IndexEthosLogosPathosConclusionIn the article “Our linguistic prejudices make no sense” Raffaella Zanuttini criticizes those who express anger when they hear others use double negatives in a sentence. He criticizes civility advocates who fail to criminalize expressions of prejudice against people who make mistakes when speaking English. Zanuttini argues that civil societies' failure to flag prejudicial comments against those who use inappropriate double negatives is indicative of a negative attitude towards others. The author argues that people who say they can't stand their friends who make mistakes in spoken language are just as bad as racists who can't stand people of other races he argues this because there is no basic science for making negative comments about people who they use double negatives, then negative concordance should be allowed as part of the English language. Zanuttini effectively uses ethos, logos and pathos to appeal to ethics, logic and emotions. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Ethos Zanuttini appeals to ethics by establishing credibility and authority on the issue discussed in the article. He presents himself as an authority on linguistics. Using authority, the author embarks on examining the topic as an individual who understands the rules that govern the topic. In questioning the scientific basis of the criticism of those who say "aks" instead of "ask", Zanuttini refers to metathesis as a linguistic concept. He says that metathesis recognizes that multiple negative elements are common in many languages ​​and that if people who use such languages ​​apply the same when speaking English, they should not be reprimanded (Zanuttini 1). Zunittini's view is that the application of natural phenomena found “in all human languages” should not attract prejudicial comments that aim to portray speakers of a certain language as weak (1). In essence, Zunittini believes that freedom must cross various aspects of life including the use of language. The author also appeals to ethics in showing her understanding of other languages ​​in which negative concord is permitted. Zanuttini cites the Italian phrase “non ho vedo niente” which she interprets literally as meaning “not (I) have seen anyone” (1). The author's gesture of interpreting the Italian language indicates that she is an authority on linguistics. The Italian ruling reveals that the use of negative concordia is common in the country. However, Italians allow double negatives because they do not affect the meaning of their language. The acceptance of double negatives in the Italian language, Zanuttini argues, should strike those who say they cannot tolerate a similar phenomenon in English to understand that there is no single English grammar. The credibility of the author is seen in her way of explaining the statement that there is no single grammar that creates English. He says that people who criticize other people's grammar do so based on their vision of the speaker and not on the language used (Zanutini 2). It explains grammar as a guide that helps people form sentences in their language. Therefore, people create mental recipes that guide them to interpret and pronounce words that make up sentences in their language (Zanuttini 2). By claiming that recipes are formed based on the speaker's language, the author presents himself as a credible linguist capable of teaching the formation and origin of the language. The author's use of ethics leaves the reader in no doubt regarding the analysis of the topic. An authority on,.