Page 320 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 320
What Do We Know about the World?
which remained inert in the beginning of their writing efforts, since a
significant increase to the text-length was noticed (Texts B and C).
But, according to the classical teachings of Quintilian, imitation
isn’t a panacea. Despite the more persuasive character of the produced
texts, its practice didn’t influence either the production of arguments
based on the topic of comparison or the use of metaphors. More precise-
ly, students showed weakness, especially in the final text (Text C), in the
invention of arguments based on the sub-topic of difference. Their lim-
ited use may be ascribed to the subtle differentiation among the topics
of difference and of antithesis as well as to the acknowledgement of the
difficulty of their settling (Corbett and Connors, 1999: 97, 105). Final-
ly, as regards the limited use of metaphors and the relative underdevel-
oped sub-topic of similarity, it may be related to the need for more in-
teractive activities and students’ joint participation in classroom (Cam-
eron, 1996).
7. Conclusion
To conclude, the statistical results of the research showed that imi-
tation should still serve as a useful method of teaching and learning in
the field of writing and the acquisition of literacy (Murphy, 1990; Men-
delson, 2001: 289). Its practice in a Greek primary school seemed to help
the students who lack skills in argumentative writing. More specifically,
the students improved the form, the style and the content of their texts
by releasing latent abilities even from the beginning of their efforts (Gor-
rell, 1987: 53; Butler, 2002: 26). The successful imitation of the argumen-
tative topics concerning cause and effect, antecedent and consequent,
antithesis, and rhetorical questions led to a variety of results. In particu-
lar, students were helped towards the production of more elaborated
texts, the development of argumentative genre awareness and the con-
struction of a solid basis upon which they placed the social artefact of
argumentation. However, imitation doesn’t exclude the practice of more
interactive argumentative activities in the classroom. On the contrary,
such activities in combination with imitation, may extend the acquired
argumentative “textual basis” facilitating students “to understand what
they are doing more deeply, more purposefully and more rhetorically”
(Devitt, 2004: 202).
References
Aristotle (1995). Rhetoric, Vol. 1, Athens: Kaktos.
which remained inert in the beginning of their writing efforts, since a
significant increase to the text-length was noticed (Texts B and C).
But, according to the classical teachings of Quintilian, imitation
isn’t a panacea. Despite the more persuasive character of the produced
texts, its practice didn’t influence either the production of arguments
based on the topic of comparison or the use of metaphors. More precise-
ly, students showed weakness, especially in the final text (Text C), in the
invention of arguments based on the sub-topic of difference. Their lim-
ited use may be ascribed to the subtle differentiation among the topics
of difference and of antithesis as well as to the acknowledgement of the
difficulty of their settling (Corbett and Connors, 1999: 97, 105). Final-
ly, as regards the limited use of metaphors and the relative underdevel-
oped sub-topic of similarity, it may be related to the need for more in-
teractive activities and students’ joint participation in classroom (Cam-
eron, 1996).
7. Conclusion
To conclude, the statistical results of the research showed that imi-
tation should still serve as a useful method of teaching and learning in
the field of writing and the acquisition of literacy (Murphy, 1990; Men-
delson, 2001: 289). Its practice in a Greek primary school seemed to help
the students who lack skills in argumentative writing. More specifically,
the students improved the form, the style and the content of their texts
by releasing latent abilities even from the beginning of their efforts (Gor-
rell, 1987: 53; Butler, 2002: 26). The successful imitation of the argumen-
tative topics concerning cause and effect, antecedent and consequent,
antithesis, and rhetorical questions led to a variety of results. In particu-
lar, students were helped towards the production of more elaborated
texts, the development of argumentative genre awareness and the con-
struction of a solid basis upon which they placed the social artefact of
argumentation. However, imitation doesn’t exclude the practice of more
interactive argumentative activities in the classroom. On the contrary,
such activities in combination with imitation, may extend the acquired
argumentative “textual basis” facilitating students “to understand what
they are doing more deeply, more purposefully and more rhetorically”
(Devitt, 2004: 202).
References
Aristotle (1995). Rhetoric, Vol. 1, Athens: Kaktos.
