Opinion: Tuberville’s racially charged remarks should be condemned.

Main topic: The author gives the audience his opinion about a specific event and
reports the reactions to it. The author's aim is to contest the ideology of senator
Tuberville, exposing the discriminatory nature of his claims, being clear about who are
the ones affected by his intentions and encouraging them to react accordingly.
Relational values

 Relation with reader: The author tries to create a close relationship with the
reader by identifying himself as another “pacient” of these declarations
(“Tuberville also came after my own Muslim community with lies…”). Later on,
he speaks directly to the reader by referring him as “you” in “And it’s unlikely
you will see them do so”.
 The author uses an “inclusive we” style of sentence when he states that
“Tuberville… has repeatedly told us who he is.”
 The senator uses “exclusive you/they” in his speeches. “They want reparations
because they think the people …”. “They want to take over what you got”. Later
he states “You can’t destroy history; you can’t change it” referring to the
opposition.
 Tuberville also uses “inclusive we” in the line “We need to learn from history”.
Modes of sentences: Most sentences are in declarative mode (giving information) but
there are also imperative (argumentative) sentences. E.g.: “We need to learn from
history”, “Tuberville’s charged remarks should be condemned” (Expressive modality).
Experiential values
Ideological differences:

 Negative Evaluations - Wording: The author uses several terms that denote his
evaluations (ideologically charged words): “…Tuberville caused an uproar…”;
“caused such a backlash”; “…inhumane suffering of their ancestors”;
“Connecting reparations… with people who commit crimes is outrageous”;
“way beyond a dog whistle”; “…go-to targets GOP leaders love to demonize”.
Agency: Participants

 Obeidallah uses a clear agency when he names the people responsible for his
accusations. “GOP Sen. Tommy Tuberville caused an uproar…”; “Tuberville’s
spokeswoman did not respond…”.
 The author refers to the “pacients” of these declarations as “Black Americans”,
“immigrants”, “Muslim community”, “LGBTQ community”.
Negation:

 It is used by the author when he claims that “That wasn’t true, but Tuberville
knows some GOP voters well”.
Hyponymy:
  It is used in cases where the author refers to governor, senator, president,
concepts included into the “Political leaders” category.
Synonyms:

 The author employs the words “crowd” and “audience” to refer to the same
group of people.
Antonyms:

 According to Tuberville’s ideology, we could consider “black” and “white”

people as antonyms.
Expressive values

 Metaphors used:
o Dog whistle (a subtly aimed political message which is intended for, and
can only be understood by, a particular demographic group).
o Buffet of bigotry (wording).
o Charities under fire (being attacked).
o Handful of US senators (small amount).
o Battleground state (warfare metaphor used for ideological context).
 Relational modality: The senator denotes his authority over the opposition
when he says “You can’t destroy history; you can’t change it”.
Connective values
Cohesive devices:

 Repetition is used in Tuberville’s speech when he claims “They want crime

because they want to take over what you got. They want to control what you
have”. By doing this, he is trying to convince the audience that the opposition
has negative intentions.
 Reference is also used to avoid repeating words. E.g.: “They are not owed that”
where “that” refers to the reparations black people are getting.

Integrantes:
-Britos Yamila
-Fernández Rodolfo
-Toledo Cristian