Analyze rhetorical context, like audience and timeMake sure you .docx

Analyze rhetorical context, like audience and time
Make sure you have evidence and examples to prove the thesis
A summary to make sure the audience knows what you are
talking
Thesis: talk about point of the paper, the point of the paper in
your analisis, analyzing the rhetorical strategies (ethos, pathos,
logos)
Analyze the argument (dis the author support their claims)
HOW TO SET UP THE PAPER
-hook
-Introduction (short summary – more detailed about the paper)
Thesis
-Longer summary-more detail about) / background information /
Ted talk 2014
- evidence /examples
- conclusion
http://www.ted.com/talks/mark_pagel_how_language_transform
ed_humanity?language=en#t-351943
Each of you possesses the most powerful, dangerous and
subversive trait that natural selection has ever devised. It's a
piece of neural audio technology for rewiring other people's
minds. I'm talking about your language, of course, because it
allows you to implant a thought from your mind directly into
someone else's mind, and they can attempt to do the same to
you, without either of you having to perform surgery. Instead,
when you speak,you're actually using a form of telemetry not so
different from the remote control device for your television. It's
just that, whereas that device relies on pulses of infrared
light, your language relies on pulses, discrete pulses, of sound.
0:55And just as you use the remote control device to alter the
internal settings of your televisionto suit your mood, you use

your language to alter the settings inside someone else's brain to
suit your interests. Languages are genes talking, getting things
that they want. And just imagine the sense of wonder in a
baby when it first discovers that, merely by uttering a sound, it
can get objects to move across a room as if by magic, and
maybe even into its mouth.
1:25Now language's subversive power has been recognized
throughout the ages in censorship, in books you can't
read, phrases you can't use and words you can't say. In fact, the
Tower of Babel story in the Bible is a fable and warning about
the power of language. According to that story, early humans
developed the conceit that, by using their language to work
together, they could build a tower that would take them all the
way to heaven. Now God, angered at this attempt to usurp his
power, destroyed the tower, and then to ensure that it would
never be rebuilt, he scattered the people by giving them
different languages --confused them by giving them different
languages. And this leads to the wonderful irony that our
languages exist to prevent us from communicating. Even
today, we know that there are words we cannot use, phrases we
cannot say, because if we do so, we might be accosted,
jailed, or even killed. And all of this from a puff of
air emanating from our mouths.
2:29Now all this fuss about a single one of our traits tells us
there's something worth explaining.And that is how and why did
this remarkable trait evolve, and why did it evolve only in our
species? Now it's a little bit of a surprise that to get an answer
to that question, we have to go to tool use in the
chimpanzees. Now these chimpanzees are using tools, and we
take that as a sign of their intelligence. But if they really were
intelligent, why would they use a stick to extract termites from
the ground rather than a shovel? And if they really were
intelligent, why would they crack open nuts with a rock? Why
wouldn't they just go to a shop and buy a bag of nuts that
somebody else had already cracked open for them? Why not? I
mean, that's what we do.

3:15Now the reason the chimpanzees don't do that is that they
lack what psychologists and anthropologists call social
learning. They seem to lack the ability to learn from others by
copying or imitating or simply watching. As a result, they can't
improve on others' ideas or learn from others' mistakes --
benefit from others' wisdom. And so they just do the same
thing over and over and over again. In fact, we could go away
for a million years and come back and these chimpanzees would
be doing the same thing with the same sticks for the
termites and the same rocks to crack open the nuts.
3:54Now this may sound arrogant, or even full of hubris. How
do we know this? Because this is exactly what our ancestors,
the Homo erectus, did. These upright apes evolved on the
African savanna about two million years ago, and they made
these splendid hand axes that fit wonderfully into your
hands. But if we look at the fossil record, we see that they made
the same hand axe over and over and over again for one million
years. You can follow it through the fossil record. Now if we
make some guesses about how long Homo erectus lived, what
their generation time was, that's about 40,000 generations of
parents to offspring, and other individuals watching, in which
that hand axe didn't change. It's not even clear that our very
close genetic relatives, the Neanderthals, had social
learning. Sure enough, their tools were more complicated than
those of Homo erectus, but they too showed very little
change over the 300,000 years or so that those species, the
Neanderthals, lived in Eurasia.
4:55Okay, so what this tells us is that, contrary to the old
adage, "monkey see, monkey do," the surprise really is that all
of the other animals really cannot do that -- at least not very
much.And even this picture has the suspicious taint of being
rigged about it -- something from a Barnum & Bailey circus.
5:17But by comparison, we can learn. We can learn by watching
other people and copying or imitating what they can do. We can
then choose, from among a range of options, the best one. We
can benefit from others' ideas. We can build on their

