Mantık ve Duyguyu Dengelemek: Yabancı Dil Olarak İngilizce Tartışmacı Yazmada İkna Stratejileri Üzerine Derlem Temelli Bir Çalışma

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 67 - 79, 28.12.2025

Ayşe Bethan Güven

Öz

Bu çalışma, B1 seviyesindeki Türk EFL öğrencilerinin argümanatif yazılarında mantıksal ve duygusal ifadeleri nasıl kullandıklarını araştırmaktadır. Aristoteles'in retorik çerçevesinden yararlanarak ve LIWC tabanlı dilbilimsel tanımlayıcılarla desteklenen bu çalışma, TELC metin derlemesinin bir parçası olarak 122 katılımcı tarafından yazılan 244 denemeyi incelemiştir. Akademik (mantıksal) veya duygusal (ahlaki) yanıtları teşvik etmek için iki farklı yazma etkinliği kullanılmıştır. Logos ve pathos örnekleri için manuel kodlama yapılmıştır. Sonuçlar, öğrencilerin Etkinlik 2'de tutarlı bir şekilde daha mantıksal, Etkinlik 3'te ise daha duygusal argümanlar kullandıklarını ortaya koymuştur. Bu durum, tür ve hedef kitleye karşı umut verici bir duyarlılığı yansıtmaktadır. Bulgular, orta seviyedeki öğrenciler bile ikna edici yazma stilini stratejik olarak uyarlayabildiklerini göstermektedir. EFL yazma öğretimi için çıkarımlar arasında, tür bilincine daha fazla vurgu yapılması ve retorik argümanlar konusunda açık eğitim verilmesi yer almaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İngilizce yazma , Retorik ikna unsurları , Derlem temelli çalışma , Logos , Pathos

Etik Beyan

Bu araştırmada anket, mülakat, test veya kayıt gibi yöntemlerle doğrudan insan katılımcılardan veri toplanmamıştır. Araştırmanın verileri, TELC derleminden elde edilen önceden mevcut ve anonimleştirilmiş öğrenci yazılı ürünlerinden oluşmaktadır. Bu nedenle etik kurul onayı gerekmemektedir.

Destekleyen Kurum

Geçerli değildir.

Teşekkür

Yazar, bu çalışmanın hazırlandığı ders sürecindeki rehberliği ve desteği için Doç. Dr. Gonca Subaşı’na, ayrıca değerli tavsiye ve teşvikleri için danışmanı Doç. Dr. Meral Ceylan’a içten teşekkürlerini sunar.

BALANCING LOGIC AND EMOTION: A CORPUS-BASED STUDY OF PERSUASIVE STRATEGIES IN EFL ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING

Öz

This study explores how Turkish EFL learners at the B1 level use logical and emotional appeals in their argumentative writing. Drawing on Aristotle’s rhetorical framework and informed by LIWC-based linguistic descriptors, the study investigated 244 essays written by 122 participants as part of the TELC corpus. Two distinct writing tasks were used to prompt either academic (logical) or emotional (moral) responses. Manual coding was conducted for instances of logos and pathos. The results revealed that students consistently used more logical appeals in Task 2 and more emotional appeals in Task 3, reflecting a promising sensitivity to genre and audience. The findings suggest that even at an intermediate level, learners can strategically adapt their persuasive style. Implications for EFL writing instruction include a stronger emphasis on genre awareness and explicit training in rhetorical appeals.

Anahtar Kelimeler

EFL writing , Rhetorical appeals , Corpus-based study , Logos , Pathos

Etik Beyan

This research did not involve direct data collection from human participants through surveys, interviews, tests, or recordings. The data consist of previously existing and anonymized learner essays from the TELC corpus. Therefore, no ethical approval was required.

Destekleyen Kurum

Not applicable.

Teşekkür

The author would like to express sincere gratitude to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gonca Subaşı for her guidance and support during the course in which this paper was prepared, and to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Meral Ceylan, advisor, for her invaluable advice and encouragement.

Kaynakça

• Ananda, C., Mardiah, R., & Fajaryani, N. (2024). Writing argumentative essays: Jambi EFL students' challenges and strategies. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.21093/ijeltal.v9i2.1722
• Aristotle. (2007). On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse (G. A. Kennedy, Ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Babanoglu, M. (2014). A corpus-based study on the use of pragmatic markers as speech-like features in Turkish EFL learners’ argumentative essays. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, 186–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.312
• Barzani, S., & Mohammadzadeh, B. (2022). Pragmatic competence: An imperative competency for a safe and healthy communication. Applied Nanoscience. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13204-021-02199-3
• Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/I.1.1
• Cangır, H., Uzun, K., Can, T., Oğuz, E., & Kaya, Ö. (2024). The development of an error-tagged learner corpus: TELC (Turkish-English Learner Corpus) and its web-interface. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2, 279–307. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1489654
• Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge University Press.
• Connor, U., & Lauer, J. (1988). Cross-cultural variation in persuasive student writing. In A. C. Purves (Ed.), Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy (pp. 138–159). Ablex.
• El-Dakhs, D., Yahya, N., & Thowaini, B. (2025). Persuading in Arabic and English: A study of EFL argumentative writing in contrast with native English norms. Open Cultural Studies, 9. https://doi.org/10.1515/culture-2025-0056
• Ellis, R. (2008). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
• Ferretti, R., & Graham, S. (2019). Argumentative writing: Theory, assessment, and instruction. Reading and Writing, 32(6), 1345–1357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09950-x
• Hatipoğlu, Ç., & Algı, S. (2018). Catch a tiger by the toe: Modal hedges in EFL argumentative paragraphs. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 18(4), 957–982. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.4.0373
• Kamimura, T., & Oi, K. (1996, March). A cross-cultural analysis of argumentative strategies in student essays. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL).
• Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16(1–2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x
• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
• Liu, D., & Huang, J. (2021). Rhetoric construction of Chinese expository essays: Implications for EFL composition instruction. SAGE Open, 11(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020988518
• Lutzke, J., & Henggeler, M. (2009). The rhetorical triangle: Understanding and using logos, ethos, and pathos. Indiana University Writing Center.
• Mallahi, O. (2024). Exploring the status of argumentative essay writing strategies and problems of Iranian EFL learners. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 9(19). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-023-00241-1
• Mohamad, H. A. (2022). Analysis of rhetorical appeals to logos, ethos and pathos in ENL and ESL research abstracts. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v7i3.1314
• Perelman, C., Olbrechts-Tyteca, L., Wilkinson, J., & Weaver, P. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Qin, J. (2013). Applying the Toulmin model in teaching L2 argumentative writing. The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 2, 21–29.
• Rose, D., & Martin, J. (2014). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy of the Sydney School. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 109–112. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt044
• Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1–4), 209–241. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209
• Uysal, H. H. (2008). Tracing the culture behind writing: Rhetorical patterns and bidirectional transfer in L1 and L2 essays of Turkish writers in relation to educational context. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(3), 183–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.003
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.