D0478 - ESERCITAZIONI DI FRENCH LINGUISTICS 1 (LM)

Course contents

I. The Different Forms of Argumentative Discourse1. Direct and Indirect Argumentation

Definition, enunciative situation, means and textual typology: pamphlet, open letter, speech, plea, prosecution speech, essay, apologue, fable, fairy tale, philosophical tale, utopia, dystopia, correspondence and epistolary writing, advertising, tourist guide, review and criticism.

Objectives: to convince and to persuade.

II. The Structure of Argumentation1. Topic, Thesis, Argument and Example2. Types of Arguments

Logical and pragmatic arguments, argument based on numbers, value-based argument, argument from authority, ad hominem argument.

3. Types of Reasoning

Inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning and syllogistic reasoning, analogical reasoning, reasoning through refutation, a fortiori reasoning, reductio ad absurdum, slippery-slope reasoning, concessive reasoning and dialectical reasoning.

4. The Role of Discourse Markers

Which discourse markers can be used to:

• begin an argument;

• add an argument or an example;

• present an alternative;

• compare;

• reformulate;

• illustrate;

• explain or justify by expressing cause;

• refute by expressing opposition;

• concede;

• formulate a hypothesis;

• express a purpose;

• express a consequence;

• conclude?

III. The Means of Argumentation: Expressing Involvement and Engaging the Addressee1. The Speaker’s Subjectivity and the Role of Modal Markers

Verbs and verbal phrases, prepositions and prepositional phrases, adverbs, adjectives, verbal moods and punctuation.

2. Engaging the Addressee

Direct address, rhetorical questions, implicit meaning and shared understanding, irony, and the choice of examples, particularly examples that are close to the addressee from a temporal, geographical or identity-related perspective.

3. Convincing, Persuading and Deliberatinga. Convincing

To convince means appealing to the addressee’s reason through argumentative reasoning: logical and pragmatic arguments, arguments based on numbers, examples involving figures, historical facts and statistics, and the frequent use of discourse markers.

b. Persuading

To persuade means appealing to the addressee’s emotions through arguments intended to elicit feelings and emotional reactions, including value-based arguments, arguments from authority and ad hominem arguments; examples intended to move the audience; the frequent use of modal markers; the choice of tone, such as pathetic, lyrical or comic; emphatic punctuation; and emotional intonation.

c. Deliberating

To deliberate means weighing the arguments for and against a position in order to reach a decision. This may take place through dialogue. When no solution is satisfactory, the situation is described as a dilemma. Deliberation involves concessive and dialectical reasoning, interrogative sentences and modal markers expressing uncertainty.

4. Rhetorical Genres and the Tone of Argumentation

Satirical, pathetic, polemical, epideictic, including captatio benevolentiae, judicial, including the enthymeme, and deliberative.

IV. Writing an Argumentative Text and Artificial Intelligence: Towards a Responsible and Critical Use of AI and ChatGPT1. Identifying Differences Between AI-Generated and Human-Written Texts

Students will identify the differences between texts generated by AI and texts written by human authors in response to the same instructions, reformulated as prompts.

This comparison will make it possible to analyse the characteristics of each type of production, identify the strengths of AI, including speed, organisation and reformulation, and examine its limitations, including insufficient contextualisation, lack of personal creativity and lived experience, and the risk of errors or bias.

2. Developing a Responsible and Critical Use of AI

Students will develop a responsible and critical approach to the advantages and limitations of AI systems in writing.

Although such systems can be used as writing-support tools, they can never replace verification, human oversight and the writer’s personal appropriation of the text.

Readings/Bibliography

Holleville, Stéphanie, Débattre en FLE (Français langue étrangère). Toutes les clés pour argumenter et exprimer son opinion en français avec précision et efficacité. B1-C2, Paris, ed. Ellipses, 2021.

Assessment methods

Final written examination (summer, autumn and winter examination sessions): students will be required to produce a written text following the argumentative strategy of a text or document provided as an attachment during the examination. Time allowed: 3 hours.

During the final written examination, students may not use any printed or digital resources.

Teaching tools

Virtuale

Office hours

See the website of Valeria Zotti