The article “No compassion for drunk drivers” written by Roger Simon is an outraged reply to a TV program, condemning drunk drivers. The author is extreme in his judgment, the use of abuse words in the beginning of the text (no compassion, I hate them, I become enraged, I wanted to kick the in the set) and in the end (the repetition of the phrase- I wanted to kick in the set, you were the killer, self-indulgent slobs, kill each other) points out his view which is very angry and emotional.
Yet the style of the article is publicist and though we cannot determine the clear-cut introduction and conclusion, a closer look at the text helps to realize, that the main part- the body- includes a few arguments, namely factual evidence. I think the combination of emotions and well-founded reasoning/common sense efficiently changes the way people feel about drunk driving. It arouses the reader`s concern mixed with rage and that is the pragmatic purpose of the text- not only to inform, bur to interest and to move the reader toward agreement with the author.
The register of the text is consultative, neutral words are mostly used and the use of bookish words colors the writing, the reader feels the sarcasm and the irony of some situations. For instance, drivers are impaired after imbibing, suffer a melancholy, the agony to take public transportation.
These are quotations taken from the TV program. As compared to the real agony of the victim`s families (the widowed woman, 2 orphaned children) the agony of the driver, who was merely fined and whose license was merely revoked, becomes absurd, fabricated and the author tries to prove the contrast between reality and what was given in the TV program. The opposition between the author and the predominant atmosphere of sympathy in that program thus becomes clear. At first glance already the presence of the author is obvious.
There are so many inner dialogues in the text, both with the reader (what it is you do mean), with the host (not me, Phil), with the driver (wrong, Mr. Burke, you were the killer), personal pronouns, elliptical question (so why don`t you just say it) mostly in the opening and in the closing parts of the article, that the presence of the author, his attempts to address the reader directly and to carry him with his stream of consciousness, the emotionality of the narration become obvious.
There are some constructions, which the author uses throughout the text. For example, parallel constructions or repetitions (I hate them, I really hate them, I did not react, I did not think, I was plenty moved for the victims, I was plenty moved for the people…etc), graduation (who were crippled, paralyzed, reduced to vegetables, killed) and the use of evaluations (very, at all, really, plenty, so many). In combination with epithets (extreme, dramatic, raged and others) and emphasizing constructions (you do mean, I do agree) gives a sharp idea what the author thinks about the situation and how important it is for him to appeal to our deep-seated emotions.