1 00:00:02,620 --> 00:00:09,399 On to the second paragraph. The first sentence is really simple, not so. Of 2 00:00:08,783 --> 00:00:15,738 course. it's referring back to the last sentence of the first paragraph. We said, 3 00:00:15,738 --> 00:00:22,430 now we thought at least some of it was safe. And saying, no, it wasn't safe. So, 4 00:00:22,430 --> 00:00:28,505 what are we going to say about this sentence? Well, what about the little 5 00:00:28,505 --> 00:00:33,901 word, so? So, can be an argument marker. It can indicate that what follows it, is a 6 00:00:33,901 --> 00:00:38,923 conclusion. But, is that what it's doing here? I don't think so. As we just saw 7 00:00:38,923 --> 00:00:44,012 like in, I don't think so, the word, so, can be used in many ways, where it's not 8 00:00:44,012 --> 00:00:49,232 an argument marker. And this is saying, it's not so. It's not that way. So there's 9 00:00:49,232 --> 00:00:56,084 no argument here. So that would get marked with a big N for nothing. Now, what about 10 00:00:56,084 --> 00:01:05,746 shocking, as it sounds, shocking? Well, is shocking always bad? Remember we saw in 11 00:01:05,746 --> 00:01:10,535 the first paragraph the word stunning. Well, stunning stuns you, and shocking 12 00:01:10,535 --> 00:01:15,296 shocks you. And it's telling you that you have some kind of reaction. But it's not 13 00:01:15,296 --> 00:01:19,882 telling you whether that reaction is due to the thing being good, or the thing 14 00:01:19,882 --> 00:01:23,703 being bad. You can get shocked by something good or bad. It can be 15 00:01:23,703 --> 00:01:28,367 shockingly good, or shockingly bad. And so the word shocking by itself. Doesn't 16 00:01:28,367 --> 00:01:34,213 indicate that it's e plus or e minus, so again, you get a nothing. I mention it 17 00:01:34,213 --> 00:01:40,059 only because it's clear that Robert Redford thinks that shocking is bad, that 18 00:01:40,059 --> 00:01:45,601 this should not have happened. He's suggesting that it's bad. But the word 19 00:01:45,601 --> 00:01:55,689 shocking, itself, is not an evaluative word. What about, as it sounds? Well, he's 20 00:01:55,689 --> 00:02:00,541 saying that it sounds that way. He's not saying that it is that way. He's not 21 00:02:00,541 --> 00:02:05,798 saying that it may sound that way. He's saying it does sound that way, which is to 22 00:02:05,798 --> 00:02:10,787 say, it seems that way to him. Which is not to say it really is true, so he's 23 00:02:10,787 --> 00:02:16,309 guarding the client. He's not saying that it really is shocking. He's saying that it 24 00:02:16,309 --> 00:02:20,899 seems shocking. So he's guarding the client, in order to avoid someone 25 00:02:20,899 --> 00:02:26,087 objecting that it's not really all that shocking, after all. Say, well it sounds 26 00:02:26,087 --> 00:02:31,276 shocking, and in order to make that part of his argument mo re defensible. Because 27 00:02:31,276 --> 00:02:36,554 it's not really essential to his argument, that it's shocking or not. So what's 28 00:02:36,554 --> 00:02:42,590 supposed to be shocking? Clinton's Bureau of Land Management, or BLM, has approved 29 00:02:42,590 --> 00:02:48,543 oil drilling within the monument. Notice that there is no guarding at all here he 30 00:02:48,543 --> 00:02:53,748 just states it. They did it they approved oil drilling within the monument. And, 31 00:02:53,748 --> 00:02:59,154 that's because it's not really something he is arguing for. He's actually opposed 32 00:02:59,154 --> 00:03:04,159 to it. It's something that his opponents might support but he doesn't so, he 33 00:03:04,159 --> 00:03:09,765 doesn't want to guard it since he wants to say it just happened as a matter of fact 34 00:03:09,765 --> 00:03:14,570 that they approved it so, there's I nothing that we need to mark in that 35 00:03:14,570 --> 00:03:20,201 particular sentence. Next sentence. BLM or the Bureau of Land Management has given 36 00:03:20,201 --> 00:03:25,218 Conoco Incorporated, a subsidiary of the corporate giant DuPont permission to drill 37 00:03:25,218 --> 00:03:30,985 for oil and gas in the heart of the new monument. Well, there's a lot going on 38 00:03:30,985 --> 00:03:37,296 here that we could mention, no, BLM has given Conoco a subsidiary that explains 39 00:03:37,296 --> 00:03:44,012 how they got permission by siding the BLM. It's a subsidiary of the corporate giant 40 00:03:44,012 --> 00:03:50,323 DuPont. He's certainly suggesting that giant suggested that he's the small guy, 41 00:03:50,323 --> 00:03:56,716 you know, up against the big corporate giant. It might even has some connotation 42 00:03:56,716 --> 00:04:03,100 of corporate giants being bad, but it doesn't actually say that. And so, again 43 00:04:03,100 --> 00:04:11,551 giant should be marked as nothing. What about permission? To say that someone's 44 00:04:11,551 --> 00:04:16,415 permitted to do something, is to say that it's not wrong. That's what permitted 45 00:04:16,415 --> 00:04:21,403 means. Now of course, if you're talking about a legal permission, then to say that 46 00:04:21,403 --> 00:04:26,330 it's permitted is to say that it's not legally wrong. It's not forbidden by law. 47 00:04:26,330 --> 00:04:30,895 It still might be morally wrong but at least it's legally permitted means it's 48 00:04:30,895 --> 00:04:35,576 not legally forbidden. And so if forbidden and wrong are evaluative words, to deny 49 00:04:35,576 --> 00:04:39,967 them and say it's not wrong looks like an evaluative as well. But one of the 50 00:04:39,967 --> 00:04:44,706 interesting things about this evaluative word is it's clear whether it's positive 51 00:04:44,706 --> 00:04:49,853 or negative. It means it's not wrong, but that doesn't mean it is good or is right. 52 00:04:49,853 --> 00:04:54,758 It simply means it's not forbidden. So, it's not clear whether to put plus or 53 00:04:54,758 --> 00:05:01,638 minus. I'll just leave it as a plain E in that case, okay? Now, what did they have 54 00:05:01,638 --> 00:05:06,517 permission to do to drill for oil and gas in the heart of the new monument, okay? 55 00:05:06,517 --> 00:05:11,092 That's what the permission was a permission to do. The word to there is not 56 00:05:11,092 --> 00:05:15,788 being used as an argument marker in this case because you can't say they get 57 00:05:15,788 --> 00:05:20,545 permission in order to, right? What they gave them permission to do was to drill, 58 00:05:20,545 --> 00:05:24,862 okay? What about drill? Well clearly Robert Redford doesn't want them to drill. 59 00:05:24,862 --> 00:05:28,915 So he thinks that's bad. But he doesn't say it's bad. He just calls it drilling. 60 00:05:28,915 --> 00:05:33,331 And they're drilling for oil and gas. Well a lot of people think that oil and gas are 61 00:05:33,331 --> 00:05:37,540 good things. But they don't say here that they're good. They're simply saying that 62 00:05:37,540 --> 00:05:42,369 they're oil and gas. The coolest part of this cuz I think, is that metaphor at the 63 00:05:42,369 --> 00:05:47,106 end. I mean you have this image that there is this poor monument and somebody is 64 00:05:47,106 --> 00:05:52,139 drilling right in its heart you know like, what could be crueler than to drill in the 65 00:05:52,139 --> 00:05:56,520 heart of a young monument the poor innocent thing. So, this metaphor of the 66 00:05:56,520 --> 00:06:01,316 heart is a nice rhetorical device that fits with the drilling and is building up 67 00:06:01,316 --> 00:06:05,816 people's opposition to what Redford wants them to be opposed to. But it does 68 00:06:05,816 --> 00:06:10,801 actually give an argument it's just stating it in a flower or a metaphorical 69 00:06:10,801 --> 00:06:17,240 way, it will get their feelings going, okay? You may wonder. Notice he doesn't 70 00:06:17,240 --> 00:06:23,984 say, you do wonder. He says you may wonder. So this is, tell me, a guarding 71 00:06:23,984 --> 00:06:29,516 term. So you should mark it with G. And you may wonder, as I do, as is sometimes 72 00:06:29,516 --> 00:06:35,120 used as an argument marker, but here you're not saying that you wonder because 73 00:06:35,120 --> 00:06:41,082 I do or I wonder because you do. The word because can't be substituted for as, so to 74 00:06:41,082 --> 00:06:46,901 say as I do is simply to conjoin the two and say you wonder, and I also wonder or 75 00:06:46,901 --> 00:06:52,361 you may wonder cuz I don't know whether you are or not, and I do. And what we 76 00:06:52,361 --> 00:06:58,137 wonder is how can this happen? Now we have a rhetorical question. How can this 77 00:06:58,137 --> 00:07:02,728 happen? Well that's obviously suggesting. It shouldn't a happened, you know, how 78 00:07:02,728 --> 00:07:07,483 could something have gone so wrong, as it did in this case? But he didn't actually 79 00:07:07,483 --> 00:07:12,179 say that. He simply asked the rhetorical questions. An that's really the trick of 80 00:07:12,179 --> 00:07:16,523 rhetorical questions. Notice there're a bunch of them here. Wasn't the whole 81 00:07:16,523 --> 00:07:21,395 purpose this? Didn't the President say he was doing this? Then these three sentences 82 00:07:21,395 --> 00:07:26,208 in a row are all rhetorical questions. So what's the trick of rhetorical questions? 83 00:07:26,208 --> 00:07:31,432 The point of a rhetorical question is to get you to give the answer. If I say, how 84 00:07:31,432 --> 00:07:36,751 can this happen and someone thinks to themselves well the government messes up 85 00:07:36,751 --> 00:07:41,336 all the time. Then you've got that audience member who answered the question 86 00:07:41,336 --> 00:07:46,223 to be saying it themselves and there's nothing more forceful in an argument than 87 00:07:46,223 --> 00:07:51,231 to get your audience to say it themselves when you don't have to say it. And, that's 88 00:07:51,231 --> 00:07:55,876 the trick of a rhetorical question and what Redford is doing here is putting 89 00:07:55,876 --> 00:08:00,474 three of them right in a row so that you'll have to go along with him three 90 00:08:00,474 --> 00:08:05,528 times in a row. And then that obviously has an effect on your feeling like you're 91 00:08:05,528 --> 00:08:10,582 with him. On you feeling like you agree with him. That's the effect he's trying to 92 00:08:10,582 --> 00:08:16,076 create by using these rhetorical questions. Okay, what's the whole purpose 93 00:08:16,076 --> 00:08:22,761 of creating? Notice the whole purpose is to preserve. That phrase, the whole 94 00:08:22,761 --> 00:08:29,460 purpose, goes with it. Cause we say the purpose is, to preserve. And there. As 95 00:08:29,460 --> 00:08:35,616 before, in the previous paragraph, we're signaling an explanation cuz if you want 96 00:08:35,616 --> 00:08:41,464 to explain why Clinton created the monument, then the answer was, to preserve 97 00:08:41,464 --> 00:08:47,081 the colorful cliffs and sweeping arches and so on. So this is going to be an 98 00:08:47,081 --> 00:08:53,544 explanation and to say that's the purpose is to say that you created it because you 99 00:08:53,544 --> 00:08:59,134 wanted to preserve or in order to preserve. Then this whole purpose. Marks 100 00:08:59,134 --> 00:09:04,486 the conclusion, and the, to preserve, marks the premise. And we have a little 101 00:09:04,486 --> 00:09:09,984 argument. He wanted to preserve his colorful cliffs, therefore, he created the 102 00:09:09,984 --> 00:09:15,337 monument. And we've got the conclusion marked by the whole purpose, and the 103 00:09:15,337 --> 00:09:21,250 premise or the reason, marked by the word to. Okay. Preserve. We've already seen a 104 00:09:21,250 --> 00:09:27,648 word a lot like that namely protect. And we saw that when you protect something it 105 00:09:27,648 --> 00:09:33,967 has to be good. Preserve also means to preserve it against things that would harm 106 00:09:33,967 --> 00:09:40,053 it. If harm is bad, then preserving and protecting against harm must be good, so 107 00:09:40,053 --> 00:09:45,310 we can make that as E plus. Its colorful cliffs. Colorful sounds good, but of 108 00:09:45,310 --> 00:09:50,561 course colorful just means it's colorful. Sweeping arches, broad and sweeping and 109 