Presenting a macroargument |
“In Valparaíso the issue of street dogs has always been a problem that has affected the community, with attacks, rabies, fleas, ticks and mange being some pathologies brought by poor stray dogs. But we are the real problem, because the city dog is practically a pet rather than a street animal, and if they are wandering the streets and multiplying, it is due to their neglect and abandonment. This is why we are mainly responsible for their future infestation.… In short, the poor Street dog is unaware of what it does unlike human beings, and we are the main problem, not them” (Corpus TA, bas 7). |
An argumentative construction is observed which gives account of a prototypical structure, presenting a thesis, arguments and then a conclusion that reformulates the thesis in order to reinforce it. |
Introducing an argument or piece of information. |
“With regard to the role played by the school in the problem, it is necessary to maintain respect for the decision that the person has made, since ( puesto que ) rejecting their life choice could also be taken as discrimination [...]” (Corpus TA, bas 3). |
An argument or a piece of information is introduced in the form of a hypothetical statement that has an implicit guarantee, which implies that the argumentation maintains its formulation on the hypothetical level regarding what could happen if the proposed thesis were not complied with. |
Accompanyingthe opinion, thesis or conclusion. |
“[...] does not influence this person’s work performance; therefore (por tanto), they should allow her to present herself as a woman, if this makes her feel comfortable”. “There is a real dilemma in the face of the imminent attack of dogs, (...), people lose patience when faced with such acts. As a result ( por consiguiente ), the pressure of the people becomes evident before a government that has precariously responded “(Corpus TA, cast 21). |
In these cases, the connectors allow linking the statements that accompany the thesis, reinforcing it through their guarantee. In the first case, the hypothetically formulated arguments are presented in the form of what should be allowed. In the second case, it is a concrete example of connection between arguments that support a thesis. |
Suggesting the general rule. |
“Nobody can deny ( Nadie puede negar ) the great problem there is not only in Valparaiso, but throughout the country with respect to stray dogs” (Corpus TA, epa 10). |
In the following example the guarantee is made explicit by stating a general rule. However, when analysing the content of the text, it can be pointed out that even when it responds with the wording of a general rule, it is not such and becomes a fallacy. |
Introducing modality or a qualifier. |
“Clearly ( claramente ), people have a right to better welfare” (Corpus TA, cast 29). |
Explicitly, a modalizer or qualifier is presented, which in this case reinforces the idea enunciated and serves as support for the thesis. |
Mentioning the source or authority. |
“A published study showed ( Un estudio publicado exponía ) that seventy percent of the dogs found on the street are abandoned pets. With the registry of responsible ownership, the problem could be addressed in a more meticulous way” (Corpus TA, efi 24). |
In the example it is made explicit that there is a source of authority that allows sustaining the argument through specific support, but it is not made explicit which and it loses its validity. |
Offering a reservation |
“[…] the university should take a more active role as a “trainer of trainers”. Nevertheless ( no obstante ), it is a joint task that allows clarifying issues, knowing and accepting ourselves” (Corpus TA, hist 29). |
In the following example, the connector allows introducing a reservation about the thesis, establishing restrictions that are not specified, because it indicates the responsibility that the university holds without indicating with whom it shares the task. |
Providing a reinforcement for the justification. |
People see the reality of stray dogs as a situation that is harmful to them and to the dogs themselves, and in fact ( y de hecho ), you do not need to be an expert to see that health problems, such as rabies or ringworm, are a reflection of that “(Corpus TA, cast 30). |
In this example, a guarantee is presented as a reinforcement for the thesis that is based on common sense. |
Adding a counterargument. |
But who has a wider worldview? As an initial response it could be the transgender, who it appears shows an acceptance of transgender peers and therefore, the impression that she would accept all sorts. On the contrary ( Por el contrario ), we could say that the people who reject this person in a working capacity have a more backward worldview [...] “(Corpus TA, cast 2). |
Through the connector an opposite argument is introduced in order to give greater strength to the proposed thesis, claiming that those who do not share the thesis are backward. Arguably, the weight of the argument places it among the ad populum arguments. |