They Say, I SayThe Moves that Matter in Academic Writing

Ch. 4-6

This is the beginning of “I Say,” whereas Ch. 1-3 were focused on “They Say.”

Our authors note that “Moving to the ‘I Say’ stage can be daunting in academia, where it often may seem that you need to be an expert in a field to have an argument at all” (55).

The truth is that you need “to realize… that good arguments are based not on knowledge that only a special class of experts has access to, but on everyday habits of mind that can be isolated, identified, and used by almost anyone” (55-6).

Ch. 4: “Yes/No/Okay, But”Three Ways to Respond

Though one may not always be an expert, successful arguments are built on “basic rhetorical patterns that most of us use on a daily basis” (56).

We are going to look at the 3 most common ways to respond.

You can respond…

3 categories of responses seems odd

Remember your readers attention, this is why you may find that keeping it simple in approach can be useful

The authors point out that “It is always a good tactic to begin your response not by launching directly into a mass of details but by stating clearly whether you agree, disagree, or both, using a direct, no-nonsense formula” (57).

Say things like: “I agree,” “I disagree,” or “I am of two minds. I agree that , but I cannot agree that .” (57)

After using one of these responses, you can move towards the complications of your argument – now that you have your audience’s firm attention

Only Three Ways to Respond?

Seems like a simpler move than most Often associated with critical thinking:

Questioning, which can be the easiest way to start off an essay

There are hidden challenges “You need to do more than simply assert that you

disagree with a particular view” (58). “you also have to offer persuasive reasons why you

disagree” (58).

Disagree – And Explain Why

Example from the text“Although they say women’s rights are improving, I

say women’s rights are not improving.” This response simply contradicts the view its disagreeing

with and “fails to add anything interesting and new” (59).

The argument above is not an argument, for it to be one you need to be support what you have to say (59).

You need to show that you are adding something to the argument, “you need to demonstrate that you have something to contribute” (59).

More than simply saying “Not”

This method uses the idea that “you disagree not with the position of itself but with the assumption that it is a new or stunning revelation” (59).

ExampleAccording to a recent report by some researchers at Stanford University, high school students with college aspirations “often lack crucial information on applying to college and on succeeding academically once they get there.” Well, duh… It shouldn’t take a Stanford research team to tell us that when it comes to “succeeding academically,” many students don’t have a clue.- Gerald Graff, “Trickle-Down Obfuscation”

Using the “duh” method

X is mistaken because she overlooks recent fossil discoveries in the South.

X’s claim that rests upon the questionable assumption that .

I disagree with X’s view that because, as recent research has shown, .

X contradicts herself/can’t have it both ways. On the one hand, she argues . On the other hand, she also says .

By focusing on , X overlooks the deeper problems of .

Templates for Disagreeing, With Reasons

This is called the “twist it” move. This is where “you agree with the evidence that someone else has presented but show through a twist of logic that this evidence actually supports your own, contrary position” (60).

Disagreeing with a “twist”

“X argues for stricter gun control legislation, saying that the crime rate is on the rise and that we need to restrict the circulation of guns. I agree that the crime rate is on the rise, but that’s precisely why I oppose stricter gun control legislation. We need to own guns to protect ourselves against criminals” (60).

The “twist it” move comes from the way that X claims “that the crime rate is on the rise but then argues that this increasing crime rate is in fact a valid reason for opposing gun control legislation” (60).

Example of a “twist it”

1. Not wanting to be unpleasant2. Not wanting to hurt someone’s feelings3. Not to make yourself vulnerable to being

disagreed with in return

Though we can be fearful of confrontation but simply ignoring a disagreement doesn’t make it go away.

The key is that its not a “put down,” there is a respectful way of doing it

Reasons to Hesitate to Disagree

Its less than simple, like disagreeing

You need to “do more than simply echo views you agree with…it’s important to bring something new and fresh to the table, adding something that make you a valuable participant in the conversation” (61).

