argumentation

The learners’ ability to write a well-organized argumentative essay has gained prominence within the last decades. The multiple intelligences play a significant role in enhancing the precision of both language and thought during the writing process. The current study aimed at investigating the possible relationship between linguistic and logical intelligences and the frequency of informal fallacies and evidence types in Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative essays. To the end, a total of 110 upper-intermediate EFL learners were asked to respond to the relevant items of Multiple Intelligences Developmental Assessment Scale (MIDAS) and to write an argumentative essay. The informal fallacies and four categories of evidence were identified using two models of argumentation. Among several categories of informal fallacies and evidence, only statistical evidence was absent in argumentative essays. The results of Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient revealed a significant relationship between the participants’ linguistic and logical intelligences and the frequency of informal fallacies and evidence types in their argumentation. However, no significant difference was found between male and female EFL learners in terms of the frequency of informal fallacies and evidence types in their argumentative essays. The findings contribute to enhancing the efficiency of writing materials and courses by considering the learners’ individual differences.

The work of architecture is believed to depend on the governing thought in the process of architectural designing. This thought can be analyzed, developed, experienced, and interpreted. Creativity is the only domineering force in the idea of designing which is in quest for freeing architecture from the routine methods, and also finding the novel systems to answer the questions in architecture. Therefore, a special fixed and stable place is considered for creativity. However, the background and history of research and clash of ideas in recent years explains for the change in reconsidering the general ideas, and interpretations on creativity in the process of designing. Today, the approach that considers the process of designing an outcome of responding to the demand on creativity in architecture through logical and analytic methods is no longer credited. Instead, the process of designing is considered in a creative and intuitive way which is metaphysical rather than argumentative. This change in attitude and the relevant interpretations have introduced clear evidence; however, there remain many questions involving the identity and quality of the creative occurrences in the process of designing. Therefore, the intuitive approaches and interpretations about creativity have been so over generalized and complicated that have left a lot of obscurities behind. This article is an attempt to respond to some of these questions by identifying the ways the intuitive creativity occurs and also to present a descriptive stream in the emergence of creativity which means creating ideas only happen according to intuition.

As a dominant genre of academic writing, research papers can be considered as the locus of reproduction concerning asymmetrical power relations and dominance. Through a purposive sampling consisting of the analysis and evaluation of an argument, the purpose of this study was to divulge the power and ideology latent in the discussion section of the research articles to raise second language learners’ awareness of the epistemological foundations and methodological goals and values of the ideologies behind the texts as social structures. By using a practical reasoning framework as an evaluative tool to analyze a text presented in the discussion part of arguments published in research articles, the analysis revealed that the scientific viewpoints exhibit themselves as the premises of these arguments. These world views maintain the dominance of the papers on global academic and social discourses. Understanding the ideological purpose of the article genre is crucial for promoting democratic and equitable education. This assertion highlights the importance of recognizing this function.

Toulmin's (1958) model of argumentation and Abdi et al.'s (2010) model of metadiscourse, mapped onto Grice's (1975) Cooperative Principle, are both attempts to elaborate on the process and contribute to the goal of obtaining persuasion. This study is an attempt to integrate the use of metadiscursive and argument strategies to provide a common logical rationale for their employment. Through a qualitative investigation of 40 ELT research articles (RAs), we propose a convergent framework for employing CP-based metadiscourse and argumentation model in RA arguments. As a result, endophoric markers were identified to be used as warrants to meet quantity, while transitions, frame markers, and code glosses were found to be employed as conclusions and data to fulfill manner. Furthermore, evidentials were found to be employed in conclusion, backing, and warrant; hedges were seen to be used as qualifiers; and finally, disclaimers were recognized to be employed in rebuttals; to meet quality. The findings reveal that argumentations are built metadiscursively which has implications for writers and educators. For writers, it could help to develop a deeper understanding of the positive role of metadiscursive strategies in RA arguments and as such could guide a more efficient employment of it to facilitate persuasion. For educators, the findings could provide a model for building and ensuring basic logical and rhetorical characteristics of an argument in academic writing.