English 121: Guide: What you need for class

AUTHORITY IN COMMUNICATING (writing, speaking) 

Authority or credibility is the quality that makes the rhetors believable, so the term is interchangeable with Ethos, one of the three rhetorical appeals used by rhetors to further their communication. Only the rhetors who establish their authority with the audience, or in other words, appear trustworthy to their audience, have a chance at successfully communicating their message to that audience.  

There are multiple areas to investigate when assessing a rhetor’s authority, and here are some of the most important: 

1. Professional qualifications and connection to the topic 
   The rhetor should be qualified in the field that he is communicating, so it is not as essential to locate the Ph.D. following the rhetor’s name, as it is important to verify that the degree aligns with the subject area within which the rhetors communicates.  
2. Use of sources of information 
   The rhetor demonstrates respect for multiple viewpoints by not being the only source of information. Using sources in communicated texts illustrates the rhetor’s awareness of various perspectives on the subject.  
3. Source documentation (citation styles - MLA, APA, etc.)
   Including outside sources is one way for the rhetor to bolster authority within the communication, but if those sources are not credible or not appropriately documented, their presence might present harm to the credibility of the rhetor. If the sources are properly used and documented, there will also be no room for plagiarism.  
4. Use of Ethos tag in signal phrases 
   When incorporating sources in the text, rhetors underscore the sources’ credibility by using ethos tags in the signal phrases. For example, when first using the source, they could write: “Director of CDC, Jacob Murk, urgently pleads that…” Such a phrase not only introduces the source of the information but also points to the credibility of the source itself. 
5. Tone and diction 
   Using vocabulary appropriate for and expected by the audience is key to establishing trust with the ones the rhetor communicates with. Declarative statements establish authority but revealing too much emotional state with very strongly charged words such as “horrible,” for example, does not. Avoiding such vocabulary does not mean that the rhetor must soften the language too much, however, and switch to words such as “might,” “maybe,” “could.” The “all or nothing” statements such as “nothing,” “everybody,” “all,” do not build authority with the audience either.  
6. Use of pronouns 
   Most rhetors communicating in professional and academic rhetorical situations know to avoid first-person and second-person pronouns, so there will not be an “I,” “we,” “you” in their texts. One way to achieve authority is to be as objective as possible, but writing in the first-person point of view makes the text needlessly subjective. Second person pronouns instantly make the communication informal and less authoritative because the rhetor sounds more like a salesperson trying to sell something to the audience rather than carefully outlining an argument about the subject.  
7. Text’s appearance 
   To build authority, the rhetors design a text that is visually polished in design, organization, so that not only its content but also its format communicates authority. Flawless grammar, complete sentences, sophisticated vocabulary, especially when discussing something elaborate or complicated, underscore the professionalism of the text and the authority of its rhetor, but if used incorrectly, or out of context, that same sophisticated lexis will undermine the rhetor’s authority.  

Textual Signifiers (like signal phrases)