Analysis Of Syrian Presidesident Speech, Bashar Al-Assad In 2011

Please check this as it si related to the essay and it is from my teacher: https://ir(dot)uiowa(dot)edu/poroi/
Assessment
A 4 thousand-word (max) essay examining critically an example of contemporary political speech and employing the techniques learned on the module. Advice on the content of this essay is provided at the end of this guide.
Module Text:
The module text, which ought to be purchased, is Sam Leith, You Talkin’ to Me? Rhetoric from Aristotle to Obama (London: Profile, 2011). This has been more recently published as Words Like Loaded Pistols (2012). It is available in paperback and isn’t very expensive. It will be useful in introducing you to the basic rhetorical techniques taught in the first half of the course.
-----
The Essay
There is no exam for this module. 100% of your mark – and hence the test for all the outcomes indicated at the top of this guide – will come from your essay. So it is important that you are aware of what is required of you.
The essay consists of a speech analysis that examines a specific speech ‘moment’ and applies the techniques of rhetorical analysis to explore how – and how well – it works. You can choose your own speech, but it must be broadly contemporary (at least 20th C., no earlier) and of some significance in terms of its place in events (which you will need to explain). DO NOT choose a speech that has already been analysed by the tutor in the lectures/seminars.
Your essential requirements are as follows.
Deviation from these instructions may lower your mark:
1. Analyse a contemporary speech of political significance of your choice in terms of its rhetorical dimensions: that is, identify its basic claim and then characterise it by argument, arrangement and style; indicate what is at issue and what overriding conclusion(s) it seeks to support; explain its proofs, forms of appeal, correspondences to and divergences from any obvious speech conventions; and note any distinctive use of language/performance that made it effective (or not). Account for the distinctive rhetorical aspects (but not every single one) of the speech and define the rhetorical terms you employ with reference to literature from rhetorical studies, where available.
2. Explain the situation of the speech – its local and its wider contexts – and the exigencies to which it was a response. Who was the speaker and who were the audience; and what was their disposition; how did the speaker respond to the audience in the text of the speech?
3. Evaluate the effectiveness of the speech in terms of its rhetorical qualities and its intended practical effects. Consider any evidence of public response to the speech (the media, members of audience, etc), not just your own feelings about it.
4. The essay will be 4000 words in length MAX, so it needs to be clearly structured, but do not use sub-headings.
5. Explain your choice of speech in the first paragraph (not as a personal choice but in terms of its historical/political significance) and summarise your conclusions about how the speech worked (e.g. primarily through an ethical appeal). Then go on to consider context, audience, speech, etc. Conclude with a summary of what you have shown.
6. Double space your text (so I can read it without squinting), paginate it (ie put page numbers in it), and include a bibliography indicating the source of the speech. You do not need to include a copy of the speech.
7. Do quote but try not to quote excessively; select key remarks that substantiate your analysis. Use your own words to describe what is going. Always explain long quotes; don’t assume they always do the talking for you.
8. You can analyse a speech that is not originally in English. But your quotation must translate into English and the original source must still be in the bibliography
9. A bibliography is an alphabetical list of all items used. Don’t divide it up into different kind of items (the speech, articles, books, videos). One single list (in order) is sufficient.
10. Put a front page on the essay with your student number, the title of the course, date and call it ‘Speech Analysis’. Do NOT put your name on it.
11. Before you submit, do a spell check and measure the length. 4K words is the absolute limit (excluding the bibliography)!
How to do well on this module:
You may not have written an essay like the one required of you in this module. The essay is not a response to a specific question but an analysis. To do well, you will need to follow the rules of presentation indicated above (and other conventional advice in other documents such as the Undergraduate Handbook), write clearly and in a way that demonstrates particular attention to lucid and precise presentation of ideas; and you will need to show judgement in drawing attention to key rhetorical elements of the speech in question (learned in this module), drawing upon rhetorical literature, and using the available evidence to show your distinct understanding of the speech, its context and the impact it had. Above all, present an argument about the speech as a whole – not just description of parts with no overall integration.
Here is a table that indicates broadly speaking what kinds of work get which classification. Obviously, the result depends on the extent of any specific element being achieved or not. For greater detail on general grades (i.e. for all modules, not just this one), please consult the Undergraduate Handbook.
-------
Please follow this:
THE STYLE SHOULD BE LIKE THIS:
Clear writing, correct spelling and grammar
• Follows presentation rules (double- spaced lines, page numbers, full reference citations, no subheadings, etc)
• Consistent and accurate bibliography
• Stays within specified word length
• Avoids needless embellishment (eg no
italics on quotes, or quotes in capital letters) or confusion (eg lengthy URLs for citations)
CONTENT SHOULD BE LIKE THIS:
Independent assessment based on sophisticated reading of speech and analysis of its rhetoric
• Discusses speech with reflection on context, speaker, impact, general significance of issue
• Underscore a selection of key rhetorical elements according to a distinct view of its merits
• Quotes material as evidence but lightly, when appropriate
• Explores literature on rhetoric to develop analysis
https://learn(dot)gold(dot)ac(dot)uk/mod/aspirelists/view.php?id=661845