wisdom. And as a result, our ideas do accumulate, and our
technology progresses. And this cumulative cultural
adaptation, as anthropologists call this accumulation of ideas, is
responsible for everything around you in your bustling and
teeming everyday lives. I mean the world has changed out of all
proportion to what we would recognize even 1,000 or 2,000
years ago. And all of this because of cumulative cultural
adaptation. The chairs you're sitting in, the lights in this
auditorium, my microphone, the iPads and iPods that you carry
around with you -- all are a result of cumulative cultural
adaptation.
6:16Now to many commentators, cumulative cultural
adaptation, or social learning, is job done, end of story. Our
species can make stuff, therefore we prospered in a way that no
other species has. In fact, we can even make the "stuff of life" -
- as I just said, all the stuff around us. But in fact, it turns
out that some time around 200,000 years ago, when our species
first arose and acquired social learning, that this was really the
beginning of our story, not the end of our story. Because our
acquisition of social learning would create a social and
evolutionary dilemma, the resolution of which, it's fair to
say, would determine not only the future course of our
psychology, but the future course of the entire world. And most
importantly for this, it'll tell us why we have language.
7:11And the reason that dilemma arose is, it turns out, that
social learning is visual theft. If I can learn by watching you, I
can steal your best ideas, and I can benefit from your
efforts,without having to put in the time and energy that you
did into developing them. If I can watch which lure you use to
catch a fish, or I can watch how you flake your hand axe to
make it better, or if I follow you secretly to your mushroom
patch, I can benefit from your knowledge and wisdom and
skills, and maybe even catch that fish before you do. Social
learning really is visual theft. And in any species that acquired
it, it would behoove you to hide your best ideas, lest somebody
steal them from you.

7:58And so some time around 200,000 years ago, our species
confronted this crisis. And we really had only two options for
dealing with the conflicts that visual theft would bring. One of
those options was that we could have retreated into small family
groups. Because then the benefits of our ideas and
knowledge would flow just to our relatives. Had we chosen this
option, sometime around 200,000 years ago, we would probably
still be living like the Neanderthals were when we first entered
Europe 40,000 years ago. And this is because in small
groups there are fewer ideas, there are fewer innovations. And
small groups are more prone to accidents and bad luck. So if
we'd chosen that path, our evolutionary path would have led
into the forest -- and been a short one indeed.
8:49The other option we could choose was to develop the
systems of communication that would allow us to share
ideas and to cooperate amongst others. Choosing this option
would mean that a vastly greater fund of accumulated
knowledge and wisdom would become available to any one
individual than would ever arise from within an individual
family or an individual person on their own. Well, we chose the
second option, and language is the result.
9:20Language evolved to solve the crisis of visual
theft. Language is a piece of social technologyfor enhancing the
benefits of cooperation -- for reaching agreements, for striking
deals and for coordinating our activities. And you can see that,
in a developing society that was beginning to acquire
language, not having language would be a like a bird without
wings.Just as wings open up this sphere of air for birds to
exploit, language opened up the sphere of cooperation for
humans to exploit. And we take this utterly for granted, because
we're a species that is so at home with language,
9:59but you have to realize that even the simplest acts of
exchange that we engage in are utterly dependent upon
language. And to see why, consider two scenarios from early in
our evolution. Let's imagine that you are really good at making
arrowheads, but you're hopeless at making the wooden

shafts with the flight feathers attached. Two other people you
know are very good at making the wooden shafts, but they're
hopeless at making the arrowheads.So what you do is -- one of
those people has not really acquired language yet. And let's
pretend the other one is good at language skills.
10:34So what you do one day is you take a pile of
arrowheads, and you walk up to the one that can't speak very
well, and you put the arrowheads down in front of him, hoping
that he'll get the idea that you want to trade your arrowheads for
finished arrows. But he looks at the pile of arrowheads, thinks
they're a gift, picks them up, smiles and walks off. Now you
pursue this guy, gesticulating. A scuffle ensues and you get
stabbed with one of your own arrowheads. Okay, now replay
this scene now, and you're approaching the one who has
language. You put down your arrowheads and say, "I'd like to
trade these arrowheads for finished arrows. I'll split you
50/50." The other one says, "Fine. Looks good to me. We'll do
that." Now the job is done.
11:14Once we have language, we can put our ideas together and
cooperate to have a prosperitythat we couldn't have before we
acquired it. And this is why our species has prospered around
the world while the rest of the animals sit behind bars in zoos,
languishing. That's why we build space shuttles and
cathedrals while the rest of the world sticks sticks into the
ground to extract termites. All right, if this view of
language and its value in solving the crisis of visual theft is
true, any species that acquires it should show an explosion of
creativity and prosperity. And this is exactly what the
archeological record shows.
11:55If you look at our ancestors, the Neanderthals and the
Homo erectus, our immediate ancestors, they're confined to
small regions of the world. But when our species arose about
200,000 years ago, sometime after that we quickly walked out
of Africa and spread around the entire world, occupying nearly
every habitat on Earth. Now whereas other species are
confined to places that their genes adapt them to, with social

