Before writing my article I read various articles and debate some opposing and some proposing the topic of euthanasia, the style model I used was also an editorial that extensively gives the readers the main idea of what Euthanasia is, it doesn’t necessarily take sides (for or against) it just leaves it to the reader to decide if it’s wrong or not, it was taken from the ‘Encyclopaedia Britannica’; the purpose of this text is for reader to adopt the view that euthanasia is seen different based of each and every individual. The aim of my article is to convince and persuade and also inform the readership that euthanasia is not murder but mercy killing. In terms of target audience ‘life. It’s not for everyone’ should appeal to both men and women that are aged 18 and above or generally anyone who is of age and is facing the situation here society is telling them that euthanasia is wrong or bad. The aim of a persuasive text is to influence and so there needs to be a close relationship between reader and writer. To ensure that my piece is persuasive and that it has a friendly but firm tenor, after the introductory paragraph I began to tell the reader stories and situations of real life individual to pull emotive strings. Throughout ‘life. It’s not for everyone’, I have tried to incorporate interesting examples of lexis, the most notable is repetition or antistrophe and this is demonstrated right from the opening ‘act of terminating and individual’s life’, ‘… whose life is terminated…’ … terminating the patient’s life deliberately…’this is used to emphasis the point and creates a rhythm and again emphasis the relationship between ideas and enhances cohesion. Antistrophe or repetition is a conventional feature in persuasive writing because it helps establish the right tenor and help reiterate the point been made. In line with this, there are a lot of facts and figure ‘In 1962 only 47% said “yes”. In 1993 78% and in 1994 and 1995 74% answered with “yes”. Now only 18% say “no” and another 8% are undecided.

From this poll the people have stated that in some circumstances Voluntary Euthanasia should be allowed to be practiced’seeing as it is a highly debated topic, Not only does this inform and educate the reader, but it could also relate to laws that currently affecting them. Such firm and strong tone make it more likely to be taking seriously and make it likely that the readership will side with my view, with this the lexis is quite formal and contains little or no colloquial. An example of this is where refer to people with terminal diseases as ‘patients’ and not ‘sick people’ or where I refer to ending someone’s life as ‘termination’ and not ‘killing them’. Rhetorical questions like ‘well why a person can’t just be put out of intolerable suffering and achieve the same fate?’ ‘So tell me why then shouldn’t euthanasia be legal to free both Macey and her mother from this mutual pain and suffering?’ Are included as well, involving the audience and making them feel they have an important part to play in the argument. The pronoun (‘we and ‘you’) has the same effect. Another significant feature is the inclusion of dramatic language and hyperbole like ‘chronic’ ‘excruciating pain’. This creates and exaggerated and mocking tone, making the article more persuasive and interesting to read. Aside from lexis, there are a number of other features that have an impact on the reader and make the article more persuasive, first alliteration plays a significant role (‘learn’ , ‘love’ , ‘live’) because it emphasise the importance of the topic in relation to our human rights. As I mentioned previously, the tenor of the persuasive text is importance because it relies on the reader participation with in good for this particular context. Also, I think this is a particular device makes my view more appealable. Connected to this, sentence size is an important technique; if I have used a lot of long sentences, I will follow with a short one. This catches the readers’ attention and draws them into the argument. For the same effect, I have included three part list (‘…. So tell me why then shouldn’t euthanasia be legal to free both Macey and her mother from this mutual pain and suffering?’) Contrasting pairs (‘hasten death’ ‘life and death’) and parallelism (the use of the words ‘terminate’, ‘pain’, death). The structure of my argument is effective as well. Apart from having a strong and informative opening and ending, it refers to events that will have some relevance to the readers. The final paragraph then undermines my argument and summarise and gives points why euthanasia is a good and not a vice.
I think the article’s over the top nature brings the audience into the argument and makes it more effective. Furthermore, pragmatics has been used through the use of the word ‘dignified manner’ in the phrase ‘and wants to end their life in a dignified manner’ ‘overtly it refers to pride and reputation’ but covertly. It relates to the fact that euthanasia can make one died in a way that is more acceptable. Once more, I think this makes my argument more sophisticated and memorable. Thanks to the inclusion of these techniques, the article shares many the topic of both views for and againts this is similar to what is done in my style model. Therefore, ‘life. It’s not for everyone’ fulfils its aim to persuade.