Reviewing the Argumentative Text: “Polite Speech” 2015 AP Lang Prompt

Summary

In this lecture, Eduardo Barreto dives into the intricacies of crafting an argumentative essay centered around the notion of polite speech as discussed in the 2015 AP Lang prompt. It delves into the importance of understanding the value, function, and context of polite speech in communication. Barreto explores the necessity of defining a clear thesis, developing sub-claims, and backing them with strong evidence. Additionally, he underscores the importance of addressing opposition, choosing relevant examples, and concluding effectively. The lecture is rich with strategies to enhance argumentative writing by leveraging examples from history, like the communication between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, and frameworks such as ethos, pathos, and logos.

Highlights

• Eduardo Barreto discusses the 2015 AP Lang prompt on polite speech, emphasizing its value and function 🎓
• Barreto urges the importance of defining your essay's thesis - whether polite speech has value, function, or both 🤔
• He suggests using varied contexts to demonstrate how polite speech operates, such as in diplomatic or personal settings 🌐
• The lecture gives an example of how polite speech affected historical figures like Hamilton and Burr 📜
• Strategies for argumentative writing include using ethos, pathos, and logos for strong persuasion 💪
• Barreto highlights the importance of addressing opposition thoughtfully to avoid creating non-existent counterarguments 🤷
• Examples like diplomatic use of polite speech during the US and USSR tensions provide strong evidence 🌏
• Conclude with either a solution, a powerful statement, or a call to action to leave a lasting impression 🎯

Key Takeaways

• Understand the true value and function of polite speech 💬
• Identify whether to argue for value, function, or both 👥
• Consider the context in which polite speech operates 🌍
• Craft a compelling thesis with supporting sub-claims 📝
• Choose strong, relatable examples to back up your claims 📚
• Address possible opposition carefully to avoid weakening your argument 🛡️
• Conclude your essay with impactful statements or suggestions 🔚
• Avoid common logical fallacies to strengthen your argument ⚠️

Overview

Eduardo Barreto's lecture on the argumentative text 'Polite Speech' for the 2015 AP Lang Prompt explores the nuanced role of polite discourse in communication. Recognizing its significance in both conveying respect and sometimes acting as a barrier, he guides students through crafting a sophisticated argumentative essay.

The lecture extensively covers the importance of formulating a clear thesis that reflects either the value, function, or dual role of polite speech. Barreto emphasizes understanding the context, such as professional versus personal settings, to highlight how polite speech is employed differently, and why its relevance varies.

Furthermore, Barreto equips students with strategies to effectively support their arguments. He stresses using compelling historical examples and logical rhetorical appeals to enhance persuasion. The session wraps up with advice on addressing oppositional views and forming strong conclusions, ensuring students craft coherent and impactful essays.

