Structure of argumentative text

Structure of argumentative text

Structure of Argumentative Essays With so much stress about getting good grades and getting everything done on time, we shouldn’t have to deal with the stress of uniforms. Students already have so many things taken away from them during school hours, individuality and confidence shouldn’t have to be hidden by uniforms  · Structure of an argumentative text. An argumentative text generally consists of three fundamental parts: Introduction or approach, which is the starting point or approach of an initial situation, from which the problem to be addressed in the text should emerge. Also known as “premises” or “data.” The structure of an argumentative text does not follow a rigid framework. Some of its components may be absent or displaced depending on the texts. Also, in the development text, it is possible to use a single argumentative process (argumentative explanation or refutation) or both. Outline of an argumentative text. Introduction. 1. Subject

The argumentative text. Structure and features. - Nessie School of Languages

The main aim of Unit 34 is to present the issue of argumentative texts in terms of structure and main features. Our aim is to offer a broad account of what argumentative texts are and why they are used for in both linguistic and pragmatic terms, structure of argumentative text, structure of argumentative text is, how language and textual features are structure of argumentative text to achieve the purpose of persuading and convincing the audience to wh om a rethorical or dialectical argumentation is addressed.

So, we shall divide our study in five main chapters. So, in order to establish the relationship between both concepts, we shall review 1 the notion of text linguistics since the analysis of argumentative texts is discussed within the framework of Discourse Analysis.

Accordingly, we shall provide 2 a definition of text and hence we structure of argumentative text examine a its main textual features common to all text types such as texture and ties and b the seven standards of textuality in order to get to the notion of intertextuality.

Chapt e r 3 will offer then an insightful analysis of argumentative texts in terms of 1 definition; 2 main types of description; 3 structure and 4 main textual devices within descriptive text types: a cohesion, regarding i grammatical, ii lexical and iii graphological devices, and b coherence.

Chapte r 4 will be devoted to present the main educational implications in language teaching regarding argumentative texts and Chapter 5 will offer a conclusion to broadly overview our present study. Finally, Chapter 6 will include all the bibliographical references used in this study. An influential introduction to the analysis of texts is based on relevant works of Halliday and Hasan, Cohesion in English ; van Dijk, Text and Context ; and Beaugrande and Dressler, structure of argumentative text, Introduction to Text Linguistics The background for educational implications regarding argumentative texts is based on the theory of communicative competence structure of argumentative text communicative approaches to language teaching are provided by Canale, From Communicative Competence to Communicative Language Pedagogy ; Hymes, On communicative competence In addition, the most complete record of current publications within the educational framework is provided by the guidelines in van Ek and Trim, Vantage ; B.

A Common European Framework of reference In fact, many fields have approached the study of texts, and in particular, that of argumentative texts : linguistics from grammar, morphology and phonologyanthropology different speech acts in different culturespsychology speaker and hearer behaviour and stylistics correctness, clarity, elegance, appropriateness, style.

Yet, the oldest form of preoccupation with texts and the first foundation for the analysis of texts and its articulation is drawn from the notion of text linguistics which has its historical roots in rethoricdating from Ancient Greece and Rome through the Middle Ages up to the present under the name of text linguistics or discourse.

Traditional rethoricians were influenced by their major task of training public orators on the discovery of ideas inventionthe arrangement of ideas dispositionthe discovery of appropriate expressions for ideas elocutionand memorization prior to delivery on the actual occasion of speaking.

In the Middle Ages, rethoric was based on grammar on the study of formal language patterns in Greek and Latin and logic on the structure of argumentative text of arguments and proofshence its relevance within our study.

Rethoric still shares several concerns with the kind of text linguistics we know today, for instance, the use of texts as vehicles of purposeful interaction oral and writtenthe variety of texts which express a given configuration of ideas, the arranging of ideas and its disposition within structure of argumentative text discourse and the judgement of texts which still depends on the effects upon the audience. In addition, a text is best regarded as a semantic unit and not a unit of form.

First of all, the concept of texture is defined as the textual resource that functions as a unity with respect to its environment and secondly, ties are defined as the resources that English has for creating texture so as to contribute to its total unity by means of co hesive relations reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, and lexical cohesion. Perhaps the notion of textuality is the most relevant in our study since we reach the notion of argumentative text through one of its seven standards: intertextuality.

Actually, written, structure of argumentative text. texts conform to rules that most successful writers unconsciously follow and native readers unconsciously expect to find.

It is relevant, then, to address the term textuality in written and oral texts as it is involved in rules governing written discourse hence its relationship to argumentative texts. If any of these standards are not satisfied, the text is considered not to have fulfilled its function and not to be communicative, structure of argumentative text. We shall briefly review the first six standards of structure of argumentative text in relation to argumentative texts so as to analyse the seventh one in more depth in next section:.

It also deals with cohesive ties as mentioned above anaphora, cataphora, ellipsis, etc and signalling relations tense and aspect, structure of argumentative text, modality, updating, junction, structure of argumentative text, conjunction, disjunction and subordination which prove essential in argumentative texts.

