0:00:02.620,0:00:09.399
On to the second paragraph. The first[br]sentence is really simple, not so. Of

0:00:08.783,0:00:15.738
course. it's referring back to the last[br]sentence of the first paragraph. We said,

0:00:15.738,0:00:22.430
now we thought at least some of it was[br]safe. And saying, no, it wasn't safe. So,

0:00:22.430,0:00:28.505
what are we going to say about this[br]sentence? Well, what about the little

0:00:28.505,0:00:33.901
word, so? So, can be an argument marker.[br]It can indicate that what follows it, is a

0:00:33.901,0:00:38.923
conclusion. But, is that what it's doing[br]here? I don't think so. As we just saw

0:00:38.923,0:00:44.012
like in, I don't think so, the word, so,[br]can be used in many ways, where it's not

0:00:44.012,0:00:49.232
an argument marker. And this is saying,[br]it's not so. It's not that way. So there's

0:00:49.232,0:00:56.084
no argument here. So that would get marked[br]with a big N for nothing. Now, what about

0:00:56.084,0:01:05.746
shocking, as it sounds, shocking? Well, is[br]shocking always bad? Remember we saw in

0:01:05.746,0:01:10.535
the first paragraph the word stunning.[br]Well, stunning stuns you, and shocking

0:01:10.535,0:01:15.296
shocks you. And it's telling you that you[br]have some kind of reaction. But it's not

0:01:15.296,0:01:19.882
telling you whether that reaction is due[br]to the thing being good, or the thing

0:01:19.882,0:01:23.703
being bad. You can get shocked by[br]something good or bad. It can be

0:01:23.703,0:01:28.367
shockingly good, or shockingly bad. And so[br]the word shocking by itself. Doesn't

0:01:28.367,0:01:34.213
indicate that it's e plus or e minus, so[br]again, you get a nothing. I mention it

0:01:34.213,0:01:40.059
only because it's clear that Robert[br]Redford thinks that shocking is bad, that

0:01:40.059,0:01:45.601
this should not have happened. He's[br]suggesting that it's bad. But the word

0:01:45.601,0:01:55.689
shocking, itself, is not an evaluative[br]word. What about, as it sounds? Well, he's

0:01:55.689,0:02:00.541
saying that it sounds that way. He's not[br]saying that it is that way. He's not

0:02:00.541,0:02:05.798
saying that it may sound that way. He's[br]saying it does sound that way, which is to

0:02:05.798,0:02:10.787
say, it seems that way to him. Which is[br]not to say it really is true, so he's

0:02:10.787,0:02:16.309
guarding the client. He's not saying that[br]it really is shocking. He's saying that it

0:02:16.309,0:02:20.899
seems shocking. So he's guarding the[br]client, in order to avoid someone

0:02:20.899,0:02:26.087
objecting that it's not really all that[br]shocking, after all. Say, well it sounds

0:02:26.087,0:02:31.276
shocking, and in order to make that part[br]of his argument mo re defensible. Because

0:02:31.276,0:02:36.554
it's not really essential to his argument,[br]that it's shocking or not. So what's

0:02:36.554,0:02:42.590
supposed to be shocking? Clinton's Bureau[br]of Land Management, or BLM, has approved

0:02:42.590,0:02:48.543
oil drilling within the monument. Notice[br]that there is no guarding at all here he

0:02:48.543,0:02:53.748
just states it. They did it they approved[br]oil drilling within the monument. And,

0:02:53.748,0:02:59.154
that's because it's not really something[br]he is arguing for. He's actually opposed

0:02:59.154,0:03:04.159
to it. It's something that his opponents[br]might support but he doesn't so, he

0:03:04.159,0:03:09.765
doesn't want to guard it since he wants to[br]say it just happened as a matter of fact

0:03:09.765,0:03:14.570
that they approved it so, there's I[br]nothing that we need to mark in that

0:03:14.570,0:03:20.201
particular sentence. Next sentence. BLM or[br]the Bureau of Land Management has given

0:03:20.201,0:03:25.218
Conoco Incorporated, a subsidiary of the[br]corporate giant DuPont permission to drill

