The dog law should be abolished to such an extent that one might need a "driver's license" to have a dog
Receiver:
Politicians in that it is they who have the opportunity to change the law
Citizens as they are the ones who need to make the topic relevant enough to get on the political agenda
Circumstances:
The Dogs Act, 2001
Innocent dogs die
Informing about the circumstances
Persuade seems persuasive as the speech leads directly up to action
Language:
Comparisons
(l.15) helps underlining the point and makes the message unmistakable
Metaphors
“lump them all together” they are all the same
Makes the reader see the point from a different perspective.
Repetitions
“554 dogs”(ll.3-4) Underlines and strengthens the point
“Alternative” (ll.19-20) Underlines and strengthens the point
Personal anecdotes
“My friend had a dog” makes the speech personal and appeals to the receivers’ pathos
Rhetorical questions
Makes the reader reflect about the subject E.g. (ll.1-2) + (ll.8-9) + (l.14)
Pronouns
E.g. The “We” (l.1) (l. 8) makes the speech including
Anaphora
”A dog, A dog, A dog (…)” Makes the point very clear
Logos, ethos, pathos
Pathos creates sympathy with the receiver (l.3)
Logos references to concrete dates and numbers makes the speech seem trustworthy because it addresses the logic (ll.2-3)
Det er gratis at oprette en konto