learning and language, we could transform the environment to
suit our needs. And so we prospered in a way that no other
animal has. Language really is the most potent trait that has
ever evolved. It is the most valuable trait we have for
converting new lands and resources into more people and their
genes that natural selection has ever devised.
12:49Language really is the voice of our genes. Now having
evolved language, though, we did something peculiar, even
bizarre. As we spread out around the world, we developed
thousands of different languages. Currently, there are about
seven or 8,000 different languages spoken on Earth. Now you
might say, well, this is just natural. As we diverge, our
languages are naturally going to diverge. But the real puzzle
and irony is that the greatest density of different languages on
Earth is found where people are most tightly packed together.
13:23If we go to the island of Papua New Guinea, we can find
about 800 to 1,000 distinct human languages, different human
languages, spoken on that island alone. There are places on that
island where you can encounter a new language every two or
three miles. Now, incredible as this sounds, I once met a Papuan
man, and I asked him if this could possibly be true. And he said
to me, "Oh no. They're far closer together than that." And it's
true; there are places on that island where you can encounter a
new language in under a mile.And this is also true of some
remote oceanic islands.
13:59And so it seems that we use our language, not just to
cooperate, but to draw rings around our cooperative groups and
to establish identities, and perhaps to protect our knowledge and
wisdom and skills from eavesdropping from outside. And we
know this because when we study different language groups and
associate them with their cultures, we see that different
languages slow the flow of ideas between groups. They slow the
flow of technologies. And they even slow the flow of
genes. Now I can't speak for you, but it seems to be the
case that we don't have sex with people we can't talk
to. (Laughter) Now we have to counter that, though, against the

evidence we've heard that we might have had some rather
distasteful genetic dalliances with the Neanderthals and the
Denisovans.
14:50(Laughter)
14:52Okay, this tendency we have, this seemingly natural
tendency we have, towards isolation, towards keeping to
ourselves, crashes head first into our modern world. This
remarkable image is not a map of the world. In fact, it's a map
of Facebook friendship links. And when you plot those
friendship links by their latitude and longitude, it literally
draws a map of the world. Our modern world is
communicating with itself and with each other more than it
hasat any time in its past. And that communication, that
connectivity around the world, that globalization now raises a
burden. Because these different languages impose a barrier, as
we've just seen, to the transfer of goods and ideas and
technologies and wisdom. And they impose a barrier to
cooperation.
15:44And nowhere do we see that more clearly than in the
European Union, whose 27 member countries speak 23 official
languages. The European Union is now spending over one
billion euros annually translating among their 23 official
languages. That's something on the orderof 1.45 billion U.S.
dollars on translation costs alone. Now think of the absurdity of
this situation. If 27 individuals from those 27 member states sat
around table, speaking their 23 languages, some very simple
mathematics will tell you that you need an army of 253
translators to anticipate all the pairwise possibilities. The
European Union employs a permanent staff of about 2,500
translators. And in 2007 alone -- and I'm sure there are more
recent figures -- something on the order of 1.3 million
pages were translated into English alone.
16:45And so if language really is the solution to the crisis of
visual theft, if language really is the conduit of our
cooperation, the technology that our species derived to promote
the free flow and exchange of ideas, in our modern world, we

