Argument Structure in Arabic and English: Re-assessing Purity and Redeeming Hybridity

Faisal Said Al-Maamari

Abstract


This study presents a contrastive rhetorical analysis of 20 argumentative Arabic and English editorials in argument structure. Samples were selected from two daily newspapers with equally wide distribution, and articles were written by their respective native writers. Both graphical and textual analyses captured the argument structure in terms of macro and micro arguments. A core finding is that the argument structure in the sampled editorials did not conform to the current predominant model of argument structure, which tended to polarize argument structure in terms of through or counter argumentation. The study contributes to the existing literature by defying the polarized traditional purity typology of argument structure frequently cited in the literature, and emphasizes a more dynamic hybrid model to understanding and analyzing arguments in general and in Arabic and English specifically. Additionally, the study of the professional genre of editorails has implications for academic writing and second language writing pedagogy by sensitizing foreign language learners to existing models of argument structure and possible ways to structure their arguments in the target language.

 


Keywords


Arabic, argument structure, contrastive rhetoric, editorials, English, newspaper genres

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abbadi, R. (2014). The construction of arguments in English and Arabic: A comparison of the linguistic strategies employed in editorials. Argumentum, 10, 724-746.

Bell, A. (1991). The language of news media. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Nativization of job application-a microethnographic study. Paper presented at the International Conference in English in South Asia, Islamabad, Pakistan, 4-8 January, 1989.

Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dantas-Whitney, M. and Grabe, W. (1989). English and Brazilian Portuguese editorial prose. Paper presented at the 24th Annual TESOL Convention, San Antonio, TX, April, 1989.

de Beaugrande, R. (1980). Text, discourse and process: Toward a multidisciplinary science of texts. Narwood, NJ: Ablex.

de Beaugrande, R. & Dressler, W. (1981). Introduction to textlinguistics. London: Longman.

Drid, T. (2014). Exploring the use of Through-argumentation and counter-argumentation in Arabic speaking EFL learners’ argumentative essays. Arab World English Journal, 5(4), 336-352.

Flowerdew, J. (1993). An educational, or process, approach to the teaching of professional genres. ELT Journal, 47, 305-316.

Grabe, W. (1987). Contrastive rhetoric and text type research. In U. Connor and R. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages, 115-137. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Grabe, W. and Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory and practice of writing. Pearson Education: Longman.

Hatim, B. (1991). The pragmatics of argumentation in Arabic: The rise and fall of a text type. Text ,11, 189-199.

Hatim, B. (1997). Communication across cultures: Translation theory and contrastive text linguistics. Reed Hall: University of Exeter Press.

Hatim, B. and Mason, I (1997). The translator as communicator. London & New York: Routledge.

Hoey, M. (1983). On the surface of discourse. London: George Allen and Unwin.

Hoey, M. (1994). Signaling in discourse: A functional analysis of a common discourse pattern in written and spoken English. In M. Coulthard (ed.) Advances in written text analysis, 26-45. London: Routledge.

Jenkins, S. and Hinds, J. (1987). Business letter writing: English, French and Japanese. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 327-349.

Leki, I. (1991). Twenty-five years of contrastive rhetoric: Text analysis and writing pedagogies. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 515-534.

Malah, Z., Tan, H. & Rashid, S. M. (2016). Evaluating lexical cohesion in Nigerian newspaper genres: Focus on the editorials. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English literature, 6(1), 240-256.

Raimes, A. (1983). Tradition and revolution in ESL teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 535-552.

Ten, G. S. (1986). An applied discourse analysis of sales promotion letters. MA thesis submitted to the National University of Singapore, Singapore.

Toulmin, S. (1969). The uses of argument. London: Cambridge University Press.

Trikkonen-Condit, S. and Liflander-Koistinen, L. (1989). Argumentation in Finnish versus English and German editorials. In M Kusch and H. Schroder. Text-interpretation-argumentation, 173-181. Hamburg: Germany: Helmut Buske Verlage.

Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 165-187.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.4p.104

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2021 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.