There are “moves that enable you to contribute something of your own to a conversation even as you agree with what someone else has said” (61).

1. You can point out something that has gone unnoticed2. You can cite a personal experience that ties in

What’s is ultimately important is to provide some difference and contrast between what you are agreeing with and your view – there still needs to be distinction

Agree – But With A Difference

I agree that diversity in the student body is educationally valuable because my experience at Central University confirms it.

X’s theory of is extremely useful because it sheds light on the difficult problem of .

X is surely right about because, as she may not be aware, recent studies have show that .

Those unfamiliar with this school of thought may be interested to know that it basically boils down to .

Templates for Agreeing

It’s okay to agree, but make sure that you try to be your own person, avoid being “unoriginal”

Remember that if you are agreeing with one person, you are disagreeing with another

Example:These findings join a growing convergence of evidence across the

human sciences leading to a revolutionary shift in consciousness… If cooperation, typically associated with altruism and self-sacrifice, sets off the same signals of delight as pleasures commonly associated with hedonism and self-indulgence; if the opposition between selfish and selfless, self vs. relationship biologically makes no sense, then a new paradigm is necessary to reframe the very terms of the conversation.- Carol Gilligan, “Sisterhood Is Pleasurable: A Quiet Revolution in Psychology”

Issues with Agreeing

Boiled down, Gilligan is saying:

I agree that , a point that needs emphasizing since so many people still believe .

If group X is right that , as I think they are, then we need to reassess the popular assumption that .

The point of these “templates [is to] allow you to do, then, is to agree with one view while challenging another – a move that leads into the domain of agreeing and disagreeing simultaneously” (64).

Gilligan’s point…

This is the authors favorite way of responding, for them “it helps us get beyond the kind of ‘is too’ / ‘is not’ exchanges that often characterize the disputes of young children and the more polarized shouting matches of talk radio and TV” (64).

Agreeing and Disagree Simultaneously…

Although I agree with X up to a point, I cannot accept his overriding assumption that religion is no longer a major force today.

Although I disagree with much that X says, I fully endorse his final conclusion that .

Templates for Agreeing and Disagreeing Simultaneously

Though I concede that , I still insist that .

X is right that , but she seems on more dubious ground when she claims that .

While X is probably wrong when she claims that , she is right that .

Whereas X provides ample evidence that , Y and Z’s research on and convinces me that instead.

Agreeing and Disagreeing Templates Continued…

I’m of two minds about X’s claim that . On the one hand, I agree that . On the other hand, I’m not sure if .

My feelings on the issue are mixed. I do support X’s position that , but I find Y’s argument about and Z’s research on to be equally persuasive.

Another way, “I’m of two minds”

Many authors worry about expressing indecision, ambivalence, about an issue as much as agreeing or disagreeing – this can lead to confusion in the reader

According to our authors, “At other times, however, acknowledging that a clear-cut resolution of an issue is impossible can demonstrate your sophistication as a writer” (67).

Is Being Undecided is Okay?

I want you to read “Agonism in the Academy: Surviving the Argument Culture” by Deborah Tannen.

Its begins on p. 214 in your They Say, I Say of the 2nd edition or find it online at:

http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/tannend/chronicle033100.htm

Ch. 4 - Exercises

Determine who is saying what in the texts you read…

◦ This is important when reading challenging works for school.

◦ The authors mention that: when students have trouble understanding difficult texts, it is not just because the texts contain unfamiliar ideas or words, but because the texts rely on subtle clues to let readers know when a particular view should be attributed to the writer or to someone else. (68-9)

Ch. 5: “And Yet”Distinguishing What You Say from What They Say

“We are all middle-class,” or so it would seem. Our national consciousness, as shaped in large part by the media and our political leadership, provides us with a picture of ourselves as a nation of prosperity and opportunity with an ever expanding middle-class life-style. As a result, our class differences are muted and our collective character is homogenized.Yet class divisions are real and arguably the most significant factor to determining both our very being in the world and the nature of the society we live in.- Gregory Mantsios, “Rewards and Opportunities: The Politics and Economics of Class in the U.S.”