In other words, it gives sense to a text. Here we meet the purpose of argumentative texts, that is, to convince the audience about a universal truth which is presented briefly and clearly. Here a set of occurrences should constitute a cohesive and coherent text having some use or relevance for the receiver in an appropriate context of communication agreement or disagreement in argumentation.

unexpected or known vs. unknown or uncertain by means of content words verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs. Hence specific lexical devices in argumentative texts adversative conjunctions, declarative verbs. in opinion essays. There exist the prerogative of presenting alternative opinions about peop le, objects and events in live presentations and hence, objective and subjective argumentations. Intertextualit y concerns the factors which make the use of one text dependent upon knowledge of one or more previously encountered texts, that is, the ways in which the production and reception of a given text depends upon the participants knowledge of other texts, structure of argumentative text.

The usual mediation is achieved by means of the development and use of text typesstructure of argumentative text, being classes of texts expected to have certain traits for certain purposes: narrative, descriptive, expository, dialectic and, for our purposes, argumentative. For 2, years there have been two traditions of classifying texts.

The first one, deriving. More specific, it refers to modes of discourse realized through text types, thus narration, description, directive, exposition and argumentation. Within the second tradition, rethoric refers to communicative function as rethorical strategies in functional lines: argumentative: to promote the acceptance of certain be liefs ; descriptive: to enrich knowledge spaces; narrative: to arrange actions and events; and so on.

In this section we shall approach the concept of text typology from two main perspectives: 1 the main criteria for text typology by means of which we review basic principles for all types of texts regarding textual devices, order and sequence elements and common text structures; and 2 a text type classification and argumentation. There are three main criteria when establishing a typology for texts: textual devices, order and sequence structure of argumentative text and common text structures for all types of texts.

For such reasons, texts may have a wide range of interpretative possibilities. Moreover, structure of argumentative text to the concept of form is the notion of order and sequence, which may vary depending on the type of text, structure of argumentative text. For instance, structure of argumentative text, introduction, development and conclusion in argumentative texts, logical, chronological, or psypchological in narrative texts; from general to specific, upward and downward direction, personality vs.

physical appearance in descriptive texts; and so on. By studying the textual and lexical elements of text types, one can learn to regularly recognize the overall structure of a text. Following a general division of any kind of text we may sometimes begin with a brief heading or title, structure of argumentative text, with or without a byline, an epigraph or brief quotation, or a salutation, such as we may find at the start of a letter.

They may also conclude with a brief structure of argumentative textbyline, or signature. Elements which may appear in this way, either at the start or at the end of a text division proper, are regarded as forming a class, known as divto p or divbot respectively. We may classify texts in two ways. Firstly, according to purposeand secondly, according to type or mode.

According to purpose, structure of argumentative text, in terms of communicative functions, the discourse is intended to inform, express an attitude, persuade and create a debate. According to type or mode, the classification distinguishes among descriptive, narrative, expository, instrumental, and argumentative modes. Hence, in this study we are dealing with argumentative texts which, structure of argumentative text the one hand, are intended to persuade and convince the audience in terms of communicative functions and, on the other hand, according to the category or text types structure of argumentative text is included within the type of argumentation, that is, the fact of supporting or disagreeing with a statement whose validity is questionable or contentious.

Now let us examine argumentative texts more in depth regarding their structure and main features. Chapte r 3 will offer then an insightful analysis of argumentative texts in terms of 1 definition; 2 main types of argumentation; 3 structure and 4 main textual devices within argumentative text types: a cohesion, regarding i grammatical, ii lexical and iii graphological devices, and b coherence.

An argumentative text is usually defined as a type of discourse concerned with the presentation and evaluation of arguments, either rethorical or dialectical, which show the cause-effect relationship established in an event or theory. Moreover, argumentative texts may vary depending on the type of audience they are addressed to, for instance, structure of argumentative text, non-specialized audience appealing to common sense and common principles, values and places or to a specialized group where the basis for agreement is more specific.

With this audience in mind, the argumentative discourse may take the form of a discussion, an interview, a speech, an essay, an opinion letter, a letter or a book on literary criticism among others.

Basically, we can distinguish three types of argumentative texts depending on the social character or the rational character of argumentation: first, a subjective argumentation; second, an structure of argumentative text ar gumentation also called scientific ; and finally, other types of argumentation. It must be borne in mind that in current society, argumentation is always present at all levels, that is, in the domains of literature fiction and structure of argumentative text everyday life non- fiction.

Hence the orator starts by posing implicitly or explicitly the problem to be dealt with so as to organise the arguments which will lead him to a relevant conclusion. Actually, the speaker refers to a particular system of knowledge and his point of view is expressed mainly by means of presupposit ions and connotations, which produce informal, persuasive, ironical, appreciative or pejorative arguments. Due to the use of dialectics, this type of argumentation is especially frequent.

