Principles for selecting argumentative sentences - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 10
About This Presentation
Title:

Principles for selecting argumentative sentences

Description:

Principles for selecting argumentative sentences – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:36
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 11
Provided by: jerryand
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Principles for selecting argumentative sentences


1
Principles for selecting argumentative sentences
  • Jerry Andriessen
  • Educational Sciences, Utrecht University
  • Pierre Coirier
  • Language Communication Lab., Un. Of Poitiers

2
Difficulties of argumentative text production
  • Ill-defined and ill-structured knowledge
    (opinions judgements)
  • Linearization of complex cognitive plans
  • Referential planning
  • Strategies

3
The alpha-omega paradigm
  • Write a text
  • starting with (alpha) A city is a pleasant place
    to live in.....
  • ending with (omega) A village is a pleasant
    place to live in.

4
Specific characteristics
  • Conflicting but not mutually exclusive claims
  • No  idea generation  process choose 6
    arguments among a pool of 24
  • Available arguments strictly controlled
  • 6 alpha (theme A city), argumentative
    orientation in favour of city
  • 6 alpha - (theme A city), argumentative
    orientation against city
  • 6 omega (theme ? village), argumentative
    orientation in favour of villlage)
  • 6 omega - (theme ? village), argumentative
    orientation against village

5
Global requirements
  • 1. Recognizing the existence of a conflict
    between two positions A and ?
  • (Stein Miller, 1993 van Eemeren
    Grootendorst, 1984).
  • Then ? ( or -) and A ( or -)
  • 2. Taking a claim ? is superior to A
  • (Stein Miller, 1993 van Eemeren
    Grootendorst, 1984 Oostdam, 1990 Golder
    Coirier, 1994)
  • Then Pro-? ( ? ?-) gt pro-A (? ?-)
  • 3. Supporting the claim (claim backing)
  • (Adam, 1992 Antaki Leudar, 1990, 1992
    Apotheloz Mieville, 1989 Coirier Golder,
    1993 Grize, 1982 Van Eemeren, De Glopper,
    Grootendorst Oostdam, 1994 Stein and Miller,
    1990).
  • Then ? (and ?-)
  • 4. Assigning a minimal value to the opposite
    claim
  • (Grize, 1982 Brassart, 1987 Stein Miller,
    1993).
  • Then ? (and ?-)
  • 5. Restrictions to both opposing claims Z, but
    z-, and A, but a-
  • (Marchand, 1993).
  • Then (?-) (?)

6
Then ? gt ?- gt ?gt ?-
  • 578 protocols
  • Alpha 10.7
  • Alpha - 25.5
  • Omega 52.4
  • Omega - 11.4

7
Local requirements
  • 1. To ensure argumentative coherence into the
    textual sequence
  • co-orientation ? coordination ( and  or
    equivalents) a and a a and z- z and z z-
    and a
  • anti-orientation ? opposition or concession (but,
    even if, ...) a but a- z even if z- a but
    z etc
  • 2. To ensure thematic continuity
  • If starting with alpha, then maintain theme A A
    ? a ( or -), a ( or -) , a.( or -)...
  • If ending with omega, then develop theme ? ? ?
    ? ( or -), ? ( or -) , ?.( or -)...

8
Complying to both global and local requirements
  • ALPHA
  • /because/ ?, ?...
  • /but/ ?-, ?-... /moreover/ ?, ?...
  • /then/ /even if/ ?-, ?-...
  • /however/ ?, ?...
  • /so/
  • OMEGA

9
Complying to both global and local requirements
  • Expert argumentative text at the level of
    conceptualization if
  • Recognizing the validity of both claims
  • Counter-argumentation
  • Main problem in argumentative text writing
  • Dealing simultaneously with conceptual content
    and textual general
  • constraints
  • Solution
  • Helping (not imposing!) to take into account the
    opposite claim
  • Clear separation between the conceptualizing and
    the linearizing processes

10
Assignments
It is difficult to manage simultaneously
thematization and argumentative
orientation The best conditions for doing that
are proposing from the beginning the two
opposite claims a strategic separation between
conceptualization and linearization
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com