0:03:25.218,0:03:30.985
for oil and gas in the heart of the new[br]monument. Well, there's a lot going on

0:03:30.985,0:03:37.296
here that we could mention, no, BLM has[br]given Conoco a subsidiary that explains

0:03:37.296,0:03:44.012
how they got permission by siding the BLM.[br]It's a subsidiary of the corporate giant

0:03:44.012,0:03:50.323
DuPont. He's certainly suggesting that[br]giant suggested that he's the small guy,

0:03:50.323,0:03:56.716
you know, up against the big corporate[br]giant. It might even has some connotation

0:03:56.716,0:04:03.100
of corporate giants being bad, but it[br]doesn't actually say that. And so, again

0:04:03.100,0:04:11.551
giant should be marked as nothing. What[br]about permission? To say that someone's

0:04:11.551,0:04:16.415
permitted to do something, is to say that[br]it's not wrong. That's what permitted

0:04:16.415,0:04:21.403
means. Now of course, if you're talking[br]about a legal permission, then to say that

0:04:21.403,0:04:26.330
it's permitted is to say that it's not[br]legally wrong. It's not forbidden by law.

0:04:26.330,0:04:30.895
It still might be morally wrong but at[br]least it's legally permitted means it's

0:04:30.895,0:04:35.576
not legally forbidden. And so if forbidden[br]and wrong are evaluative words, to deny

0:04:35.576,0:04:39.967
them and say it's not wrong looks like an[br]evaluative as well. But one of the

0:04:39.967,0:04:44.706
interesting things about this evaluative[br]word is it's clear whether it's positive

0:04:44.706,0:04:49.853
or negative. It means it's not wrong, but[br]that doesn't mean it is good or is right.

0:04:49.853,0:04:54.758
It simply means it's not forbidden. So,[br]it's not clear whether to put plus or

0:04:54.758,0:05:01.638
minus. I'll just leave it as a plain E in[br]that case, okay? Now, what did they have

0:05:01.638,0:05:06.517
permission to do to drill for oil and gas[br]in the heart of the new monument, okay?

0:05:06.517,0:05:11.092
That's what the permission was a[br]permission to do. The word to there is not

0:05:11.092,0:05:15.788
being used as an argument marker in this[br]case because you can't say they get

0:05:15.788,0:05:20.545
permission in order to, right? What they[br]gave them permission to do was to drill,

0:05:20.545,0:05:24.862
okay? What about drill? Well clearly[br]Robert Redford doesn't want them to drill.

0:05:24.862,0:05:28.915
So he thinks that's bad. But he doesn't[br]say it's bad. He just calls it drilling.

0:05:28.915,0:05:33.331
And they're drilling for oil and gas. Well[br]a lot of people think that oil and gas are

0:05:33.331,0:05:37.540
good things. But they don't say here that[br]they're good. They're simply saying that

0:05:37.540,0:05:42.369
they're oil and gas. The coolest part of[br]this cuz I think, is that metaphor at the

0:05:42.369,0:05:47.106
end. I mean you have this image that there[br]is this poor monument and somebody is

0:05:47.106,0:05:52.139
drilling right in its heart you know like,[br]what could be crueler than to drill in the

0:05:52.139,0:05:56.520
heart of a young monument the poor[br]innocent thing. So, this metaphor of the

0:05:56.520,0:06:01.316
heart is a nice rhetorical device that[br]fits with the drilling and is building up

0:06:01.316,0:06:05.816
people's opposition to what Redford wants[br]them to be opposed to. But it does

0:06:05.816,0:06:10.801
actually give an argument it's just[br]stating it in a flower or a metaphorical

0:06:10.801,0:06:17.240
way, it will get their feelings going,[br]okay? You may wonder. Notice he doesn't

0:06:17.240,0:06:23.984
say, you do wonder. He says you may[br]wonder. So this is, tell me, a guarding

0:06:23.984,0:06:29.516
term. So you should mark it with G. And[br]you may wonder, as I do, as is sometimes

