When establishing ethos, the brief discussion on the use of colloquialisms creates interesting points. Colloquialisms can make a positive or negative impact depending on the particular audience. My group of friends from high school are notorious for discussing inside information that makes outsiders to the group feel uncomfortable because they do not “get” the conversation. I also feel this way when my husband comes to our “teacher gatherings.” When people get together with colleagues, you can’t help but discuss work. This is often boring to those who do not work in the school setting because they cannot relate to the conversation. On a different note, I watched a competition unfold among two groups trying to appeal to a group of young Harry Potter enthusiasts at a sneak peek of a newly opened Harry Potter ride at Universal Studios. Neither group of presenters were avid followers of the Harry Potter mania, establishing a definite disconnect when attempting to persuade the children into choosing their display. However, one of the groups did their research and used colloquialisms associated with Harry Potter that were quite familiar, amusing, and appealing to the enthusiasts. This set them apart from the other group, ensuring a victory.
As a teacher who stresses not to use I or you in formal writing situation, I do not necessarily agree 100 percent with the authors in the Grammatical Person section of the reading. I do agree that the “I-you” relation indicates to the audience that the rhetor is including them in the conversation. I also agree that the “we-thy” relationship can establish an ally between the audience and rhetor. However, I feel that sometimes when these distinct pronouns are used, it can create a distance between the audience and rhetor. For example, if the audience does not agree or see eye to eye with the rhetor’s comments or with that particular rhetor, this may cause even more distance than if the first and second person pronouns were not used. At times, l believe that authors write somewhat vague in order to allow the audience to relate to different aspects of the writing. However, the authors do somewhat address this on page 220 by stating that sometimes first person can create an “ego centered voice that excludes the audience.”
Overall, this chapter creates awareness on how I handle communication is different situations. The way that I speak and write alters depending on the situation, audience, and message. Unfortunately at times, many of the inventions created to improve technology (telephone, email) can hinder the message that I am trying to convey.