confront a question. And that question is whether in this
modern, globalized world we can really afford to have all these
different languages.
17:13To put it this way, nature knows no other circumstance in
which functionally equivalent traits coexist. One of them always
drives the other extinct. And we see this in the inexorable
march towards standardization. There are lots and lots of ways
of measuring things --weighing them and measuring their length
-- but the metric system is winning. There are lots and lots of
ways of measuring time, but a really bizarre base 60
system known as hours and minutes and seconds is nearly
universal around the world. There are many, many ways of
imprinting CDs or DVDs, but those are all being standardized as
well. And you can probably think of many, many more in your
own everyday lives.
17:58And so our modern world now is confronting us with a
dilemma. And it's the dilemma that this Chinese man
faces, who's language is spoken by more people in the
world than any other single language, and yet he is sitting at his
blackboard, converting Chinese phrasesinto English language
phrases. And what this does is it raises the possibility to us that
in a world in which we want to promote cooperation and
exchange, and in a world that might be dependent more than
ever before on cooperation to maintain and enhance our levels
of prosperity, his actions suggest to us it might be
inevitable that we have to confront the ideathat our destiny is to
be one world with one language.
18:47Thank you.
18:49(Applause)
18:57Matt Ridley: Mark, one question. Svante found that the
FOXP2 gene, which seems to be associated with language, was
also shared in the same form in Neanderthals as us. Do we have
any idea how we could have defeated Neanderthals if they also
had language?
19:14Mark Pagel: This is a very good question. So many of you
will be familiar with the idea that there's this gene called

FOXP2 that seems to be implicated in some ways in the fine
motor control that's associated with language. The reason why I
don't believe that tells us that the Neanderthals had language is
-- here's a simple analogy: Ferraris are cars that have
engines. My car has an engine, but it's not a Ferrari. Now the
simple answer then is that genes alone don't, all by
themselves, determine the outcome of very complicated things
like language. What we know about this FOXP2 and
Neanderthals is that they may have had fine motor control of
their mouths -- who knows. But that doesn't tell us they
necessarily had language.
19:55MR: Thank you very much indeed.
19:57(Applause)
Assignment 2
XE452 Global Issue in ICT, 2nd SEMESTER (142)
2014 – 15 Academic Year
Student ID
Student Name

CLO
PLO
Total marks
Marks awarded
4
AS3
12
4
AS3
8
4
IT 3
5
TOTAL MARK AWARDED
25
Categories
60 - 69%
(Level 1)
70-79%
(Level 2)

80 -89%
(Level 3)
90-100%
(Level 4)
Communication Skills- (CS3)
Effective use of the studied concept
Ability to show the differences with passable effectiveness
Ability to show the differences with moderate effectiveness
Ability to show the differences with considerable effectiveness
Ability to show the differences with high degree of
effectiveness
Communication Skills- (CS3)
Effective use of the studied concept
Ability to give decision based on the conducted analysis with
passable effectiveness
moderate effectiveness
considerable effectiveness
high degree of effectiveness
Information Technology
(IT 3)
Use MS Word to write the answer clearly and organized
Messy and disorganized
Satisfactory in organizing
Fairly systematic and orderly
Systematic and orderly
REPORT INSTRUCTION:
OVERALL MARK
Report: 25 Marks

PROJECT FORMAT
The cover page should carry the following: –
· Name of the University College
· Program title
· Subject code and title
· Name of lecturer
· Name and ID of every member of your group
· Date of submission
Note: Refer to the last page
The assignment must be: –
· Type written
· Include all Headings
· Edited for typo and grammatical errors
· Left and right alignment of 2 cm
· 1.5 spacing
· Font size - 11
· Lettering – Times New Roman

· Paragraphing – 2 spaces
Description:
CENTREPOINT would like to expand their business globally.
The owner of the company believes that to have global business
long-life software is needed. The owner of the company is
thinking to have a website that enables the customer to register
on the website and the data of the customer will be recorded for
future login and contact. The website should also update the
information such as adding new product, changing the product
price. The website should also have various integrated payment
systems in order to make it easy for the customer to pay using
different methods. Security is the main requirement in this
website. The website should update the information such as the
price of the products and also tell the customer whether the
product is available or out of stock. The owner of the company
is looking for expert programmers who are able to improve their
skills in term of integrating any new technology with what will
be developed.
Working in group of 2 to 3 students, conduct a detailed analysis
base on the choosing programming language criteria and discuss
any addition factor needed in order to compare the different
programming languages and give final decision that could help
the owner of the company to take decision.
Write comparison between at least two programming languages,
for example: C, C++, C#, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Python,
Ruby, SQL.
Page 2 of 3

Analyze rhetorical context, like audience and timeMake sure you .docx

Analyze rhetorical context, like audience and timeMake sure you .docx

More Related Content

Similar to Analyze rhetorical context, like audience and timeMake sure you .docx (20)

More from rossskuddershamus (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Analyze rhetorical context, like audience and timeMake sure you .docx