0:06:29.516,0:06:35.120
used as an argument marker, but here[br]you're not saying that you wonder because

0:06:35.120,0:06:41.082
I do or I wonder because you do. The word[br]because can't be substituted for as, so to

0:06:41.082,0:06:46.901
say as I do is simply to conjoin the two[br]and say you wonder, and I also wonder or

0:06:46.901,0:06:52.361
you may wonder cuz I don't know whether[br]you are or not, and I do. And what we

0:06:52.361,0:06:58.137
wonder is how can this happen? Now we have[br]a rhetorical question. How can this

0:06:58.137,0:07:02.728
happen? Well that's obviously suggesting.[br]It shouldn't a happened, you know, how

0:07:02.728,0:07:07.483
could something have gone so wrong, as it[br]did in this case? But he didn't actually

0:07:07.483,0:07:12.179
say that. He simply asked the rhetorical[br]questions. An that's really the trick of

0:07:12.179,0:07:16.523
rhetorical questions. Notice there're a[br]bunch of them here. Wasn't the whole

0:07:16.523,0:07:21.395
purpose this? Didn't the President say he[br]was doing this? Then these three sentences

0:07:21.395,0:07:26.208
in a row are all rhetorical questions. So[br]what's the trick of rhetorical questions?

0:07:26.208,0:07:31.432
The point of a rhetorical question is to[br]get you to give the answer. If I say, how

0:07:31.432,0:07:36.751
can this happen and someone thinks to[br]themselves well the government messes up

0:07:36.751,0:07:41.336
all the time. Then you've got that[br]audience member who answered the question

0:07:41.336,0:07:46.223
to be saying it themselves and there's[br]nothing more forceful in an argument than

0:07:46.223,0:07:51.231
to get your audience to say it themselves[br]when you don't have to say it. And, that's

0:07:51.231,0:07:55.876
the trick of a rhetorical question and[br]what Redford is doing here is putting

0:07:55.876,0:08:00.474
three of them right in a row so that[br]you'll have to go along with him three

0:08:00.474,0:08:05.528
times in a row. And then that obviously[br]has an effect on your feeling like you're

0:08:05.528,0:08:10.582
with him. On you feeling like you agree[br]with him. That's the effect he's trying to

0:08:10.582,0:08:16.076
create by using these rhetorical[br]questions. Okay, what's the whole purpose

0:08:16.076,0:08:22.761
of creating? Notice the whole purpose is[br]to preserve. That phrase, the whole

0:08:22.761,0:08:29.460
purpose, goes with it. Cause we say the[br]purpose is, to preserve. And there. As

0:08:29.460,0:08:35.616
before, in the previous paragraph, we're[br]signaling an explanation cuz if you want

0:08:35.616,0:08:41.464
to explain why Clinton created the[br]monument, then the answer was, to preserve

0:08:41.464,0:08:47.081
the colorful cliffs and sweeping arches[br]and so on. So this is going to be an

0:08:47.081,0:08:53.544
explanation and to say that's the purpose[br]is to say that you created it because you

0:08:53.544,0:08:59.134
wanted to preserve or in order to[br]preserve. Then this whole purpose. Marks

0:08:59.134,0:09:04.486
the conclusion, and the, to preserve,[br]marks the premise. And we have a little

0:09:04.486,0:09:09.984
argument. He wanted to preserve his[br]colorful cliffs, therefore, he created the

0:09:09.984,0:09:15.337
monument. And we've got the conclusion[br]marked by the whole purpose, and the

0:09:15.337,0:09:21.250
premise or the reason, marked by the word[br]to. Okay. Preserve. We've already seen a

0:09:21.250,0:09:27.648
word a lot like that namely protect. And[br]we saw that when you protect something it

0:09:27.648,0:09:33.967
has to be good. Preserve also means to[br]preserve it against things that would harm

0:09:33.967,0:09:40.053
it. If harm is bad, then preserving and[br]protecting against harm must be good, so

0:09:40.053,0:09:45.310
we can make that as E plus. Its colorful[br]cliffs. Colorful sounds good, but of

0:09:45.310,0:09:50.561
course colorful just means it's colorful.[br]Sweeping arches, broad and sweeping and

0:09:50.561,0:09:55.615
curves, well that sounds good, that's[br]sounds beautiful the way he describes it.

