“Seeing through the haze of alcohol” – Language analysis Essay. In the article “seeing through the haze of alcohol’ taken from the opinion page of the September 29th, 2011 Courier Mail, Jane Fynes-Clinton refutes the view of alcohol abuse amongst young people, and how the government isn’t doing enough to prevent the alcohol abuse. She presents her point of view in an agitated and frustrated tone. The writer uses rhetorical questions, negative connotations, inclusive language, statistical evidence and expert opinions to appeal to the readers’ logic, reason and justice.

The writer uses a wide variety of persuasive techniques throughout the article, the first couple being a negative connotation, inclusive language and a rhetorical question. She states “Boozy, messy, bloody nights …” “… They are accepted as standard. ” She follows this statement with a rhetorical question. She asks “But is this what we really want? Is it the best we can do and be? ” This question includes the reader, making them feel guilty, and leaves the reader with a sense of shame.

It makes the reader agree that people are crossing the limits and it’s just getting worse and worse over time. Also, this rhetorical question poses the idea that the government is to blame, for not establishing adequate measures to prevent alcohol fueled violence and injuries thus manipulating the reader to agree with this point of view. Furthermore, the author then continues to use expert opinions from the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, the Queensland Police Union and other law-enforcement agencies.

She states that all 3 of these organizations blame the government for rejecting the idea of putting a curfew of 2am in bars and “wanting to wait for a trial of other measures to finish before considering changes. ” The author uses these expert opinions to backup her argument, so that she’s not the only one who thinks this. This also diverts the blame of the impact of alcohol abuse towards the government, more specifically Premier Anna Bligh for rejecting the idea, and more or less allowing this to occur. The third persuasive technique the author uses in the article is statistical vidence. In the last paragraph of the article she states how other cities around the world have enforcements to prevent alcohol abuse. She then goes on to use statistical evidence from “the report ‘Range and Magnitude of Alcohol’s Harm to Others’. ” She says that according to that report, that alcohol misuse impacts the economy by $36 billion a year. This ultimately demonstrates the reader how “unimaginably big” this issue in Australia has become, and encourages the public to demand a change in law to stop the alcohol abuse.

I believe, that through the use of various persuasive techniques, such as rhetorical questions, negative connotations, inclusive language, statistical evidence and others, the author has without a doubt, effectively persuade the reader to consider her contentions. I don’t see how someone could argue against this point of view because she used very valid points and to argue against it would not be logical. No one can say that “$36 billion a year” is good or “Boozy, messy, bloody nights” are acceptable. Nevertheless, it arouses deep concern for the reader, and leaves the blame on the government for the impacts alcohol abuse has made.