AP LANG vocab

Argument

A persuasive discourse resulting in a coherent and considered movement from a claim to a conclusion.

Claim

Also called an assertion or proposition,states the argument’s main idea or position. differs from a topic or subject in that a claim has to be arguable.

Claims of fact

asserts that something is true or not true.

Claim of value

argues that something is good or bad, right or wrong

Claim of policy

proposes a change.

Evidence

Support for a claim or argument. There are several different types of evidence,

Personal experience

Evidence drawn from the writer’s own experience.

Personal observations

Evidence the writer has seen but not necessarily experienced.

Testimony

An expression of how the writer — or someone the writer is citing — feels about a personal experience or personal observation.

Anecdotes

Evidence drawn from stories about other people that the writer has either observed, been told about, or researched

Analogies

Evidence that makes comparisons between two unrelated things as a way to clarify one of them

Current events

Evidence drawn from what is happening locally, nationally, and globally. Current events can be interpreted in many ways and may contain bias.

Historical information

Verifiable facts that a writer knows from research. This kind of evidence can provide background and context for current issues as well as help establish ethos

Expert opinion

Evidence based on the knowledge of experts whose jobs and/or experiences give them specialized, credible knowledge

Quantitative evidence

Includes things that can be measured, cited, counted, or otherwise represented in numbers — for instance, statistics, surveys, polls, experiment results, and census information. It may be presented through verbal explanations or, more often, in illustrations such as graphs, charts, or tables.

Lines of reasoning

The connections between the claims in the writer’s argument and the evidence presented to support them.

Thesis

The overarching claim that clearly states the writer’s position in a text.

Induction

From the Latin inducere, “to lead into,” a logical process of reasoning from particulars to universals, using specific cases in order to draw a conclusion, which is also called a generalization.

Deduction

a logical process that reaches a conclusion by starting with a general principle or universal truth (a major premise) and applying it to a specific case (a minor premise). usually demonstrated in the form of a syllogism 

Syllogism

A logical structure that uses the major premise and minor premise to reach a necessary conclusion.

Classical argument

Five-part argument structure used by classical rhetoricians

Introduction

Introduces the reader to the subject under discussion. The speaker typically announces the subject and purpose, and appeals to ethos to establish credibility.

Narration

Also known as exposition today, this provides factual information and background material on the subject at hand or establishes why the subject is a problem that needs addressing

Confirmation

Usually the major part of the text, develops the proof through evidence to support the writer’s claims.

Refutation

Addresses the counterargument. It is a bridge between the writer’s proof and conclusion.

Conclusion

Brings the essay to a satisfying close

Rogerian arguments

Developed by psychiatrist Carl Rogers, based on the assumption that fully understanding an opposing position is essential to responding to it persuasively and refuting it in a way that is accommodating rather than alienating.

Toulmin model

An approach to analyzing and constructing arguments created by British philosopher in his book The Uses of Argument (1958). The  model can be stated as a template: 

Because (evidence as support), therefore (claim), since (warrant or assumption), on account of (backing), unless (reservation).

Warrant

Expresses the assumption necessarily shared by the speaker and the audience

Assumption

the unspoken, underlying belief or value that connects your evidence to your claim

Backing

Further assurances or data without which the assumption lacks authority

Qualifier

Uses words like usually, probably, maybe, in most cases, and most likely to temper the claim, making it less absolute

Reservation

 Explains the terms and conditions necessitated by the qualifier.

Rebuttal

Gives voice to possible objections.

Methods of development

Modes of expression writers use to achieve their purposes. Each of these modes is a way of thinking — a reasoning pattern that develops and organizes the reasoning of the writer’s argument

Narration

A method of development that tells a story or recounts a series of real-life events. Chronology usually governs narration, which includes concrete details, a point of view, and sometimes such elements as dialogue.

Cause and effect

A method of development that relies on an analysis of the causes that lead to a certain effect or, conversely, the effects that result from a cause

Comparison and contrast

Juxtaposing two things to highlight their similarities and differences. It is useful in explaining distinctions that differentiate between two seemingly similar concepts or ideas. Frequently, an argument will reflect a comparison and contrast of two people, ideas, policies, or viewpoints.

Definition

A method of development that conveys details about a concept, an event, or an object to advance an argument

Description

A method of development that evokes the senses by painting a picture of how something looks, sounds, smells, tastes, or feels. Rarely is an entire essay descriptive, but clear and vivid description can make writing more persuasive.

Logical fallacies

potential vulnerabilities or weaknesses in an argument. They often arise from a failure to make a logical connection between the claim and the evidence used to support it.

Red herring

A type of logical fallacy wherein the speaker relies on distraction to derail an argument, usually by skipping to a new or irrelevant topic. The term derives from the dried fish that trainers used to distract dogs when teaching them to hunt foxes. For example, “We can debate these regulations until the cows come home, but what the American people want to know is, when are we going to end this partisan bickering?”

Ad hominem

Latin for “to the man,” this fallacy refers to the specific diversionary tactic of switching the argument from the issue at hand to the character of the other speaker. An argument that a community park should not be renovated because the person supporting it was arrested during a domestic dispute depends on an ad hominem fallacy.

Straw man

A fallacy that occurs when a speaker chooses a deliberately poor or oversimplified example in order to ridicule and refute an idea. For example, “Politician X proposes that we put astronauts on Mars in the next four years. Politician Y ridicules this proposal by saying that his opponent is looking for ‘little green men in outer space.’”

Either-or

In this fallacy, the speaker presents two extreme options as the only possible choices. For example, “Either we agree to higher taxes, or our grandchildren will be mired in debt.”

Flaw dilemma

 where an argument presents only two choices or sides while ignoring other hidden options or a middle

Post hoc

This fallacy is Latin for “after which therefore because of which,” meaning that it is incorrect to always claim that something is a cause just because it happened earlier. One may loosely summarize this fallacy by saying that correlation does not imply causation. For example: “We elected Johnson as president and look where it got us: hurricanes, floods, stock market crashes.”

Hasty generalization

reaching a broad conclusion based on insufficient or limited evidence

Faulty analogy

comparing two things using irrelevant or inconsequential similarities