Chapters

• 00:00 - 00:30: Introduction and Prompt Overview In this chapter, the focus is on a lecture series concerning argumentation within English language composition. The discussion pivots around the 2015 FRQ prompt which examines 'polite speech' in the context of first-year university students in the United States. It highlights that phrases such as 'How are you,' and 'Nice to meet you' serve more to convey politeness than literal meaning. The task is to develop an essay that discusses the value and function of such polite expressions.
• 00:30 - 02:00: Considering the Purpose of the Argument The chapter discusses the consideration of purpose in argumentation within a cultural context. It emphasizes the importance of determining whether the argument should focus on value, function, or a combination of both. The aim is to develop a personal stance in line with anthropological insights on polite speech.
• 02:00 - 03:30: Determining Claims and Sub-claims The chapter titled 'Determining Claims and Sub-claims' discusses the use of polite phrases in conversation and how they often serve more as social lubricants than literal expressions of intent. The conversation emphasizes the importance of making claims that go beyond traditional polite expressions and suggests exploring more complex and broader claims in essays. The focus is on expanding beyond simple conversational norms like 'How are you?' or 'Nice to meet you' and considering the depth and complexity of claims being made.
• 03:30 - 05:30: Reasons and Evidence The chapter discusses the concept of polite speech beyond common phrases like 'how are you' or 'nice to meet you.' It explores the significance of polite speech in various contexts including political, personal, societal, and cultural. The text suggests that polite speech serves multiple purposes and should not be restricted to a limited set of expressions. Instead, it functions in diverse ways depending on the context.
• 05:30 - 08:30: Addressing the Opposition This chapter deals with constructing essays, especially focusing on the purpose behind argumentation. It emphasizes the importance of questioning the purpose both in the context of the prompt and in crafting one's own argument. The chapter asks the reader to contemplate on the role of polite speech, and whether to argue for its usefulness or declare it as having no value.
• 08:30 - 13:30: Examples of Claims The chapter 'Examples of Claims' discusses the idea that some functionalities, such as polite speech, may seem unnecessary but play an essential role in human interaction. The speaker suggests that, instead of dismissing these functionalities, it might be more persuasive to argue their necessity for civilization.
• 13:30 - 18:30: Essentials for Strong Reasoning In this chapter, the focus is on understanding the necessity of reasoning in forming arguments. Polite speech, for example, gains its value not from inherent worth but from its function in facilitating smooth communication. When constructing an essay, one must consider the purpose of the text, along with distinguishing the main claim and sub-claims. This involves recognizing functional components over perceived inherent values to create coherent and purpose-driven arguments.
• 18:30 - 25:00: Examples and Connections The chapter discusses the role of polite speech in various settings. It argues that polite speech serves an important function in formal settings, such as professional environments. However, in personal settings, like interactions with friends, polite speech may not be as necessary or functional.
• 25:00 - 31:00: Conclusion Techniques The chapter titled 'Conclusion Techniques' explores the use of appropriate communication styles in both professional and personal environments. It examines the necessity of polite speech in professional settings to avoid being perceived as rude and to facilitate business interactions. Conversely, it suggests that in personal settings, overly polite speech might hinder genuine communication with loved ones. The chapter implies that sometimes, being blunt or seemingly rude is acceptable and even necessary to convey true emotions and maintain honest relationships. It challenges the reader to consider their claims and adjust their communication style based on the context, whether professional or personal.
• 31:00 - 33:00: Final Tips on Rhetorical Writing This chapter focuses on the nuances of rhetorical writing, emphasizing the importance of sub-categorical claims and the reasoning behind them. It suggests incorporating elaborate examples to strengthen arguments. It highlights the use of personal examples, such as how people modify their speech to suit different social settings, like speaking differently to parents compared to others, to illustrate claims effectively.