Example of Signal markers…

The authors note that “Although Mantsios makes it look easy, he is actually making several sophisticated rhetorical moves here that help him distinguish the common view he opposes from his own position” (69).

Look at this: the phrase “or so it would seem,” this demonstrates that the

author does not necessarily agree with the view he is sharing Puts this opening view in quotation marks, showing that

these are not his words Summarizing, he distances himself by saying that “our

national consciousness, as shaped in large part by the media and our political leadership” – he also uses phrases like “our class differences,” “muted,” “our collective character,” and “homogenized”

Explanation:

Mantsios continues: He uses the word “yet” in the second paragraph, this

indicates contradiction There is a parallelism between the first and second

paragraph that sets up a contrast for the author Although he does not use the words: “I argue” or “I say,”

he still identifies his view

Paying attention to these voice markers can allow one to pick up

Explanation continued…

Here’s Mantsio’s article if you remove the voice markers

We are all middle-class… We are a nation of prosperity and opportunity with an ever expanding middle-class life-style… Class divisions are real and arguably the most significant factor in determining both our very being in the world and the nature of the society we live in.

What’s the difference? Can you feel it?

Here is what it looks like…

To avoid the confusion, clearly state your points to your audience.

Although X makes the best possible case for universal, government-funded health care, I am not persuaded.

My view, however, contrary to what X has argued, is that .

Adding to X’s argument, I would point out that .

According to both X and Y, .

Politicians, X argues, should .

Most athletes will tell you that .

Templates for Signaling Who is Saying What in Your Own Writing

Most of the time, yes, but there is a need at some point, in limited form to use it but to say it but get around the monotonous overuse, look at these:

X is right that certain common patterns can be found in the communities.

The evidence shows that .

X’s assertion that does not fit the facts.

Anyone familiar with should agree that .

But are real, and are arguably the most significant factor in .

But I’ve Been Told Not to Use “I”

Ways of identifying the markers without saying things like “X argues” can look like this:

Instead of writing:

Liberals believe that cultural differences needed to be represented. I have a problem with this view, however.

You might write:

I have a problem with what liberals call cultural differences.

There is a major problem with the liberal doctrine of so-called cultural differences.

Another Trick for Identifying Who is Speaking…

You can imbed your own opinion and help summarize things

Instead of this: Earlier in this chapter we coined the term “voice markers.” We would

argue that such markers are extremely important for reading comprehension.

You might write: We would argue that “voice markers,” as we identified them earlier,

are extremely important for reading comprehension.

Embedding references allows one to “economize” thoughts without awkward interruptions.

continued

X overlooks what I consider an important point about cultural differences.

My own view is that what X insists is a is in fact a .

I wholeheartedly endorse what X calls .

These conclusions, which X discusses in , add weight to the argument that .

Templates for Embedding Voice Markers

Study a piece of your own writing to see how many perspectives you account for and how well you distinguish your own voice from those you are summarizing. Consider the following questions:

1. How many perspectives do you engage?2. What other perspectives might you include?3. How do you distinguish your views from other views you summarize?4. Do you use clear voice-signaling phrases?5. What options are available to you for clarifying who is saying what?6. Which of these options are best suited for this particular text?

If you find that you do not include multiple views or clearly distinguish between your views and others’, revise your text to do so.

Ch. 5- Exercises

The authors share the tale of Jan Tompkins and how she’ll wake up one night, during the midst of her writing process, and realize that she overlooked a major criticism to her argument

She does not panic or throw it out, but realizes that “this is the moment of doubt and panic is where my text really begins” (78).

