A
In text 1, Will Hutton, who is a principal of Hertford College In Oxford, want to express how incredibly miserable the English people is when it comes to learn foreign languages. As described in the introducing part of the article it’s decisive for Britain’s future economy. Will thinks that the politic situation between Newt Gingrich’s and Mitt Romney has a lot to do with the prejudices that seems to be in the contemporary Britain. The Americans actually mean that it’s not possible to be an American if you’re not able to speak English, because they don’t want to be compared to Europeans, because they seems to have “lack of martial spirit and solidarity with US”. If a population in a country isn’t able to speak foreign languages then they’re forced to stay in the same culture and therefore are their employability chiefly limited. Will Hutton really want to tell the British inhabitants that it’s not just important to be able to handle another language, it’s also really nice to know it because there’s a lot of advantages an example is in text two, where pupils are on an excursion to try out their English on tourists, which makes them able to communicate with other cultures. Gradually has other countries begun to learn English, so whether if the English people needs foreign languages is a debate itself. Not only Europe sees English as a global language, now the Orient sees it as well and because of this view on the English language does the writer David Hughes sense “the rest of the world is coming to our rescue by learning ours”. Susan Purcell doesn’t really agree in that the English people are worse than others in learning foreign vernaculars, it’s just hard to choose which tongue each individual should learn at first.
Susan Purcell tries to convince the reader that the prejudgment, about the English people and learning foreign languages, is a fallacy. She argues that the reason why Europe has such decent results is substantiated with the easiness about choosing which language that should be enforced by the government. The case isn’t as easy for the Britain’s that’s one of Susan Purcell’s states; the claim for this state is that both the government and the students as well has no idea of which tongue is most important. The introduction of the school table in the English school system has made the British students even worse in choosing an unfamiliar language if you ask Susan Purcell. She’s using a lot of pathos an example P. 6 L 61-64. Which makes the reader to fell sorry for them, because they were so close in getting a reform that should insure them in learning at least one foreign language at school. One thing that might lack in her argumentation is an authority or anything else that can confirm her allegation. However she’s an authority herself because she’s been through a lot of languages and therefore seems to have a lot of knowledge, which has been told in the pre reading box. How far this is enough to call it an Ethos appeal can be discussed. After my opinion it is. A lot of statistic and other gathered information have been used as well. An example is the GCSE research that has been made on page 5 lines 40-42, where 44% of pupils learned a modern language. In the last section of the text Susan Purcell turns the problem once around. She expresses the following:” We may be at the bottom of the EU list … in our schools”. She uses this as a last chance in convincing the reader in her claim.

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. P. 2 L1-3
[ 2 ]. P. 2 L1-8
[ 3 ]. P. 3 L 63
[ 4 ]. P. 3 L 90-95
[ 5 ]. P. 4 L 33-35
[ 6 ]. P. 4 L 22-23 and 32
[ 7 ]. P.4 L 44-45
[ 8 ]. P. 5 L 29-30
[ 9 ]. P. 5 L 25-30
[ 10 ]. P5-6 L53 -60
[ 11 ]. Pink box P. 5 L1
[ 12 ]. P. 6 L 72-77