To start with I directly involved the reader by using a location known very well to them, this would make them feel like part of the article and would help benefit themselves. I abrublty start with an agitated tone where I scrutinize the language used by the community within Suffolk One by explaining to the reader it isn't "should of". This further involves the reader with my editorial. In the second paragraph I place "you're" next to "your" in an attempt for the reader to see if they truly understand grammar, those who do not may be intrigued to carry on reading in an attempt to learn. The use of a double exclamation mark in the sentence "When will these people learn!!" is ironic as it appears directly after a paragraph moaning about misuse of exclamation marks. This adds to the intended humour of the editorial. I decided to load the next paragraph full of a very violent lexis which keeps my text quick paced and action pack, a very different theme to how grammar is usually spoken about. The repeated use of plosives in this sentence; "battle", "blasted", "shot", "assaulted", represents another grammar mistake seen by me as I walk down Ipswich High Street. The syndetic list also helps to reinforce the sheer amount of mistakes I am seeing. The next paragraph moves towards a very sarcastic tone because we have hit the core point of the editorial. This is going to need concentration from now on. The indication of "signposts" shows that at any time the reader can stop reading. This foregrounds the punctuation which develops on the key theme of the editorial; grammar. After taking a paragraph to explain the hatred of misplaced apostrophes I'm back on the 'battlefield' the phrase "bombardment of bad grammar" keeps reinforcing the amount of grammar mistakes by using the repetition of violent lexis and plosives. I use a slant rhyme, "apostrophe catastrophe" in order to make a memorable slogan to make the reader remember the misuse