The excerpt from “Mother Tongue” is my argument. It argues that perfect English (Tan 22), is not required to show intelligence or credibility. This type of thinking must be acknowledged as cultural prejudice. Tan engages her audience by appealing to their emotions. Her audience is first engaged by her. She says, “I’m not a scholar of English literature.” Tan 1 says that I can only give my opinions on the English Language, and how it is different in this country and other countries. She did not boast that she had a master’s of linguistics. This would have scared her audience. Instead she stated that she was simply trying to express her views on language. This excerpt will interest readers who would like to hear her thoughts on language. This is how she successfully lures her audience to her excerpt. To appeal to her emotions, she uses Tan 8, the “broken english” or fractured mother of her mother (Tan 8) in order to demonstrate how people judge each other’s credibility. She describes how her mother was treated by people because she spoke a different language. She also states that her mother’s English was one of the reasons she had a negative perception of her. She also says that her mother’s english was a factor in her perception of her. The speech community considers imperfect english “broken or broken” (Tan 8). Anybody who reads this passage will be her secondary audience. Tan is talking about an ethical problem. People judge the credibility of others based on their use of english. We think that people who have poor English skills are ignorant and lack intellectual ability. We believe the quality of an individual’s English reflects their intelligence. However, this is false as a lack of English does not necessarily mean that you are lacking intelligence. Tan 22 states that speakers who speak “perfect English” are not necessarily more intelligent and better than those who speak broken English. A perfect english speaker can speak broken english, even though they might not understand as much. Tan demonstrates this by telling a story about her mother. She explained that although her mother’s English may be considered poor by some, it doesn’t affect her credibility. How we treat someone can be affected by their english language. Tan mentions her mother’s limited spanish and how people in stores, banks and restaurants didn’t treat her well. Tan uses a story from her mother to bring her audience into her world. Tan’s mother is acutely aware of her limited English and makes business calls to her to request information or to yell at business partners. She knows that her business partner may not take her seriously, or not understand her words. Tan’s mother’s experience helps her to present her arguments more effectively to her audience. Tan is also able to relate to some minorities in China, which might make it easier for her to reach her secondary audience. Tan uses her mother’s hospital encounter to illustrate the struggles broken english speakers may have. Tan’s mother spoke her best English to the doctor but the doctor was still unable to understand her. She refused to give her any information and made her wait for an inordinate length of time. This appeals to her audience’s emotions. She makes her audience sympathize and can relate to her mother. Tan also adds extrinsic evidence to support her argument. She cites a conversation she had during which her mother was interviewed and recorded. Her mother tells her about a political Gangster with the same name as her family. Because it conveys her mother’s english to her audience, this conversation is pertinent. She reiterates the mother’s credibility, as well her proficiency in the english language. She mentioned her mother reading Forbes reports, listening to Wall Street Week reads Shirley MacLaine’s books easily” (Tan 7). And she has daily conversations and exchanges with her stockbroker. This is to prove her mother’s proficiency in the english language. Tan uses extrinsic support to strengthen her pathos. This makes Tan’s argument more persuasive and serves as a transition to her pathos. This allows her audience access to her mother’s English grammar and credibility. Tan is also well-versed in the ethical issues she’s writing about. Her mother’s experiences have given her a great understanding of broken english. Tan’s argument is full of humorous comments. She describes her mother’s actions in paragraph 11. From telling her stockbroker loudly, to them actually travelling from California to New York to confront their boss. Tan does an excellent job of using pathos in order to strengthen her arguments. She also manages to get her audience to sympathize and understand her mother. Her repetitive use pathos reduces the argument’s weight. Logos were rarely used by her. Tan’s argument focuses on “perfect English” and people being judged for not speaking perfect english. However, Tan doesn’t really convey what “perfect” is. This leaves her audience with many unanswered questions, such as where did perfect english come from? or who spoke it? She explained to her audience what perfect English might look like, and how she speaks it when talking to people about writing. Instead of leaving her audience in confusion and asking what perfect english is, she explained it to them just as she did with Tan 8. Tan convincingly convinces her audience of the importance of this ethical issue by convincing them that lack English is not synonymous with lack knowledge. One argument against her argument is that most english speakers are not fluent in multiple languages. This can make english less accessible to them and limit their ability to communicate with the English community. “I feel that my mother’s accent almost limited my options …. However, I believe that the language spoken by the family, particularly immigrant families, can play a significant role in shaping a child’s future. Tan 15. Her mother spoke the type of english she learned growing up. However, her mother has limited English knowledge and it almost affects her. Tan mentions in her last two paragraphs that Tan is better at describing her mother’s understanding of English than Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 23. Tan 24. Tan 25. Tan 26. Tan 27. Tan 28. Tan 29. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 22. Tan 21 The last paragraph summarizes her entire excerpt. She explains that broken english is not what she means, but that it is simply a simplified version of English (Tan 22). Because it demonstrated that her mother’s understanding of English was not limited, or that she can write simple english, then her argument is strong. Tan is unable to provide an answer to the ethical dilemma she presented. She informed her audience about the ethical issues she was discussing, but did not tell them what to do next. She could have made her argument more persuasive if she had written less about her grade school experiences and provided a more specific solution to the ethical problem. The problem can be solved by her audience.