Sheikh 1 Rozina Sheikh Dr.

Steffen Guenzel ENC 1101-0011 14 October 2013 Paper 2 Final - Revised Analysis of Article on New Immigration Laws in Arizona In the state of Arizona, immigration issues are severe and have created quite a disturbance amongst many citizens of the state. Arizonas entire southern edge borders the country of Mexico, where a vast amount of illegal immigrants cross the border in order to seek refuge in states all across the country. This has become a problem and Arizona, as with many other states that border Mexico, have been alternating between various laws in order to protect the state and also to protect the people. In the article, Arizona Governor Sings Changes into Immigration Law, author Alan Silverleib discusses a new law that has recently passed in Arizona, claiming to reduce the amount of racial profiling in the search for illegal immigrants. Police officers are instructed to lay emphasis on arresting illegal immigrants; however, after this new law they are not allowed to ask for proof of citizenship unless the individual has committed another unlawful act. This means an officer cannot pull over a person simply because he suspects that the person is illegally in the country, which is where racial profiling has become a problem. Citizens claim that officers have been targeting folks that appear to be Hispanic in their search for unauthorized aliens, making it unfair for everyone, especially those who are Hispanic, legal citizens, and have done nothing wrong.

Sheikh 2 In order to rhetorically analyze this text, the aspects of a rhetorical situation will be used. Firstly, discourse is the written or spoken debate regarding text (Grant-Davie 106). In the article, Arizona Governor Signs Changes into Immigration Law, the debate was over whether the new immigration law was appropriate for the constituents of the state of Arizona. The rhetor is the one who is responsible for presenting the discourse in the text (Grant-Davie 108). In this article, rhetor would be the author Alan Silverleib because he is the one who is accountable for portraying the debate in his article. Audience is the people to whom the text is written to (Grant-Davie 109). Silverleibs article is directed to the general public of the United States; especially to young adults and anyone older. Another set of audiences this article is geared towards is the residents of Arizona because they are the ones who are being directly affected by this new law. In order to satisfy the needs of audience, Silverleib had to write in a fashion that is understandable to average citizens; most folks would not be able to comprehend difficult political terms that would be associated in this text. The author would also need to provide some background information on the issue, as well explain the different effects that would arise in changes within the law. Exigence is motivation of the communication and also the problem that can be solved through discourse (Grant- Davie 106). Silverleibs motivation in this article is to inform the general public about current controversial issues that are occurring in the state of Arizona, and may perhaps affect the rest of the country very soon. The problem is whether these immigration laws will be beneficial and whether they will satisfy the needs of the citizens or not. Constraints, another rhetorical aspect, are the factors that limit the author and will affect the achievement of the rhetorical objectives (Grant-Davie 111). Constraints that would limit Silverleib would be the need to create a neutral stance because it is a controversial issue. This requires the author to state

Sheikh 3 both sides of the argument in an unbiased tone by simply presenting the facts and how each side would have an effect on society as a whole. This may be difficult to the writer, but it would be effective in appealing to every type of audience. These aspects of rhetorical situations significantly shape how Silverleib shaped his article into a successful argument. The main argument in Silverleibs article is whether or not the new immigration laws will prove beneficial for the citizens of Arizona. Many people have different views on how it will affect the community. Some feel as if it will not make a difference; officers will find some sort of so-called violation to stop an individual and because most people are unaware of their basic rights when it comes to police officers, therefore the victims have no way of defending themselves if they have done nothing wrong. As a member of a major Latino civil rights organization, Clarissa Martinez De Castro believes that the changes to the law are not sufficient and will do little to positively affect daily law enforcement in Arizona (Silverleib). Others feel that this new law is needed because the federal government has failed to secure the states borders, so every step, no matter how small, counts in the effort to protect the peoples rights. This could be an underlying argument, that the federal government is not doing their job to protect and defend their country. Martinez argues, If they [federal government] abdicate their responsibility, they leave state and local governments to grapple with this issue, and the only thing that happens is that we create greater chaosthis is just not the way forward. Silverleib composes this argument in a very neutral way, allowing both supporting and opposing sides of the discussed law to have a say in the article. This goes back with GrantDavies rhetorical situations about how the audience and constraints take part in constructing a text. His purpose was to appeal to everyone, not just one group of people, therefore the use of an unbiased tone is necessary if he wants to successfully capture the interest of the general public.

Sheikh 4 Silverleib gives facts of the law, stating what it will affect and how it will affect it, as well as gives numerical feedback such as polling results: An April 27-28 nationwide Gallup poll, however, found that 51 percent of Americans favor the Arizona law, while only 39 percent oppose it. He then begins to present testimonies and claims from both opposing and supporting sides. Reading text can be just as difficult as creating your own text when writing. With reading, readers must alter their thinking with every text in order to efficiently understand what is being read. The use of rhetorical strategies and techniques while reading has proven very effective in the comprehension of nearly every style of text. To properly interpret the text, readers must use a process that involves constructive thinking and rhetorical analysis. According to a study done by Christina Haas and Linda Flowers, experts normally use rhetorical strategies to fully comprehend the reading, whereas younger adults and students do not use the full capacity of their knowledge to truly decipher the text (Haas and Flowers 123). In the passage, Rhetorical Reading Strategies and the Construction of Meaning, Haas and Flowers stress the importance of analytical, critical, or constructive thinking. It is claimed that many students who are considered good readers lack these characteristics, thus hindering the students from reaching a full understanding of the text. Haas and Flowers ran a series of experiments which led them to say students use rhetorical reading as a separate strategy (Haas and Flowers 132) and consider it as an extra step that is not required, whereas experts directly incorporate these tactics every time they analyze a text. There are various factors that can influence how we interpret a text, as Haas and Flowers state, In short, readers construct meaning by building multifaceted, interwoven representations of knowledge. The current text,

Sheikh 5 prior texts, and the reading context can exert varying degrees of influence on this process, but it is the reader who must integrate information into meaning (Haas and Flowers 123). Writers have various methods of writing in order to create a diverse assortment of texts. Silverleib had altered his writing style in order to achieve certain goals and objectives. The method of writing a fictional novel is much different that writing thirty page research paper. In order to achieve this range of writing, writers must follow the writing process in very different ways. As seen in this analysis, Silverleib did not just take pieces of information and throw them together; he carefully organized and coordinated his words as well as his content in a way that satisfied his needs as an author, and the needs of the reader. (Word Count: 1, 380)

Sheikh 6

Works Cited Grant-Davie, Keith. Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents. Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 101-118. Print. Haas, Christina, and Linda Flower. Rhetorical Reading Strategies and the Construction of Meaning. Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 120-137. Print. Silverleib, Alan. Arizona Governor Signs Changes into Immigration Law. CNN. Cable News Network, 30 Apr. 2010. Web. 9 Oct. 2013.

Sheikh 7