Reviewing the Argumentative Text: “Polite Speech” 2015 AP Lang Prompt Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 continuing our series of lectures for argumentation on av english language composition this is the 2015 frq polite speech here we go here's the prompt as an anthropologist studying first-year students at a university in the united states writes a friendly phrases like how are you nice to meet you and let's get in touch communicate politeness rather than literal intent what if anything is the value or function of such flight speech in a well-written essay develop your position on the value or function of polite speech
• 00:30 - 01:00 in a culture or community and with which you are familiar okay use appropriate evidence from the reading yada yada all right so here's the conversation we're supposed to be having right but it's a value or a function of polite speech there are some things that you have to consider first do i have to choose value or function can be value and function can be just value and not function it could be function not value right so you have to consider which way you want to go here now very clearly you have to develop your own position the anthropologist says
• 01:00 - 01:30 that these phrases they communicate politeness rather than literal intent that's the beginning of the conversation your entire essay cannot be polite speech it's only it's not literal it's only to be nice it doesn't matter whatever it is that you're gonna do you have to consider how complex your claim is going to be right you should probably not just restrict yourself to these phrases like how are you nice to meet you let's get in touch i think you can go broader than that
• 01:30 - 02:00 i think the conversation should be about polite speech all together in what context there are some ways in which polite speech is not only how are you nice to meet you right thank you spotlight speech i suppose right there are other phrases in other contexts let's say in a political context or in a personal context societal cultural context there are many ways in which polite speech could function so you don't have to restrict yourself to these only all right so before you begin
• 02:00 - 02:30 writing the essay you have to consider several things what exactly is the purpose of the argumentation both what is the purpose of the argument within this prompt and what is the purpose of the argument that you are going to make do you want to inquire into the function or value of polite speech do you want to present a conviction like you really feel that polite speech is absolutely useless no value whatsoever it's only a
• 02:30 - 03:00 a crude functionality that we still have for some reason and we really don't need it it only gets in the way of conversation i don't know some people believe this right maybe you want to instead pursue a persuasive avenue what does that mean so in this case you might want to say that uh polite speech that you want you want to persuade your audience that polite speech is in fact something that we need it is a function of human interaction without which we cannot exist as a civilization okay all right i guess
• 03:00 - 03:30 you can go in that direction or do you want to present a negotiation meaning polite speech does have a value but only because it has a function right so because it has a function of helping uh grease the wheels of communication then it has a value to us but really inherently it has no value it just has a function okay you have to consider what the purpose of the text is and what the purpose of your essay is going to be then you have to consider what your claim main claim and sub claims are going to be so
• 03:30 - 04:00 say that you argue that polite speech has a function in this type of setting but it really doesn't have a function in this other setting so for instance polite speech is useful necessary this will be my claim in a formal setting like uh professional settings say work of some sort but it is not necessary or it has no function or it's not as good or as important in a personal setting like with friends or
• 04:00 - 04:30 family or loved ones right if that's your overall claim then your subcategorical claims would be proving how it works in a professional setting but not in a personal setting right maybe you can say something like in a professional setting you need polite speech otherwise people are going to think you're rude they don't want to do business with you they don't like you right but in a personal setting maybe polite speech gets in the way of real communication with people you love sometimes you're rude to people you love and that's okay right so you have to consider uh what claim
• 04:30 - 05:00 and claims sub-categorical claims you're gonna make also the reasons the reasons why these claims make sense so you have to start thinking of examples that may be a little more elaborate what kind of examples are we talking about here well if you're talking about personal examples wherein you you because you're saying that polite speech works is not a functionality within personal settings then maybe one of those examples could be how people speak differently let's say to their parents as opposed to their
• 05:00 - 05:30 co-workers and with whom do they actually have a meaningful relationship we're going to assume that this would be the parents in order to prove the argument so you have to have elaborate examples i i wouldn't say elaborate necessarily but you need examples that prove the claim the reasons they they substantiate the claim right think of it as why do i believe this or why should anybody believe that which is the claim here right now after you do the reasons or you have
• 05:30 - 06:00 your reasons you have to consider what kind of evidence you're going to use now reasons and evidence are usually interchangeable right but what i mean by evidence is try to think of some way some hard evidence if you can i know it's difficult day of the exam you have 40 minutes you have no evidence except we have in your head but evidence could be uh situational say that uh history right say alexander hamilton uh sending letters to aaron burr which were done in a very polite way but
• 06:00 - 06:30 they underscored uh the hatred that they both had for each other i think this would be evidence uh improve and prove of in defense of the claim that polite speech may have a function right but in a way it actually truncates real meaning and real relationship because aaron burr shot him so this this would be harder evidence because in this case i'm using historical example in order to prove my point which is uh what you want to do then you