00:09:50,561 --> 00:09:55,615 curves, well that sounds good, that's sounds beautiful the way he describes it. 110 00:09:55,615 --> 00:10:02,393 And it surely is, as you can see in any picture. But, sweeping doesn't itself say 111 00:10:02,393 --> 00:10:07,511 it's good or beautiful or so on. Another extraordinary we already saw 112 00:10:07,511 --> 00:10:12,871 extraordinary. So colorful, sweeping, and extraordinary. They're certainly being 113 00:10:12,871 --> 00:10:18,389 used here by Redford to suggest that these are good. But they're not openly saying 114 00:10:18,389 --> 00:10:23,503 they're good. So we don't want to mark those as evaluative words. But resources. 115 00:10:23,503 --> 00:10:28,617 Now, resources are things that can give you abilities. And when you have more 116 00:10:28,617 --> 00:10:33,664 resources, you're able to do more. So, abilities sounds like a good thing. And 117 00:10:33,664 --> 00:10:39,047 resources are the things that make you more able. That give you more freedom and 118 00:10:39,047 --> 00:10:43,693 more power. So. At-least many people want to mark that as a D+ work. Some of these 119 00:10:43,693 --> 00:10:48,397 are going to be questionable. They are not obvious as others, so I am suggesting one 120 00:10:48,397 --> 00:10:53,159 way of interpreting this passage, and I hope you are following the law. But if you 121 00:10:53,159 --> 00:10:57,627 have some questions about the particular cases, that's going to be natural. It's 122 00:10:57,627 --> 00:11:02,185 partly coz our language is not totally precised. Okay. Large scale mineral 123 00:11:02,185 --> 00:11:07,878 development. Well, that's not bad if it's done in the right places. So I don't think 124 00:11:07,878 --> 00:11:13,085 that's evaluative either. Didn't the President say that he was saving these 125 00:11:13,085 --> 00:11:18,430 lands? Well didn't the President say that he was saving these lands? Well that 126 00:11:18,430 --> 00:11:23,999 suggests that he's assuring you that in fact he was saving these lands. He should 127 00:11:23,999 --> 00:11:28,983 know, whether that's what he was doing since, after all, that's what he, you know 128 00:11:28,983 --> 00:11:34,159 did himself. So he should be able to say, what he did and why. Didn't the President 129 00:11:34,159 --> 00:11:39,400 say he was saving? Saving could be marked as E plus, just like protect and preserve? 130 00:11:40,700 --> 00:11:46,716 Cuz it saves it from something bad happening. These lands from mining 131 00:11:46,716 --> 00:11:52,467 companies for our children and grandchildren. Now, what about the word 132 00:11:52,467 --> 00:11:58,100 for? This explains again why he is saving these lands. He's saving them for 133 00:11:58,100 --> 00:12:04,038 grandchildren and children. That means the reason for saving these lands is to 134 00:12:04,038 --> 00:12:09,976 benefit our grandchildren and children. So, for is going to be a reason or premise 135 00:12:09,976 --> 00:12:15,610 marker. It marks the reason or premise that justifies saving the lands and 136 00:12:15,610 --> 00:12:21,752 explains why in fact the president did want to save the lands. Okay? So now we're 137 00:12:21,752 --> 00:12:28,156 through with paragraph two. And I hope you're kind of getting the feel for how to 138 00:12:28,156 --> 00:12:34,480 do close analysis. And so, what I want to do now is give you a chance to practice 139 00:12:34,480 --> 00:12:41,026 the skill on your own. We'll put up paragraph three, mark certain words. And 140 00:12:41,026 --> 00:12:48,513 your task in the exercise, will be to put the right letter next to, or to indicate 141 00:12:48,513 --> 00:12:55,260 the function of that word in the paragraph. And the letter you put should 142 00:12:55,260 --> 00:13:01,337 be either R or P for premise marker, C for conclusion marker, A for assuring, G for 143 00:13:01,337 --> 00:13:07,600 guarding, D for discounting, E+, E- for positive and negative evaluation. And you 144 00:13:07,600 --> 00:13:11,920 can go through the third paragraph yourself in the exercise.