Logical Fallacies in EFL Learners' Argumentative Writings
Keywords:
logical fallacies, argumentative writing
Abstract
Logical fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of an argument. In argumentative writing, the presence of logical fallacies such fallacies shows either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points, and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim. The purpose of the study is to identify and discuss logical fallacies in the argumentative writing of Indonesian EFL learners. 40 argumentative essays were collected from the students of the English Department of the State University of Malang who have passed all the writing courses, including the course on argumentative writing. The results of the study shows that students still produced a number of logical fallacies in their work, some of which were so basic they can actually be avoided through simple, explicit instruction. Some pedagogical implications of the findings are also discussed.References
Abrami, P.C., Bernard, R.M., Borokhvski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M.A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage I meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78, 4, 1102-1134.
Aikin, S. F. (2016). A (modest) defense of fallacy theory. In Bondy, P., & Benacquista, L. (Eds.). Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 1-11.
Alagozlu, N. (2007). Critical thinking and voice in EFL writing, The Asian EFL Journal, 9(3), 118-136.
Atai, M. R. & Nasseri, M. (2010). A Gender-based study of informal fallacies of argumentation: The Case of Iranian Advanced EFL Learners’ Writing. IJAL, 13, 2, 19-45.
Cottrell, S. (2005). Critical thinking skills: Developing effective analysis and argument. Hampshire: Palgrave McMillan
Hughes, W. (2008). Critical thinking: An introduction to the basic skills, 5th edition. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press Ltd.
Hundleby, C. E. (2010). The authorities of the fallacies approach to argument evaluation. Informal Logic, 30, 3, 279-308.
Indah, R.N. & Kusuma A.W. (2015). Fallacies in English Department students’ claims: A rhetorical analysis of critical thinking. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora, 3, 4, 295-304.
Khodabandeh, F., Jafarigohar, M., Soleimani, H., & Hemmati, F. (2013). The Impact of Explicit, Implicit, and No-Formal Genre-based Instruction on Argumentative Essay Writing. The Linguistics Journal, 7, 1, 134-166.
Mayfield, M. (2007). Thinking for yourself: Developing critical thinking skills through reading and writing (7th ed). Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Nussbaum E.M., and Kardash, C.M. (2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 2, 157-169.
Sinnott-Armstrong, W., & Fogelin, R. (2010). Understanding arguments: An introduction to informal logic. Belmont, CA : Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Stapleton, P. (2001). Assessing critical thinking in the writing of Japanese university students: Insights about assumptions and content familiarity. Written Communication, 18, 4, 506-548.
Aikin, S. F. (2016). A (modest) defense of fallacy theory. In Bondy, P., & Benacquista, L. (Eds.). Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 1-11.
Alagozlu, N. (2007). Critical thinking and voice in EFL writing, The Asian EFL Journal, 9(3), 118-136.
Atai, M. R. & Nasseri, M. (2010). A Gender-based study of informal fallacies of argumentation: The Case of Iranian Advanced EFL Learners’ Writing. IJAL, 13, 2, 19-45.
Cottrell, S. (2005). Critical thinking skills: Developing effective analysis and argument. Hampshire: Palgrave McMillan
Hughes, W. (2008). Critical thinking: An introduction to the basic skills, 5th edition. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press Ltd.
Hundleby, C. E. (2010). The authorities of the fallacies approach to argument evaluation. Informal Logic, 30, 3, 279-308.
Indah, R.N. & Kusuma A.W. (2015). Fallacies in English Department students’ claims: A rhetorical analysis of critical thinking. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora, 3, 4, 295-304.
Khodabandeh, F., Jafarigohar, M., Soleimani, H., & Hemmati, F. (2013). The Impact of Explicit, Implicit, and No-Formal Genre-based Instruction on Argumentative Essay Writing. The Linguistics Journal, 7, 1, 134-166.
Mayfield, M. (2007). Thinking for yourself: Developing critical thinking skills through reading and writing (7th ed). Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Nussbaum E.M., and Kardash, C.M. (2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 2, 157-169.
Sinnott-Armstrong, W., & Fogelin, R. (2010). Understanding arguments: An introduction to informal logic. Belmont, CA : Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Stapleton, P. (2001). Assessing critical thinking in the writing of Japanese university students: Insights about assumptions and content familiarity. Written Communication, 18, 4, 506-548.
Published
2017-06-24
How to Cite
El Khoiri, N., & Widiati, U. (2017). Logical Fallacies in EFL Learners’ Argumentative Writings. Dinamika Ilmu, 17(1), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.21093/di.v17i1.638
Section
Articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work
