Hanh Nguyen

Le Thi Hanh Nguyen - 2013520018

Vu Thi Diem Phuc

TAN213E(GD1-HK2-2122)JIB.1

THE ARGUMENT CULTURE - SUMMARY & RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

 Author: Deborah Tannen 

 A linguistics professor at Georgetown University

 Best-selling author of books related to discourse and gender

 Focus on gender discrepancy regarding conversational habits and assumptions

 Summary: Main points

 Noble traditions: Balance, debate and listening to both sides have been distorted,

resulting in argument culture. - MAIN ISSUE

 (False) assumptions: opposition is the best way to get anything done. One of the

great strengths of our society is that we can express these conflicts openly, but we

have to find constructive ways of resolving disputes and differences.

 Nearly everything is framed as a battle or a game in which winning or losing is the

main concern. (Eg: Headlines of newspaper)

 Sometimes it is necessary and right to fight (defend the country or argue for your

rights or against offensive or dangerous ideas or actions) 

 Power of words in shaping perception

 More and more of our communication is online, and not with people we know. The

proliferation and increasing portability of technology isolates people.

 Hanh Nguyen

 The argument culture has a defining impact on our lives and on our culture. It

makes us distort facts; Makes us waste valuable time; Limits our thinking;

Encourages us to lie.

 How to overcome the habit of seeing issues in absolutes - RECOMMENDATION

1. Expand the notion of debate to include more dialogue, think about subjects

in its own terms, rather than as opposites.

2. Public arena: TV and radio can try to avoid structuring public discussions

as debates; Re-examine the assumption that audiences always prefer a

fight.

3. Insist on hearing “all sides”.

4. Use imaginations and ingenuity to change argument culture into dialogue

culture.

 Rhetorical analysis:  

Logos: States her view towards the issue with 5 clear points, each point is supported with

smaller claims, evidence, assumptions and examples.

 Situation: To understand what motivated Deborah Tannen to write, we need look

no further than the situation she identifies in the first paragraph of the second

paragraph: “The argument culture urges us to approach the world, and the people

in it, in an adversarial frame of mind. It rests on the assumption that opposition is

the best way to get anything done”. Tannen wants to make sure her readers are

aware of the problem so that they will be motivated to read her argument and take

action. For Tannen, this situation needs to change. 

 Hanh Nguyen

  Purpose: To a large extent, Deborah Tannen as a linguistic professor wants to

reflect the irritating habits of Americans which is solving things with opposition

and seeing issues in absolutes, therefore put forward some recommendations to

get rid of this adversarial mindset.

 Claims:

 The situation of argument culture pervades everywhere in every aspect of our

lives today.

Evidence: In daily conversation, public interaction, in public media such as

newspaper or TV shows and especially in the mindset of almost every

American, in their ways of viewing issues and viewing the world.

 One of the reasons for the this is the bizarre phenomenon of Holocaust denial.

 The argument culture is exacerbated by high-tech communication. 

                  Evidence: TV, E-mail and Internet.

 The argument culture has a defining impact on our lives and on our culture. 

4 reasons:  It makes us distort facts; Makes us waste valuable time; Limits our

thinking; Encourages us to lie.

 Some recommendations 

 Audience:

 People work in media fields such as TV show producers, journalists: The

author clearly states that television shows or newspapers such as … have been

the most transparent evidence showing that argument culture is becoming

ubiquitous since … (trích). Besides, she also put forward suggestions aiming

to public area that … (trích) 

 Hanh Nguyen

 Society

RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

Solving things with opposition and seeing issues in absolutes are becoming an irritating habit of

Americans in every aspect of life. This is the focus of Deborah Tannen’s article “The argument

culture” published in The Prentice Hall Guide for College Writers by Stephen Reid in 2014.

With the main audience being the social in general, her goal is to portray the phenomenon among

the Americans which is addressing problems with arguing, figure out some outstanding motives,

show us its disadvantages and to offer some suggestions for overcoming this adversarial

perspective.

One of the main rhetorical elements Tannen uses in her argument is the way she states her view

towards the issue with 5 clear points. At the very beginning, she begins with strong statements in

order to emphasize the main issue “Balance. Debate. Listening to both sides. Yet today, these

principles have been distorted. Without thinking, we have plunged headfirst into what I call the

"argument culture." After that, she exposes a commonplace false assumption that has become a

mindset of American society: “Opposition is the best way to get anything done. One of the great

strengths of our society is that we can express these conflicts openly, but we have to find

constructive ways of resolving disputes and differences.” To support her opinion, she presents

several pieces of evidence that the argument culture appears everywhere in our lives, from public

interactions, personal relationship to the media and even social issues “Nearly everything is

framed as a battle or a game in which winning or losing is the main concern.” By providing facts

and examples, Tannen shows how her conclusion can be true, and therefore giving more

credibility to her argument.  

 Hanh Nguyen

However, the author does not completely deny the positive side of arguing but does claim that

sometimes it is necessary and right to fight, for example to defend the country or argue for your

rights or against offensive or dangerous ideas or actions. But that is not the point here because

according to Tannen, “the ubiquity, the kneejerk nature, of approaching any issue, problem or

public person in an adversarial way” of the argument culture is the thing that matters in this

article. In the next part, the author draws the attention of the audience to the bizarre phenomenon

of Holocaust denial, one of the reasons accounting for argument culture, with the case of Deniers

that “have been successful in gaining TV airtime and campus newspaper coverage masquerading

as "the other side" in a "debate”. Besides, the power of words in shaping perception is also taken

into consideration. Nevertheless, regarding the “smashed” and “bumped” 

example, personally, I do not see it as supportive evidence since it does not effectively connect

with the main claim of the part which is “Sometimes you have to fight” as well as not really link

to the previous paragraph whose topic is methodology of Holocaust denial.

Another related factor is put forward is high-tech communication. The author did great in 

starts a claim by making a personal connection with the audience and then transitions to a more

direct confrontation with his audience with her own story: “My father-in-law startles phone

solicitors by saying, "We're eating dinner, but I’ll call you back. What's your home phone

number?”, and then she supports the idea by showing how the proliferation and increasing

portability of technology tools such as TV, E-mail or Internet isolates people. 

 Hanh Nguyen

The impacts, which are all negative, of the argument culture are also illustrated with clear bullet

points, making it easier for the audience to keep track. Each small claim is followed with

effective evidence so that readers can vividly understand the harmful effects of this habit. And

eventually, Tannen ends her argument by suggesting some recommendations that broadly covers

every subject, from individual to public arena to society in general. The last sentence is a call-to-

action one “It's an effort we have to make, because our public and private lives are at stake”,

which creates a strong tone, encourage audience to change themselves for a better society.

With a logos appeal, Tannen effectively indicates her view towards the issue with 5 clear points,

each point is fully supported with smaller claims, evidence, assumptions and examples. Although

there are times the examples and the evidence do not associate with the main thesis as well as

link to each other, the smaller claims do not effectively back up for the idea the author wants to

convey, the article generally has been successful in shedding light on the audience about the

negative impacts of argument culture and put forward some recommendations to get rid of this

adversarial mindset.