You are here

FAU Collections » FAU Research Repository » FAU Theses and Dissertations

Grading the scholars: Measuring the impact of field dependence on rhetorical analyses of abortion arguments

Download pdf | Full Screen View

Date Issued:
1999
Summary:
This thesis describes the pitfalls of writing rhetorical analyses of abortion arguments that are not sensitive to field dependence as described by Toulmin (1958). It examines Lake's (1984), Tonn's (1996), and Railsback's (1984) rhetorical analyses in order to test whether the lack of attention these scholars display toward field dependence detracts from the reliability of their analyses. To accomplish this task, this thesis will compare the scholars' analyses against my analysis of amicus curiae briefs filed with the Supreme Court in the Roe v. Wade (1973) and Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1988) cases. The results show that the Lake's, Tonn's, and Railsback's analyses are problematic when compared to the arguments in these amicus curiae briefs. Thus this thesis concludes that scholars need to pay close attention to field dependence when writing rhetorical analyses not only of abortion arguments but also field specific arguments in general.
Title: Grading the scholars: Measuring the impact of field dependence on rhetorical analyses of abortion arguments.
73 views
17 downloads
Name(s): Gavino, Michael Anthony.
Florida Atlantic University, Degree grantor
Mulvaney, Becky, Thesis advisor
Type of Resource: text
Genre: Electronic Thesis Or Dissertation
Issuance: monographic
Date Issued: 1999
Publisher: Florida Atlantic University
Place of Publication: Boca Raton, Fla.
Physical Form: application/pdf
Extent: 101 p.
Language(s): English
Summary: This thesis describes the pitfalls of writing rhetorical analyses of abortion arguments that are not sensitive to field dependence as described by Toulmin (1958). It examines Lake's (1984), Tonn's (1996), and Railsback's (1984) rhetorical analyses in order to test whether the lack of attention these scholars display toward field dependence detracts from the reliability of their analyses. To accomplish this task, this thesis will compare the scholars' analyses against my analysis of amicus curiae briefs filed with the Supreme Court in the Roe v. Wade (1973) and Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1988) cases. The results show that the Lake's, Tonn's, and Railsback's analyses are problematic when compared to the arguments in these amicus curiae briefs. Thus this thesis concludes that scholars need to pay close attention to field dependence when writing rhetorical analyses not only of abortion arguments but also field specific arguments in general.
Identifier: 9780599540569 (isbn), 15727 (digitool), FADT15727 (IID), fau:12483 (fedora)
Collection: FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection
Note(s): Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters
Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 1999.
Subject(s): Rhetorical criticism.
Briefs--United States.
Trials (Abortion)--United States.
Held by: Florida Atlantic University Libraries
Persistent Link to This Record: http://purl.flvc.org/fcla/dt/15727
Sublocation: Digital Library
Use and Reproduction: Copyright © is held by the author, with permission granted to Florida Atlantic University to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Use and Reproduction: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
Host Institution: FAU
Is Part of Series: Florida Atlantic University Digital Library Collections.