Read this passage from Joseph Stalin's radio broadcast from July 3, 1947: Is it really true that the German Fascist troops are invincible, as is
ceaselessly trumpeted by boastful Fascist propagandists? Of
course not!
History shows that there are no invincible armies, and never have
been. Napoleon's army was considered invincible, but it was
beaten successively by Russian, English and German Armies.
Kaiser Wilhelm's German Army in the period of the first
imperialist war was also considered invincible, but it was beaten
several times by Russian and Anglo-French troops, and was
finally smashed by Anglo-French forces.
The same must be said of Hitler's German-Fascist Army of today.
This army has not yet met with serious resistance on the
Continent of Europe. Only on our territory has it met serious
resistance, and if as a result of this resistance the finest divisions
of Hitler's German Fascist Army have been defeated by our Red
Army, it means that this army, too, can be smashed and will be
smashed as were the armies of Napoleon and Wilhelm.
Explain the rhetorical situation of Stalin's speech and how he uses rhetoric to
persuade his audience. Support your explanation with examples from the passage
and from the speech's historical context. Finally, make use of terminology from the
content of the unit to describe the speaker's rhetorical techniques.

Read the excerpt from act 1 of a doll's house. helmer: nora! [goes up to her and takes her playfully by the ear.] the same little featherhead! suppose, now, that i borrowed fifty pounds today, and you spent it all in the christmas week, and then on new year's eve a slate fell on my head and killed me, and— nora: [putting her hands over his mouth]. oh! don't say such horrid things. helmer: still, suppose that happened, —what then? nora: if that were to happen, i don't suppose i should care whether i owed money or not. helmer: yes, but what about the people who had lent it? nora: they? who would bother about them? i should not know who they were. helmer: that is like a woman! but seriously, nora, you know what i think about that. no debt, no borrowing. there can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt. we two have kept bravely on the straight road so far, and we will go on the same way for the short time longer that there need be any struggle. nora: [moving towards the stove]. as you , torvald. how does the interaction between helmer and nora advance the plot? nora realizes that helmer will completely disapprove of her having borrowed money, so she has to continue to keep it a secret from him. nora realizes that she and helmer have the same ideas about financial issues, and the conversation brings them closer together later in the play. helmer realizes that nora is more responsible with money than he originally thought, and he trusts her more with finances later in the play. nora realizes that helmer knows a lot more about borrowing and lending, and she will seek his input later when she needs it.