She revises and incorporates the the criticisms she has anticipated and that makes her text stronger

Ch. 6: “Skeptics May Object”Planting a Naysayer in Your Text

Criticisms make our works stronger.

Our writing improves from by listening to the objections

Naysayers make our texts stronger

The Lesson is…

The authors make this statement: “Isn’t the advice to incorporate critical views a recipe for

destroying your credibility and undermining your argument? Here you are, trying to say something that will hold up” (79).

Tell your readers – Tell them what others will say will actually enhance your ethos.

The point here is that “writing well does not mean piling up uncontroversial truths in a vacuum; it means engaging others in a dialogue or debate” (79).

The authors state that “the more you give voice to your critics’ objections, the more you tend to disarm those critics, especially if you go on to answer their objections in convincing ways” (79).

Anticipate Objections

At this point I would like to raise some objections that have been inspired by the skeptic in me. She feels that I have been ignoring the complexities of the situation.

Yet some readers may challenge my view by insisting that .

Of course, many will probably disagree on the grounds that .

Templates for Entertaining Objections

Here many feminists would probably object that gender does influence language.

But social Darwinists would certainly take issue with the argument that .

Biologists, of course, may want to question whether .

Nevertheless, both followers and critics of Malcolm X will probably suggest otherwise and argue that .

Templates for Naming Your Naysayers

Some people really take offense to labels: feminists, Darwinists, biologists, etc. It can feel like generalizing.

However,… “since the life of ideas, including many of our most

private thoughts, is conducted through groups and types rather than solitary individuals, intellectual exchange requires labels to give definition and serve as a convenient shorthand” (83).

Labels and Naysayers…

You will want to minimize the generalization and stereotyping.

To do this, “refine and qualify their use” (84).

Try these then:

Although not all Christians think alike, some of them will probably dispute my claim that .

Non-native English speakers are so diverse in their views that it’s hard to generalize about them, but some are likely to object on the grounds that .

Minimizing Generalization

Objections…But is my proposal realistic? What are the chances of its

actually being adopted?

Yet is it necessarily true that ? Is it always the case, as I have been suggesting that ?

However, does the evidence I’ve cited prove conclusively that ?

You can also let your naysayer speak directly:

“Impossible,” some will say. “You must be reading the research selectively.”

Templates for Introducing Objections Informally

When you are introducing an opinion that is counter or opposing to your own, make sure you don’t fall prey to the temptation…

to give opposing views short shrift, to hurry past them, or even to mock them, doing so is usually counterproductive. When writers make the best case they can for their critics (playing Peter Elbow’s ‘believing game’), they actually bolster their credibility with readers rather than undermine it. They make readers think, ‘This is a writer I can trust.’ (86).

Don’t mock others points of view, remain respectful

Represent Objections Fairly

Even when you represent objections successfully, you still have to answer those objections

The authors mention that a “surefire way to fail to overcome an objection is to dismiss it out of hand” (88).

Perhaps… the best way to overcome an objection is not to try to refute

it completely but to agree with part of it while challenging only the part you dispute. In other words, in answering counterarguments, it is often best to say ‘yes, but’ or ‘yes and no,’ treating the counterview as an opportunity to revise and refine your own position. (88)

Answer Objections

Although I grant that the book is poorly organized, I still remain that it raises an important issue.

Proponents of X are right to argue that . But they exaggerate when they claim that .

While it is true that , it does not necessarily follow that .

On the one hand, I agree with X that . But on the other hand, I still insist that .

Templates for Making Concessions While Still Standing Your Ground

Look over something you’ve written that makes an argument. Check to see if you’ve anticipated and responded to any objections. If not, revise your text to do so. If so, have you anticipated all the likely objections? Who if anyone have you attributed the objections to? Have you represented the objections fairly? Have you answered them well enough, or do you think you now need to qualify your own argument? Could you use any of the language suggested in this chapter? Does the introduction of a naysayer strengthen your argument? Why, or why not?

Ch. 6 - Exercises