• 06:30 - 07:00 want to consider what warrants do you have what premise do you have why is it that you think that polite speech is in fact valuable meaning if you think that it is valuable because it has a function right then the assumption of that the premise the warrant is that everything that has a function has value you have to prove that if you don't if you're not able to prove that everything that has a function has a value then i don't know that you'll be able to prove that its value is is
• 07:00 - 07:30 that important right so this the ato would be addressing the opposition when you address the opposition you want to consider i i don't know if you necessarily need it in a prompt like this uh considering the value or function of polite speech i don't know if you need it but in mo in many prompts you'd have to address the opposition in some way i i sometimes this can backfire because
• 07:30 - 08:00 sometimes you create an opposition that isn't there and in doing so you weaken your own argument so you have to be careful with how you address the opposition or if you do at all i wouldn't in this specific prompt so uh here are some examples of claims that we can consider all right so whether in a formal diplomatic meeting or warm domestic setting flight speech serves as a trusty ethical appeal that opens others up to more readily consider ideas and input by creating a friendlier warmer more harmonious atmosphere that's great
• 08:00 - 08:30 right because the claim is that in this specific setting right or in this specific setting polite speech is an ethical appeal that's awesome right that's evidence right there and ethos appeal sometimes if you want to prove something why something is good or it works go to the go to the appeals go to the ethos of pathos the logos if you're able to prove it in an appeal way then you have your evidence right there um and then he explains it opens up people to consider ideas
• 08:30 - 09:00 it creates a friendlier atmosphere right these are things that most people would agree with and i think that's another tidbit if you want to prove something try to go for the the safest branch right that's the if most people would agree with this then it is likely that it is true here's another one between two divided and very different groups and the first misstep to hate is a lack of respect uh so here the warrant is going to be that polite speech is useful because it creates respect and without respect there is no peace i
• 09:00 - 09:30 think that's the direction so through polite speech though polite speech might seem antiquated and useless this will be i think the address of the opposition in this case it worked really well because here he doesn't really engage fully with the opposition it's more like i know some people think it's useless but it in fact conveys mutual respect right and there cannot be any form of relationship between two groups without respect right so among the most divided and misunderstood groups polite speech has the ability to always step in the right direction
• 09:30 - 10:00 peace all right so there's a lot going on here the warrant is polite speech is useful because it creates respect and respect can foster peace and this is important right and there's even an address of the opposition these are great polite speech has become a form of self-censorship this is on the other side right preventing people from saying what they truly feel due to fear of coming off as rude or impolite it is also used as a weapon in our society that blurs the lines between polite and suppression
• 10:00 - 10:30 that's good right if this is what you want to argue i don't know if i agree with it but it doesn't matter because he convinces me and that's good enough a light speech is self-censorship so this is a strategy he's redefining polite speech and now he will argue his redefinition that's great okay here are some essentials for strong reasonings remember that the stronger the example seems the stronger your argument seems right so when you have strong examples you have strong arguments
• 10:30 - 11:00 and this is something that we sort of saw here um when talking about here we go formal different diplomatic or domestic settings ethical appeals are important so these examples are strong because when you think of diplomatic settings you think oh yeah we should be polite i guess it does have a function there immediately the example proves a point for you and that's important the relevance of connection between the example there we go connection will impact the overall strength of the
• 11:00 - 11:30 argument if if if you say the polite speech is a value function and you say well you know parents and kids there's a lot going on there right like the example does not immediately relate the point that you're trying to convey so the connection has to be clear diplomatic settings again and the value or function of light switch that is an immediate connection the example doesn't fit don't try to make it fit this is true this is true for instance if you go back
• 11:30 - 12:00 here and you see self-censorship right preventing others from saying what they truly i see this and immediately i think of 1984. so if this claim will use evidence as uh from 1984 um i i they would have to be careful because 1984 there's so much going on in the self-censorship of language it's more about not saying things that would be directly against the government so they would have to pick examples from 1984 or one big
• 12:00 - 12:30 example that immediately proves the point for them and the point that i'm making then is that the example has to fit or relate directly otherwise it's not going to fit right and try to be specific so if they're going to quote 1984 don't say in 1984 there is self-censorship this isn't good no 1984 is too big there's just too much going on so you have to use that specific example in the novel when this happens and that can relate to the point your argument if your example is wrong your claim will seem wrong
• 12:30 - 13:00 so be careful uh maybe not 1984 but let me go back here see if i see another one uh here we're talking about mutual respect oh sorry talking about respect and how that may lead to peace and this is the functionality of polite speech right so let's use that example and the point is the example is wrong so if if you use a historical example wherein uh polite speech led to respect let's say but really that polite speech didn't lead to respect
