Contrastive Rhetorical Analysis of Argumentation Techniques in the Argumentative Essays of English and Persian Writers

Biria, Reza; Yakhabi, Masoume

Contrastive Rhetorical Analysis of Argumentation Techniques in the Argumentative Essays of English and Persian Writers

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Khorasgan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

The present study intended to compare and contrast the techniques used by English and Persian writers to develop argumentative essays. To this end, 20 argumentative essays (10 in English and 10 in Persian) were selected from among the available online argumentative essays with the same length and topic. These essays were analyzed with focus on the frequency of the four argumentation techniques of refutation, rhetorical questions, statistics, and appeal to authority. The results of the study revealed that while the writers in both languages made use of all these four techniques, they significantly differed regarding the frequency of refutation and rhetorical questions. While English argumentative writers preferred direct, explicit techniques, Persian writerswere mainly in favor of indirect techniques. The findings also suggested that in EFL contexts, cultural differences and their influence on rhetoric and formal writing can make it difficult for Persian learners of English to write logical argumentative essays in the new medium.

Keywords

References

Ahmad Khan Beigi, S., & Ahmadi, H. (2011).A contrastive comparison of structural and rhetorical patterns of Persian and English argumentative essays. The Iranian EFL Journal, 7(1), 167-178.

Atkinson, D. (1997). A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL.TESOL Quarterly, 31, 77-94.

Baleghizadeh, S., & Pashaii, A. (2010). A comparison of English and Farsi rhetoric and its impact on English writing of Iranian students. Studies in Literature and Language, 1(5), 17-27.

Becker, C. B. (1986). Reasons for the lack of argumentation and debate in the Far East. International journal of intercultural relations, 10, 75-92.

Cheng, F.W., & Chen, Y.M. (2009). Taiwanese argumentation skills: Contrastive rhetoric perspective. Taiwan International ESP Journal, 1(1), 23-50.

Choi, Y.H. (1988a). Text structure of Korean speakers' argumentative essays in English. World Englishes, 7, 129-142.

Choi, Y.H. (1988b). Textual coherence in English and Korean: An analysis of argumentative writing by American and Korean students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 50 (2), 429-A.

Ferris, D. R. (1994). Rhetorical strategies in student persuasive writing: Differences between native and non-native English speakers. Research in the Teaching of English, 28, 45-61.

Fox, H. (1994). Listening to the world: Cultural issues in academic writing. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Hinkel, E. (1997). Indirectness in L1 and L2 academic writing, Journal of Pragmatics, 27(3), 361-386.

Hinkel, E. (2002). Second language writers’ text. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ismail, S. (2010). Arabic and English Persuasive Writing of Arabs from a Contrastive Rhetoric Perspective. Ph.D. thesis, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA.

Kaplan, R.B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education, Language Learning, 16, 1-20.

Kaplan, R. B. (1967). Contrastive rhetoric and the teaching of composition. TESOL Quarterly, 2(1), 10-16.

Kaplan, R. B. (1972). The anatomy of rhetoric: Prolegomena to a functional theory of rhetoric; essays for teachers. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development.

Kaplan, R.B. (1987). Cultural thought patterns revisited, In U. Connor, & R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text (pp. 9-22). Addison-Wesley.

Lebaron, M. (2003). Communication tools for understanding cultural differences and cultural diversity. Retrieved June 2003 from www.beyondinteractability.org/bi-essay/communication-tools.

Lux, P. (1991).Styles of Anglo and Latin American college student writers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52 (6), 2128A.

Liu, L. (2005). Rhetorical education through writing instruction across cultures: A comparative analysis of select online instructional materials on argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(1), 1-18.

Matalene, C. (1985). Contrastive rhetoric: An American writing teacher in China. College English, 47, 789-806.

Nam, J.M. (2006). Theory and practice of second language (L2) writing: Contrastive rhetoric in second language writing instruction and application. Center for American Studies, 1-7.

Noor, R. (2001). Contrastive rhetoric in expository prose: Approaches and achievements. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 255-269.

Nowruzi Khiabani. M., & Pourghassemian. H. (2009). Transfer of L1 organizational patterns in argumentative writings of Iranian EFL students: Implications for contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Teaching English as a
Foreign Language and Literature, 1(4), 23-38.

Oliver, R. T. (1971). Communication and culture in ancient India and China. Syracuse. NY: Syracuse University Press.

Purves, A. C. (Ed.). (1988). Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric. Newbury Park, CA: Sage publications.

Saez, F.T. (2001). An analysis of argumentative texts for contrastive rhetoric, English Language Teaching: Changing Perspectives in Context, 493-505.

Scollon, R. (1991). Eight legs and one elbow: Stance and structure in Chinese English composition. Paper presented at International Reading Association, Second North American Conference on Adult and Adolescent Literacy, Banff, Canada.

Wong, (1997). Review article: Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. By Connor. U. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966 (pp. 216), Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, (7), 131-135.

Zare-ee, A., & Farvardin, M. T. (2009). Comparison of university level EFL learners’ linguistic and rhetorical patterns as reflected in their L1 and L2 writing. Novitas-Royal, 3(2), 143-155. 143.

Zhu, W. (2001). Performing argumentative writing in English: Difficulties, processes, and strategies.TESL Canada Journal, 19 (1), 34-51.