The essay is written by T.S. Eliot as one of a series of tals broadcast to Germany after World War II.

It consists of 12 paragraphs in which the essayst writes his considerations about the texis: the English language is the richest for poetry. Thus statement is presented by Eliot in the first two lines. 

Going on, the essayst gives us a qualification of statement from line 3 to 10 writing that the texis does not mean that England has produced the greatest poets or amount of poetry.

The function of the next lines, from 11 to 14, is clarificatory. He explains that English has the largest vocabulary so it is the richest language for poetry.

In addition to this, the next paragraph, from line 14to 29, has a supporting function (of the statement) in which the author providesexamples, that is the richness is created by the variety of elements of which English is made of: Germanic foundation, Scandinavian and Norman-French elements, French and Celtic influences and words coined from latin too. 

What's more, there is another clarification with examples, the English language is also rich in its rhythmic variety, the elements are: Norman-French, Welsh, English-man Welshman Scots and Irishman and finally the influence of Greek and Latin poetry.

Then Eliot restates two times the statements writing first of all that English is a good language for poetry becouse it is derived from so many linguistic sources, and then that England has not necessaty produces the greatest poets.

From line 49 to 51 the author writes another statement in which tells that it is generally thought that yhe greatest peoples excel in one art (Italy and France in painting, Germany in music, England in poetry).

The next two paragraphs, from line 52 to 76, have a refutative function, in fact the author writes that the statement written previously is not correct becouse no art has ever been the exclusive possession of any one country of Europe, and secondly becouse there have been periods in which some other country has been the major influence in poetry than England. Instead the second refutation is that a nation which leads in a particular art form in a particular period does not necessarily produce the greatest artists.

Finally, the last two paragraphs contain other two statements, that are: 1) no European nation would have accomplished what it has if other countries had not developed the same art forms; 2) the ability of European literature to renew itself depends on the ability to receive and assimilate influences from abroad and, finally, every literature must have some sources which are particularly its own.