Aria - 2.4.16

Personally, I do believe that this argumentative writing was somewhat valid and effective. Rodriguez spoke about the intimacy of language and how the bilingual education proposal in congress could potentially devalue the meaning of family language, or a language just spoken around the house. It could be seen as a very credible argument, however, I'm not quite sure what the opposing view could be that he could bring up in a counterargument. It's possible that the counterargument is reassuring the public or anyone affected by bilingual education that it would be beneficial if it were to become law. That is one of the only reasons that I see for a possibility of the argument not being valid, which summed up is just not addressing the counterargument. I do believe that the argument he is making is effective. He uses plenty of pathos throughout his writing by using a personal perspective and anecdotes about his life, and with subtle intermissions about explaining his current life and whatnot. It differs between a regular argumentative paper just by it having more of a personal aspect, but also for it not including all of the known criteria to a basic argumentative piece.