'I saw rhetoric was used in the article "Jeremy Lin Tries on His Newest Label: Solid NBA Player" on New York Times.
The author of this article wanted the readers to believe that Jeremy Lin deserved his newest label as a solid basketball player, although multiple identities, such as undrafted underdog, franchise savior and overpaid mercenary, were foisted upon Jeremy Lin for the past five years. The author also wanted to convince us that Jeremy Lin has found out a new more comfortable status between the short-burst ecstasy of his time with the New York Knicks and the protracted bewilderment of his time with the Houston Rockets and the Los Angeles Lakers.
The argument of this article was reasonable. In order to prove that Jeremy Lin was a solid basketball player, the author provided the data that Jeremy Lin averaged 16.1 points per 36 minutes on the court during the regular season, which was his highest single-season average since his days in New York. What’s more, he notched 25 points or more in five games, including a 35-point performance against the Toronto Raptors in January and a 29-point in a surprise win over the San Antonio Spurs in March. These facts and data were the most powerful evidence to persuade the readers that Jeremy Lin was a solid basketball player.
The rhetorical techniques in this article were effective. For example, the above use of facts and data to prove that Jeremy Lin was a solid basketball player was a typical symbol of logos. In addition, the author used an authoritative honor, seventh in the NBA’s Sixth Man of the Year voting, to prove that Jeremy Lin had reset his value this season. Such a use of ethos made the argument persuasive.
The author of this article wanted the readers to believe that Jeremy Lin deserved his newest label as a solid basketball player, although multiple identities, such as undrafted underdog, franchise savior and overpaid mercenary, were foisted upon Jeremy Lin for the past five years. The author also wanted to convince us that Jeremy Lin has found out a new more comfortable status between the short-burst ecstasy of his time with the New York Knicks and the protracted bewilderment of his time with the Houston Rockets and the Los Angeles Lakers.
The argument of this article was reasonable. In order to prove that Jeremy Lin was a solid basketball player, the author provided the data that Jeremy Lin averaged 16.1 points per 36 minutes on the court during the regular season, which was his highest single-season average since his days in New York. What’s more, he notched 25 points or more in five games, including a 35-point performance against the Toronto Raptors in January and a 29-point in a surprise win over the San Antonio Spurs in March. These facts and data were the most powerful evidence to persuade the readers that Jeremy Lin was a solid basketball player.
The rhetorical techniques in this article were effective. For example, the above use of facts and data to prove that Jeremy Lin was a solid basketball player was a typical symbol of logos. In addition, the author used an authoritative honor, seventh in the NBA’s Sixth Man of the Year voting, to prove that Jeremy Lin had reset his value this season. Such a use of ethos made the argument persuasive.
Lin is definitely performing more like he did in New York, but the man bun has to go.
ReplyDeleteIntriguing post. Would have liked to see at least one mention of rhetorical devices relating to the article but otherwise a good post. Excellent differential of words
ReplyDelete