The purpose of this paper is to discuss how argumentation analysis can be used in language teaching. In my discussion, I will try to give answers to the following questions:
1. What is argumentation?
2. What is argumentation analysis?
3. What language teaching goals is argumentation analysis meant to achieve and why is argumentation analysis a good way to achieve these goals?
4. What are the most effective ways to use argumentation analysis in language teaching?

What is argumentation?

Argumentation is a form of communication relying on reasoning and proof to influence belief or behavior through the use of spoken and written messages. We engage in argumentation when we express an opinion and provide reasons or arguments to convince our listeners or readers of the rightness of our point of view. Argumentation can also be defined as a form of composition primarily in written messages. In this paradigm all texts may be classified by 4 forms of composition: narration, description, exposition, and argumentation. Narration and description of course are used in all kinds of writing but primarily in texts written to amuse and amaze. Expository writing is more likely to constitute the primary form of composition in texts written to inform and to explain. Argumentation is a form of composition employed in texts written to influence and persuade by logical force of arguments, even by emotion of expression.

What is argumentation analysis?

When we analyze an argumentative text, we should look first at its logical structure. What is the author’s main claim or main point of view? What arguments does the author provide to prove the correctness of the main claim? What arguments does he provide to prove the correctness of the previous arguments, etc? What statements are left unexpressed in the text but used by the author in his argumentation?

The second step is to identify the type of the author’s propositions. They fall into three categories: propositions of fact (what happened, is happening, or will happen), propositions of value (what is good or bad, right or wrong, effective or ineffective), and propositions of policy (what should or should not be done).

The third step is to identify the appeals the author uses to achieve persuasion of the reading audience. There are three main appeals: to the reason or intellect of the readers. to their emotions, and to their aesthetic feeling. Appeal to people’s reason is based on the rational strength of argumentation. Emotional appeal is based on arousing in the reader or hearer various emotions ranging from a feeling of insecurity to fear, from a sense of sympathy to pity. Aesthetic appeal is based on people’s appreciation of linguistic beauty of the message, its stylistic originality, rich language, sharp humor and wit.

Rational appeal is effective in changing beliefs and motives of the audience because it directly affects human reason where beliefs are formed. Emotional appeal is persuasively effective because it exploits concerns, worries, and desires of people. If you try to raise funding for your campaign for tougher crime laws you may want to remind the readers of their fear to walk alone in the street at night. So you use an emotional appeal to fear. Aesthetic appeal is persuasively effective because, if successful, it changes people’s attitudes to the message and through the message to its author. People will be more willing to accept the author’s arguments after they have experienced the arguer’s giftedness as a writer of the message.

Most students of English or any foreign language, for that matter, usually have comparatively little difficulty studying a text full of action (narration) or portrayals of things and people (description). Having grasped the plot of the text or qualities of things and situations described, they can then can render text in English using its expressions and grammar. The author’s story and images can become the skeleton for the students to coat with flesh of their story. Thus a goal of analytical reading, vocabulary and grammar acquisition, is achieved. However, if the instructor’s goal is to teach his or her students to communicate their ideas alongside with teaching them new lexis and grammar a good start is to have them comprehend, analyze, and render other people’s ideas. This is where an expository or better argumentative text comes in. But the problem is that it may not have narration at all and very little description, but rather more or less abstract ideas and lengthy speculations. How can we help the student in such a case? I believe the answer is that it is the text’s argumentation structure that can become the skeleton for the students to lean on rendering the text.

By way of questions, the instructor leads the students through the text and helps them identify the author’s main claim, other arguments supporting the claim, opposing claim and opposing arguments. What is the main topic the author discusses? What is the authors position on the issue? Who are the author’s opponents? Does the author mention them in the text? If not, can we derive from the text who they could be? What does the author want to say in the first, second, third paragraphs, etc? How does what the author says in the first, second, third paragraphs relate to his main idea? How do the first, second, third paragraph ideas relate to each other? The author’s argumentation structure can then be represented on the board. The latter point is important because while retelling the text, the students can consult the argumentation scheme, which considerably facilitates the students’ work.

Before the students are asked to retell the text however, the instructor explains what kinds of propositions there are and asks the students to identify different propositions of policy, value, and fact. Here are some questions that will lead the students in this work. What does the author call for? According to the author, what is bad or wrong about the existing situation? According to the author, what is bad or wrong about the opponents’ position on the issue? According to the author, what facts point to the rightness of the author’s point of view?

After the students have identified the type of propositions the instructor asks the students to assess the author’s argumentation in terms of appeals. What is the main target of appeal the author aims at in his persuasion? Is it the intellect of the reader? That implies a good logical structure of arguments and their validity. Does the text have good rational argumentation? Are the propositions of fact true or false? Is it the emotions of the readers? This implies that the author uses a lot allusions to fear or pity, a lot of propositions of policy and value. Does the author use them correctly? Is it the aesthetic feeling the readers have? Does the author use stylistic devices to enhance the linguistic beauty of the message? Where and what kinds?

Now the students are ready to retell the text using the language the text contains. The last but not least is a discussion focused on whether the students agree or disagree with the author. The class is divided into two opposing teams which work out a short debate to perform in front of the class. However the latter is a teaching method in itself beyond the scope of the present paper. It will require a separate investigation.