Argumentative geometry of the Chinese eight-part essay.
- Authors: FENG Y.1
-
Affiliations:
- Issue: No 4 (2024)
- Pages: 142-151
- Section: Articles
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/2454-0749/article/view/370336
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0749.2024.4.70438
- EDN: https://elibrary.ru/QCUTPT
- ID: 370336
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
The subject of the study is the linguistic and cultural features of the Chinese argumentation tradition. The object of the study is the elements of the logical structure of reasoning. The author examines such aspects of the topic as the differences between Eastern and Western models of argumentation and the prerequisites for the formation of the Chinese style of argumentation. Definitions of argumentation and related terms included in the range of concepts of argumentative discourse are given. In the aspect of this problem, the question of the relationship between the functional and semantic type of reasoning and argumentation is also highlighted. The author believes that argumentation is a more detailed development of reasoning based on ways of presenting facts, quotations, appealing to authority, emotions, expert opinion, and laws. In the social contexts of polemics, public discussions, Essenes, and science, the ability to argue is understood as an art. The author also notes that argumentation is a mental and predominantly verbal activity. Special attention is paid to the structure of classical Chinese literary argumentation. For analysis, the author turns to the scientific metaphor "geometry of argumentation". This facet of argumentation is a methodology for reconstructing argumentative discourse. According to this, a reconstruction method based on the identification of argumentation schemes is used. Argumentation schemes are generalized models of how an argument relates to a conclusion or thesis. The main conclusion of the work is that the structure of argumentation in the Chinese text differs from that in the generally accepted model of argumentation of the Western type. To substantiate this conclusion, the author considers S. Tulmin's model, which consists of six elements, believing that the elements of the model can be distinguished in the representative texts of the argumentation. Therefore, the essay can be considered as an explication of argumentation schemes. After that, the author proceeds to analyze the structure of the argumentation in the text of the "Essay on Eight Legs" (八股文), which consists of eight elements. The intermediate conclusion of the work is information about the positive and negative prescriptive aspects of using the eight-part essay scheme in an educational and professional context and in the context of application in less institutional discourses.
References
Баребина Н. С., Фан Ч. К вопросу о лингвокультурных особенностях восточной модели аргументации в политической экологии // Филология: научные исследования. 2023. №10. С. 15–27. Борзова Е. П. Восток и Запад: сравнительный анализ культур // ТРУДЫ СПБГИК. 2010. vol. 190. С. 282–311. Бузальская Е. В. Эссе: к истории становления жанра // Мир русского слова. 2015. № 2. С. 36–41. Вендина Т. И. Введение в языкознание: учебник для академического бакалавриата. Люберцы: Юрайт, 2020. 333 с. Крушинский А. А. Логика «И Цзина» // Дедукция в древнем Китае. М.: Издат. фирма «Вост. лит.» РАН, 1999. 173 с. Лисанюк Е. Н. Логико-когнитивная теория аргументации: автореф. дисс. … докт. филос. наук: 09.00.07. / Е. Н. Лисанюк. Москва, 2016. 50 с. Мадалимов Т. А. Основные черты логики древнего Востока // “Science and Education” Scientific Journal. 2020. Volume 1. Issue 4. P. 236–241. Ту Цзин-и. Экзаменационное эссе по китайскому языку: некторые литературные соображения // Monomenta Serica. 1974. 31 (1): 393-406. URL:10.1080/02549948.1974.11731106. 孔子。论语。江西:江西人民出版社. Конфуций. Цзянси: Народное издательство Цзянси. 2016. 725 с. Defoort C. Argumentation and Persuasion in Ancient Chinese Texts –Introduction // Oriens Extremus. 2005. Vol. 45. P. 91–98. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/24047642 (accessed 30.04.2024). Elman B. A. Civil Examinations and Meritocracy in Late Imperial China. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 2013. 416 p. Garrett M. M. Language and Logic in China: A Guide for Argumentation Scholars // OSSA Conference Archive. 2001. URL: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive (accessed 30.04.2024). Gentz J. Defining Boundaries and Relations of Textual Units: Examples from the Literary Tool-Kit of Early Chinese Argumentation // Literary Forms of Argument in Early China; J. Gentz, D. Meyer (eds.). Sinica Leidensia. 2015. Volume: 123 P. 112–157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004299702_006 Plaks A. H. Beyond Parallelism: A Rethinking of Patterns of Coordination and Subordination in Chinese Expository Prose // Literary Forms of Argument in Early China; J. Gentz, D. Meyer (eds.). Sinica Leidensia, Volume: 123 P. 67–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004299702_004 Reu W. D. A Ragbag of Odds and Ends? Argument Structure and Philosophical Coherence in Zhuangzi 26 // Literary Forms of Argument in Early China; J. Gentz, D. Meyer (eds.). Sinica Leidensia. 2015. Volume: 123 P. 243–296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004299702_010 Toulmin S. E. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press. 2003. 262 p. Wagner R. G. A Building Block of Chinese Argumentation: Initial Fu 夫 as a Phrase Status Marker // Literary Forms of Argument in Early China / J. Gentz, D. Meyer (eds.). Sinica Leidensia. 2015. Volume: 123 P. 37–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004299702_003 Willman M. D. Logic and Language in Early Chinese Philosophy // The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy / E. N. Zalta, U. Nodelman (Eds.). Stanford University. 2022. URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/chinese-logiclanguage/ (дата обращения: 27.03.2024).
Supplementary files

