What are the differences between analytical exposition and hortatory exposition?

Both hortatory and analytical expositions are arguments which present a thesis or opinion with supporting evidence.

An analytical exposition presents the argument in such a way that it sounds like the writer is an authority on the subject and so it does not use first person pronoun (e.g. I, we or us), extravagant language or cliches. It does use passive voice verbs which distances the writer from the opinion and makes them appear to be more objective, referring to the vast body of experts who have the same opinion or who provide this evidence (e.g. It is thought that the best way to overcome the increase in car accidents due to alcohol is ...). Examples of analytical expositions are found in the Discussion of a scientific experiment report or reports of business projects where hard evidence is required to support a recommendation or to argue a point and where the reader will not be persuaded by the personal opinion of the writer.

A hortatory or persuasive exposition, on the other hand, presents the argument in a much more flowery and flamboyant manner, using cliches, the first person and active voice verbs. It sounds much more like the personal opinion of the writer rather than a body of experts. Hortatory expositions are used by politicians, sales people, children who want their own way etc.