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

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

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

Kaynakça

1. 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
2. Aristotle. (2007). On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse (G. A. Kennedy, Ed.). Oxford University Press.
3. 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
4. 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
5. 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
6. 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
7. Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge University Press.
8. 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.

9. 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
10. Ellis, R. (2008). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
11. 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
12. 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
13. 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).
14. 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
15. 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
16. 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
17. Lutzke, J., & Henggeler, M. (2009). The rhetorical triangle: Understanding and using logos, ethos, and pathos. Indiana University Writing Center.
18. 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
19. 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
20. Perelman, C., Olbrechts-Tyteca, L., Wilkinson, J., & Weaver, P. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press.
21. Qin, J. (2013). Applying the Toulmin model in teaching L2 argumentative writing. The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 2, 21–29.
22. 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
23. 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
24. 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
25. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.