Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


APLANG CH 7 Presentation

No description

Kaylee Coel

on 9 November 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of APLANG CH 7 Presentation

By Kaylee C, Madison P, Noor S, and Rebecca K. The Classical Oration The Structure of an argument that was
devised by Greek and Roman rhetoricians
2000 years ago for presenting cases in
courts or making speeches to a senate. 1. Introduction
2. Background
3. Lines of Argument
4. Alternative Arguments
5. Conclusion Not every piece follows the
structures of the oration and
all its components but you will
be likely to identify some of
the elements in successful
arguments. Structuring Arguments The oration has a sequence in 6 parts: 1. Exordium
2. Narratio
3. Partitio
4. Conformatio
5. Refutatio
6.Peroratio 5-part updated version of the classical pattern: The audience wants to know what the subject is, how it will be covered and the evidence that will be given. Begin with ethos and conclude with enough pathos to win the audience over Rogerian
Argument Inductive Reasoning:
the process of generalizing
on the basis of a number
of specific examples. Deductive Reasoning:
reaches a conclusion by
assuming a general principle
(called major premise) and
then applying that principle
to a specific case (minor premise). Syllogism:
A deductive chain of
reason Enthymeme:
A shortened version of syllogisms. Must have willingness to think about opposing positions and describe them fairly.
Acknowledge that alternatives to your claims exist and they would be reasonable under certain circumstances.
Willing to search for a compromise.
Moves toward understanding and cooperation. Rhetorical Structure: Introduction
Writer's position
Benefits to opponent Structure arguments to learn opposing positions well enough that you are able to state the viewpoints of opponents fairly in your own work. •People involved in disputes should
not respond to each other until they understand their opponent’s arguments
well enough to state the opponent’s
position fully, fairly, and
sympathetically. Tone of Rogerian Argument: Steer clear of stereotypes
Emphasize how all parties will gain from working together ACTIVITY!!! example: Toulmin Argument Steps to making a Toulmin Argument: 1. Make a claim.
-a claim is a controversial or debatable subject.
-a question is not a claim but is used to come up with a claim. 2. Support the claim with reasons.
- it could be personal experiences, anecdotes, facts, or authorities 3. Add a warrant.
-A warrant is the connection between
the claim and the evidence 4. Qualify the Claim.
-. Qualifiers are words or phrases such as it seems, rarely, sometimes, in general, or often
-Makes the argument more reasonable and easier to accept as the truth 5. Add more evidence/backing.
-Can use appeals to logos, pathos, and ethos to create a supported argument 6. Rebuttal and Response
-Give the opposing view point to the statement, but remember to stick with the side of the argument that was originally chosen and show why the opposing side can be seen as incorrect Qualify the claim and create a rebuttal. Texting while driving is dangerous. Qualify: Texting someone while driving can be dangerous. Rebuttal: Texting while stopped is okay because people do not have to look up while they are stopped.
Full transcript