorical questions to keep them engaged and to challenge their perspective. In the beginning of the article, Boroditsky asks “Do the languages we speak shape the way we think?” By doing this, Boroditsky not only sets the framework for the entirety of the article, but also gets the audience to think about this question as they continue to read on. At the end of the article, Boroditsky argues in conclusion that language constructs knowledge. Boroditsky probes further at this idea by asking “How do we come to be the way we are?” and “Why do we think the way we do?” This challenges the audience to look inward and reflect on how language shapes their reality. By asking these tough rhetorical questions, Boroditsky keeps
…show more content…
In the beginning of the article, Boroditsky states that it is argued whether language shapes thought or not. Boroditsky immediately references studies conducted by Stanford University and MIT, these studies use “data collected from around the world, including Greece, China, Chile, Indonesia, Russia, and Aboriginal Australia.” Researchers that work under Boroditsky conclude that “people who speak different languages do indeed think differently and that even flukes of grammar can profoundly affect how we see the world.” Through referencing and analyzing this study, Boroditsky uses this as evidence to support his thesis. Boroditsky also references studies conducted by Caitlin Fausey from Stanford University near the end of the article. These studies have speakers of English, Spanish, and Japanese watch videos in which “two people [are] popping balloons, breaking eggs and spilling drinks either intentionally or accidentally. Later everyone got a surprise memory test.” The test asked each subject who the agent was for each event. The studies concluded that there is a “cross-linguistic difference in eyewitness memory.” Boroditsky added the results of this study to the article to further prove his purpose: convince the audience that language shapes thought and influences our thinking. Boroditsky utilizes findings of other studies to present his/her audience with an objective conclusion that supports his
In the beginning of the article, Boroditsky states that it is argued whether language shapes thought or not. Boroditsky immediately references studies conducted by Stanford University and MIT, these studies use “data collected from around the world, including Greece, China, Chile, Indonesia, Russia, and Aboriginal Australia.” Researchers that work under Boroditsky conclude that “people who speak different languages do indeed think differently and that even flukes of grammar can profoundly affect how we see the world.” Through referencing and analyzing this study, Boroditsky uses this as evidence to support his thesis. Boroditsky also references studies conducted by Caitlin Fausey from Stanford University near the end of the article. These studies have speakers of English, Spanish, and Japanese watch videos in which “two people [are] popping balloons, breaking eggs and spilling drinks either intentionally or accidentally. Later everyone got a surprise memory test.” The test asked each subject who the agent was for each event. The studies concluded that there is a “cross-linguistic difference in eyewitness memory.” Boroditsky added the results of this study to the article to further prove his purpose: convince the audience that language shapes thought and influences our thinking. Boroditsky utilizes findings of other studies to present his/her audience with an objective conclusion that supports his