Hence it is namely found in oral and written discourse. Thusin oral discourse we find it in political speeches, structure of argumentative text, debates, interviews, informal conversations, radio and TV reports whereas in written discourse we namely find it in letters, press articles, opinion columns, business letters, and so on. On the other hand, the objective-type also called scientific type is related to the cognitive process of formally judging about a given problem.

Similarly to the subjective type, the orator starts by posing implicitly or explicitly the problem to be dealt with so as to organise the arguments which will lead him to a relevant conclusion. However, alike the subjective- type, scientific argumentation refers to the methods based on established facts and obeys to well established laws.

Hence, we may find research documents, experiments, direct observations, fieldwork reports, analysis which are reflected on statistics, tables, diagrams, illustrations, photos, maps and so structure of argumentative text. In general, scientific argumentation has a mixture structure, where other text-types are involved, such as expository, explanatory and argumentative sequences, and very seldom do we find a scientific discourse exclusively.

Hence scientific argumentation usually appears in relation to expositions, structure of argumentative text, explanations, definitions or interpretations of a given issue. Hence we may find :. This technique is used in commentary texts, which may give more informatio n on specific subjects or offer a different point of view on a subject by holding to true values newspaper complaint column, discussions, footnotes.

Hence, there is a clear dissociation structure of argumentative text the given arguments. This technique is namely used in scientific texts which tend to be more specific as the main argument is supported by verifiable facts or statements NASA reports on Mars, formal letters, lectures, bibliographies.

The structure of argumentative texts, which seek to persuade and convince the audience, cannot be a sequence of disordered arguments. Yet, it must follow some principles of order regarding the way arguments are structure of argumentative text so as to present an organized sequence of structure of argumentative text and reasonable arguments which lead structure of argumentative text author to be effective and persuasive.

There are, though, a common sequence of arguments for all types of humanistic discourse exposition and argumentation : issue selection and kind of work, seeking information, structure of argumentative text, work planning, writing down of the argument, and finally, presentation.

Hence, we shall focus on the first one issue selection and kind of work since it is from this notion that we get three types of work depending on the theme re sume, research, argumentation and in particular, our current theme: argumentation and sequence structure. The structure of argumentative text of argumentation is quite frequent in essay writing since it is a dialectic form from classical dialectic and rethoric.

It may be oral or written and is aimed to convince the audience in a reasonable way of a universal truth, idea or thought, almost always questionable. The fact of being questionable brings about the essence of argumentation: to present a suggesting and polemic argument for the audience to accept and feel interested in it.

Typ the thesis is placed at the beginning of the argument. Here the encoder moves from the context to the text, that is, the thesis is related to a general proposition cause- effect which in turn is related to a particular structure of argumentative text which serves as proof. The conclusion then is a synthesis of the two propositions.

Argumentative texts have two essential components: on the one hand, the thesis the idea or theory that the author presents as a universal truth in a relevant, brief and clear way and the body of argumentation which forms the rest of the text with a sequence of arguments which aim to validate the previous step the thesis. Arguments then may be classified into two: positive arguments, which are aimed to reinforce the truth of the thesis based on relevant authors; personal experiences; or analogy and negative arguments aimed to refuse those arguments or ideas agains the main thesis to be developed.

According to classical guidelines, argumentative texts will develop then positive and negative arguments pros and cons following six main steps: introduction, issue explanation, outline of the argument, proof, refutation and conclusion 1.

The author must use the beginning of his text not to write about the issue in general but to gain the audience sympathy.

The outline of the argument. This third step establishes the difficult points of the argument which must be presented in a concise, organized and coherent way so as to establish the relationship between the different parts of the argument by means of linguistic elements or discourse deixis.

Moreover, at this point, the effectiveness of the argument may be improved once the audience is better informed. They invite the audience to reflect on them and consider the given bibliographic references so as to enhance the relevance of their arguments. This is the reason why students E. and Bachillerato are asked to present their argumentative essays within the structure of expository texts in three different parts :.

introduction, development and conclusion whereas argumentative presentations originally had six steps: 1 introduction, 2 issue explanation, 3 out line of the argument, 4 proof, 5 refutation, and 6 conclusion B. Similarly, refutation may establish the main unacceptable ideas or opposite thoughts to that of our main issue, and therefore, raise more interest on the part of our audience.

ARGUMENTATIVE TEXT

, time: 6:53

La structure du texte argumentatif | Alloprof

 · By default definition, an argumentative essay is a written text where opinions are expressed in support or against a central theme, and explanations back up the stance taken. It’s quite popular among students and teachers alike and is usually given for learners to develop good oratory and written skills when defending a particular point  · Structure of an argumentative text. An argumentative text generally consists of three fundamental parts: Introduction or approach, which is the starting point or approach of an initial situation, from which the problem to be addressed in the text should emerge. Also known as “premises” or “data.” The structure of an argumentative text does not follow a rigid framework. Some of its components may be absent or displaced depending on the texts. Also, in the development text, it is possible to use a single argumentative process (argumentative explanation or refutation) or both. Outline of an argumentative text. Introduction. 1. Subject