The essay starts by introducing the topic under discussion: English is the richest language to write poetry. The first sentence is a neutral claim. In the second sentence, the writer moves to a personal stand, expressing his own opinion about the topic sentence: he agrees with it.

Proceeding with the text, the writer clarifies his stand by denying what he doesn’t want to mean with it: his focus is not on the number of great poets or great poetry produced by the country. He quotes some poets he considers great from other countries as an example to support his argumentation. In addition he confirms that he’s not interested in claiming that England has produced the largest quantity of great poetry.

Going further the writer is more precise about his opinion: he agrees with the topic sentence because English is simply the richest medium to write poetry. As a support to his argumentation, he says English has the largest vocabulary.

Immediately after, he specifies that the wealth of  vocabulary is not the reason why English is a rich language. On the contrary, the great number of terms is only a consequence of the real reason.

Afterwards, he tells the reader/listener his opinion about the real reason: the variety of the elements of which English is made up.
Then, he lists all the elements as a support for his thesis: the Germanic foundation (that is also a common element between the English people and the German people to which the speech is delivered, as the writer himself underlines); Scandinavian and Norman French elements (justified by the Danish and Norman conquests); a succession of different French influences; the constant addition and rejection of new words coined by Latin; the Celtic element.

Another time, he specifies that all the quoted influences need to be considered not only in the history of Words, but primarily in the development of  rhythms (that is a very important feature in poetry).