• 13:00 - 13:30 it only led to i don't know warfare let's say or miscommunication between the two groups of people and you got that wrong then you're going to lose validity in your overall claim so you have to make sure that whatever example you end up using it makes sense and it's true otherwise it will improperly support your your claim okay here's a larger body that i think you should look at i'm only going to read a piece of it but i do want you to pause it and maybe uh use it as an example so those who argue
• 13:30 - 14:00 that polite speech is somehow worthless simply because it does not express the exact literal meaning misunderstand the point of language entirely so this paragraph is in many ways begins as an address of the opposition the beauty of language is that it is that it is not exact science with concrete rules and precision precise information language can have tone and emotion and weight language is about truly communicating conveying ideas not transmitting exact information like a radio or binary machine code or a
• 14:00 - 14:30 computer posture body language demeanor okay so you can see that this body paragraph works so well because the the the theoretical or rather the rhetorical point that they use is about language altogether and then they include other forms of language and these forms of language in many ways they prove the point for him right which is polite speech is not about
• 14:30 - 15:00 you know only expressing the exact literal meaning right there's so much more going on and then they use 1984 as an extended example of the idea right so flight speech is valuable not because it means exactly what it says but because it creates a human connection between people and this is buried right here is the main claim of the body paragraph that's the point of polite speech and i think this is what elevates the argument altogether because he's
• 15:00 - 15:30 looking at an argument through a very complex view so read this let's go to the next one here's another example that might you might find useful so david's example in today's context polite speech has become a power powerful diplomatic tool especially when the consequences are dire and the fate of the world could be at stake there's context right there right so why is polite speech a powerful diplomatic tool well because we need it for international relations which is what he's saying so during the 1980s the united states was
• 15:30 - 16:00 poised against the soviet union now this is great because this example will encompass the shaky relationship that america and the city the ussr had in the 80s right now this this almost the example i think uh takes the entire body apparently every dictator shaking hands here we go the example takes the entire body paragraph and this is really really well done sometimes the
• 16:00 - 16:30 best way to prove a claim is to relate an example whether anecdotal or historical sometimes even personal perhaps depending how how the nature of the personal example uh and let that example prove it for you if you have to work too hard at proving it it'll be obvious but if the example proves it for you there's nothing more to say and this is great i think we have a chance to look at it because and i think you you already imagine that using america and the ussr and
• 16:30 - 17:00 how they can how certain certain uh phrases and conversations help to de-escalate the issue as opposed to make it worse all right let's talk about conclusions remember that you should end with one of these um i think depends on the essay if you had a problem solution then offer offer a solution at the end or an alternative solution perhaps if you've been talking about how people think that polite speech is valueless but you think it does have
• 17:00 - 17:30 value then maybe put the last nail in the coffin and it's approved the aid to disprove the idea uh maybe make a prediction if you've been talking about how the world needs flight speech for international relations otherwise it will everything will become chaotic and make a prediction maybe say that uh without this then that and that can be a little tricky right but i think you can do that in the conclusion if there's anywhere that you can go off the cuff and say certain things that are sort of uh i don't know wild claims
• 17:30 - 18:00 if you will it's probably the conclusion uh present a call to action if you need it um sometimes i i don't know if this essay necessarily needs it other essays need more than this one but i don't know what call to action you would have to present in polite speech unless your essay was about how the world is somehow worsening for lack of polite speech and we need to bring it back is the only way that we can
• 18:00 - 18:30 really foster human relationships again maybe maybe so here are some examples that you might want to look at so um i'll start here through battles on the bat though through battles on the battlefield battles in the courtroom polite speech is used to identify and codify people's relationships with each other and make common courtesies more common that's think that's nice it emphasizes the hierarchical differences people have with each other much like a judge and a defendant polite speech may not appear to be meaningful
• 18:30 - 19:00 at school but on the battlefield i could mean life or death now this essay has been talking about the military and actual battlefield right and the use of certain language so this is why this conclusion is very unique to that essay because that's the conversation that we're having here we go between two divided and very different groups the first misstep to hate is a lack of respect so we read this one before which was uh one of the claims that we saw but this claim right here at the end it's so powerful it's so
• 19:00 - 19:30 powerful this is exactly what he's been talking about he's been talking about a ussr in america he's been talking about polite speech and fostering respect and thereby providing ushering peace into the world so final tip as always be the rhetorical writer use appeals or allude to the appeals always always always show awareness of devices right maybe use a metaphor maybe use an analogy an allusion to history some of you do that
• 19:30 - 20:00 use ironies in your speech perhaps right you need to have personality you need to have voice be careful with logical fallacies right don't attack someone in hopes of defeating their argument don't generalize quickly right don't change the argument into something that it's not and then attack that right be careful with these logical fallacies these are very common all right that's it