Here I analyze the prompts I have read.

Context & Exigence: What topic/conversation is this text responding to? What year is the text published? What is the exigence–that is, what motivating occasion/issue/concern prompted the writing? The motivating occasion could be a current or historical event, a crisis, pending legislation, a recently published alternative view, or another ongoing problem.  

It is not stated when the text was published but it was written to talk about Black English 

Author: Who is the author of this text?  What are the author’s credentials and what is their investment in the issue?  

The author of the text is June Jordan and the text talks about one of their experiences  

Text: What can you find out about the publication?  What is the genre of the text (e.g., poem, personal essay, essay, news/academic article, blog, textbook chapter, etc.)? How do the conventions of that genre help determine the depth, complexity, and even appearance of the argument? What information about the publication or source (magazine, newspaper, advocacy Web site) helps explain the writer’s perspective or the structure and style of the argument? 

It seems to have been published by the SUNY school Stony Brook. The genre of the text is a personal essay since the author of the text brings up experiences within the classroom along with the death of their student’s brother. Since it was published by Stony Brook it would have a more academic type of writing but there a lot of use of Black English from the author within the text 

Audience: Who is the author’s intended audience? What can you infer about the audience (think about beliefs and political association but also age, class, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, profession, education, geographic location, religion, etc.)? Look for clues from the text (especially the original publication) to support your inference. 

The intended audience for the text would be those who are privilege, or those who live in slightly wealthy area as to bring awareness, based off of paragraphs 5-11 from the original publication. 

Purpose: What is the author trying to accomplish? To persuade, entertain, inform, educate, call to action, shock? How do you know? 

The author is trying to bring to light the idea that there are many types of English that is spoken, and that Black English should not be considered incorrect since its does not stand with “standard English”, based off of paragraphs 2-4. 

Argument: What do you believe is the main claim/idea/argument that the author is trying to communicate? What stance does s/he take?  

The author is trying to claim that we should not try and dismiss Black English but instead try to learn/understand it. 

Evidence: How is the argument supported? Types of support include reasons and logical explanations as well as evidence. Types of evidence include anecdotes, examples, hypothetical situations, (expert) testimony, quotes, citing sources, statistics, charts/graphs, research the author or another source conducts, scientific or other facts, general knowledge, historical references, metaphors/analogies, etc.  

During the author’s personal essay, they had their students read the first 40 pages of Alice Walker’s The Color Purple, the author then asked their students how they felt about the book in which the students replied saying they found they use on English within the book “funny”, or not sounding “right”. The author then started teaching a class based on Black English to give those who do not use it a better understands, based off of paragraphs 5-9 and 20. 

Rhetorical Strategies: What aspects of this text stand out for you as a rhetorical reader? In other words, what do you observe about what the author strategically does (consciously or not) in hopes of appealing to their audience? List here as many observations as you can make about what the text does.  

The author tries to mention that there are different forms of English spoken in many countries, and that countries that have huge differing languages tend to use English to communicate with one another by naming countries such as Israel, Malaysia, Zimbabwe, and Uganda, the text can speak to the conglomerate.  

Citation: Add the correct MLA or APA bibliographic entry for this text. Use easybib.com if you prefer. 

On Call: Political Essays by June Jordan (Boston: South End Press, 1985). Copyright © by June Jordan. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission. Harvard Educational Review Vol. 58 No. 3 August 1988 

Notes: What do you want to remember about this text? 

English is such a common language that it developed several versions of itself which ranges from across the globe with there being many versions here in the U.S., and what is considered Standard English only really means that many people tend to speak that version, but it completely undermines the other types of English, one of those being Black English. We should be more inclusive of Black English instead of outright saying it does not sound right even though when you travel to somewhere like Ireland they have their own type of English which greatly differs from what we consider Standard English. 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Context & Exigence: What topic/conversation is this text responding to? What year is the text published? What is the exigence–that is, what motivating occasion/issue/concern prompted the writing? The motivating occasion could be a current or historical event, a crisis, pending legislation, a recently published alternative view, or another ongoing problem.  

There is no exact date for when the video of the presentation was published but it can be said it was made in 2016, but what the presentation is responding to is what is supposed to be considered normal. 

Author: Who is the author of this text?  What are the author’s credentials and what is their investment in the issue?  

The presenter is Safwat Saleem who is an visual artist who creates funny but sad in a way type of art who has dealt with people who in a way did not see him as normal. 

Text: What can you find out about the publication?  What is the genre of the text (e.g., poem, personal essay, essay, news/academic article, blog, textbook chapter, etc.)? How do the conventions of that genre help determine the depth, complexity, and even appearance of the argument? What information about the publication or source (magazine, newspaper, advocacy Web site) helps explain the writer’s perspective or the structure and style of the argument? 

It is a Ted talk which have people who come on and bring up experiences that have affected them and changed them as a person, and so the presenter in the Ted talk gives meaningful advice to the listener which Safwat delivers where he brings up the concept of what is considered normal which in a way is his argument 

Audience: Who is the author’s intended audience? What can you infer about the audience (think about beliefs and political association but also age, class, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, profession, education, geographic location, religion, etc.)? Look for clues from the text (especially the original publication) to support your inference. 

I believe the presenter’s intended audience would be those who aren’t part of the minority because since they are not exposed to many cultural differences for example and so they tend to find new things exposed to them as not normal 

Purpose: What is the author trying to accomplish? To persuade, entertain, inform, educate, call to action, shock? How do you know? 

The presenter is trying to inform and entertain the audience. He tries to inform people on how the normalization of certain things such as minorities getting bad grades for example hurts people and while informing he has some minor comedic interludes throughout the presentation. 

Argument: What do you believe is the main claim/idea/argument that the author is trying to communicate? What stance does s/he take?  

I believe the main claims the presenter is trying to communicate is that the concept of normal is subjective while as the normalization on certain things can hurt certain individuals. 

Evidence: How is the argument supported? Types of support include reasons and logical explanations as well as evidence. Types of evidence include anecdotes, examples, hypothetical situations, (expert) testimony, quotes, citing sources, statistics, charts/graphs, research the author or another source conducts, scientific or other facts, general knowledge, historical references, metaphors/analogies, etc.  

He supports the argument by bringing up types of normalization then hurt certain groups of individuals such as it being expected for African American individuals to receive poor grades on their assignments as well as women and minorities doing terrible in college and many individuals expect this because it is normalized within their vision. 

Rhetorical Strategies: What aspects of this text stand out for you as a rhetorical reader? In other words, what do you observe about what the author strategically does (consciously or not) in hopes of appealing to their audience? List here as many observations as you can make about what the text does.  

Safwat tries to relate to the audience by mentioning certain part of his child and being a shy kid, he also mentions during his presentation that he would rather be in the bathroom then on stage giving his presentation due to his shyness which many individuals can relate to since it is difficult of many to do public speaking.  

Citation: Add the correct MLA or APA bibliographic entry for this text. Use easybib.com if you prefer. 

Saleem, Safwat. “Why I Keep Speaking up, Even When People Mock My Accent.” Safwat Saleem: Why I Keep Speaking up, Even When People Mock My Accent | TED Talk, https://www.ted.com/talks/safwat_saleem_why_i_keep_speaking_up_even_when_people_mock_my_accent/transcript.  

Notes: What do you want to remember about this text? 

The concept of what is and what is not normal is itself subjective, everyone perceives normality differently, but sometimes a majority of people tend to accept certain norms that hurt certain individuals especially here within the US.