0:09:55.615,0:10:02.393
And it surely is, as you can see in any[br]picture. But, sweeping doesn't itself say

0:10:02.393,0:10:07.511
it's good or beautiful or so on. Another[br]extraordinary we already saw

0:10:07.511,0:10:12.871
extraordinary. So colorful, sweeping, and[br]extraordinary. They're certainly being

0:10:12.871,0:10:18.389
used here by Redford to suggest that these[br]are good. But they're not openly saying

0:10:18.389,0:10:23.503
they're good. So we don't want to mark[br]those as evaluative words. But resources.

0:10:23.503,0:10:28.617
Now, resources are things that can give[br]you abilities. And when you have more

0:10:28.617,0:10:33.664
resources, you're able to do more. So,[br]abilities sounds like a good thing. And

0:10:33.664,0:10:39.047
resources are the things that make you[br]more able. That give you more freedom and

0:10:39.047,0:10:43.693
more power. So. At-least many people want[br]to mark that as a D+ work. Some of these

0:10:43.693,0:10:48.397
are going to be questionable. They are not[br]obvious as others, so I am suggesting one

0:10:48.397,0:10:53.159
way of interpreting this passage, and I[br]hope you are following the law. But if you

0:10:53.159,0:10:57.627
have some questions about the particular[br]cases, that's going to be natural. It's

0:10:57.627,0:11:02.185
partly coz our language is not totally[br]precised. Okay. Large scale mineral

0:11:02.185,0:11:07.878
development. Well, that's not bad if it's[br]done in the right places. So I don't think

0:11:07.878,0:11:13.085
that's evaluative either. Didn't the[br]President say that he was saving these

0:11:13.085,0:11:18.430
lands? Well didn't the President say that[br]he was saving these lands? Well that

0:11:18.430,0:11:23.999
suggests that he's assuring you that in[br]fact he was saving these lands. He should

0:11:23.999,0:11:28.983
know, whether that's what he was doing[br]since, after all, that's what he, you know

0:11:28.983,0:11:34.159
did himself. So he should be able to say,[br]what he did and why. Didn't the President

0:11:34.159,0:11:39.400
say he was saving? Saving could be marked[br]as E plus, just like protect and preserve?

0:11:40.700,0:11:46.716
Cuz it saves it from something bad[br]happening. These lands from mining

0:11:46.716,0:11:52.467
companies for our children and[br]grandchildren. Now, what about the word

0:11:52.467,0:11:58.100
for? This explains again why he is saving[br]these lands. He's saving them for

0:11:58.100,0:12:04.038
grandchildren and children. That means the[br]reason for saving these lands is to

0:12:04.038,0:12:09.976
benefit our grandchildren and children.[br]So, for is going to be a reason or premise

0:12:09.976,0:12:15.610
marker. It marks the reason or premise[br]that justifies saving the lands and

0:12:15.610,0:12:21.752
explains why in fact the president did[br]want to save the lands. Okay? So now we're

0:12:21.752,0:12:28.156
through with paragraph two. And I hope[br]you're kind of getting the feel for how to

0:12:28.156,0:12:34.480
do close analysis. And so, what I want to[br]do now is give you a chance to practice

0:12:34.480,0:12:41.026
the skill on your own. We'll put up[br]paragraph three, mark certain words. And

0:12:41.026,0:12:48.513
your task in the exercise, will be to put[br]the right letter next to, or to indicate

0:12:48.513,0:12:55.260
the function of that word in the[br]paragraph. And the letter you put should

0:12:55.260,0:13:01.337
be either R or P for premise marker, C for[br]conclusion marker, A for assuring, G for

0:13:01.337,0:13:07.600
guarding, D for discounting, E+, E- for[br]positive and negative evaluation. And you

0:13:07.600,0:13:11.920
can go through the third paragraph[br]yourself in the exercise.