8.2.  A religious document would be a credible source to use as evidence for a speech on

the origin of family values, or for the types of things that are generally accepted as

family values.  As for whether or not it is a credible source for what is or is not moral

or ethical depends on ones own opinion.  The perceived credibility of such a source of

course depends on ones religious or philosophical views.  A christian, for example, may

not put much faith in the teachings of the Koran.



9.3.  If I were to use a narrative organisational pattern to present a speech on the

importance of prenatal health care, I would perhaps tell a story of a pregnant woman who

did not receive the proper health care, and how her baby suffered as a result.  The

'moral' of the story would then convey the message.  With the cause-and-effect pattern, I

would list the types of prenatal healthcare (screenings, checkups, medication, etc.) and

describe how each one is helpful or what might go wrong if they are neglected.  The cause

-and-effect pattern seems more intuitive, and would perhaps be better for conveying

specific information about prenatal healthcare, but the narrative pattern could be used to
 
give a strong emotional impact that would actually persuade people to seek prenatal

healthcare.



10.2.  When speaking to 18-23 year olds about retirement, I could mention welfare and the

taxes they (probably) are currently paying, and some of the details about population

ratios, specifically, that there probably won't be any welfare left for them by the time

they're retirement age.  I could mention interest, and how it's most profitable to start

investing earlier.  I could mention that it's also in their best interest to consider

issues related to retirement now because it will be too late when they themselves are

retiring.



11.3.  People who are shy or self conscious would probably be hesitant to respond to a

solicitation for audience response in a speech.  So would people who are not interested in

or don't understand what you have to say.  And vice versa.  An audience of reluctant

speakers would probably be a bad target for trying to get an audience response. 

 

12.1.  People do have a right to persuade others of their point of view, or to change

their attitudes and beliefs.  Ethically, persuasion is good when whoever is doing the

persuading is giving their audience sufficient information to make an informed decision,

i.e. they are receiving both sides of the argument.



13.3.  An audience might react negatively to someone who presents faulty reasoning or

inaccurate evidence for a variety of reasons.  They might think the speaker is insulting

their intellegence, and trying to 'get away with' an unsound argument.  They might think

the speaker has not bothered to do sufficient research or prepare for the speech that they

are patiently listening to.  Or they might simply think that the speaker is stupid.



14.1.  I think I'm inclined to react positively to any anyone with an accent that comes

from english as a second language.  This possibly springs, subconsciously, from my attempt

to learn a second language, at which I wasn't terribly successful, so I have respect for

anyone who has done it.  I think I am fairly neutral towards anyone with other accents

(Southern, New England, British, Australian, South African, etc.)



15.4.  A dramatic pause in a speech will emphasize what the speaker has just said.  A

pregnant pause before the punchline of a joke will increase the tension and, therefore,

increase the humor.  A pause could also indicate a shift in subject, like a new paragraph

in writing.  I think anyone who is impatient, anyone who either does not want to hear the

speech or has someplace better to be, would be less receptive to intentional pauses.  For

example, if someone in a boring meeting pauses too much, his audienc will loose interest.



16.1.  My own personal rhetorical style is masculine, although somewhat reserved.  I do

not tend to ask qualifying questions or to focus on connecting with whoever I'm speaking

to.  



17.2  Graphs or charts of statistics can be helpfull, and are usually well formatted on a

news show.  The little icon above the anchors head is not very helpful.  Nothing on the

news that I saw really detracted from the clarity of the message.



18.4.  Speakers who are not well prepared or well versed in the subject about which they

are speaking may not be able to handle questions spontaneously.  Even speakers who are

well prepared may not be able to easily synthesize their knowledge into a good answer.

Questions may be interpreted as challenges or attacks if they are unexpected, or imply in

their phrasing that the speaker cannot answer them.  Some questions are challenges or

attacks.  As a speaker it helps to be as knowledgeable as possible on a subject before

attempting to field questions about it.