By Months: Signe Kivi

The style is formal and analytical, addressing the minister politely ("Respected Minister"). The speaker uses personal acknowledgment, referencing the minister's passion for the Estonian language and their role as an advocate for Estonian-language education, to strengthen their question. The emphasis is on logical and procedural analysis of the problem.

The rhetorical style is formal and procedural, utilizing direct questions and citing authoritative sources (the president’s letter). The tone is critical and demanding, offering the commission a reprimand rather than a proposal, and demanding an explanation of how the criticism was addressed and what conclusion was ultimately reached.

The address is formal, respectful, and questioning, directed straight to the director and the minister. The style is logical and evidence-based, relying on an external source (a letter from organizations) when presenting concerns. The objective is to obtain a clear response and confirmation from the minister regarding the consequences of the policy.

The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and sharply critical, focusing on logical and procedural flaws. The speaker poses direct questions that demand accountability ("Why?", "What are the future plans?"), and calls into question the reliability of the sources, labeling them "strange" and "unofficial."

The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, posing a question to the commission following the presentation. The tone is cautious and concerned, emphasizing the security threat, and relies on logical arguments and research findings. The speaker begins courteously, commending the thoroughness of the report, but quickly transitions to pressing security issues.