Language of arguments used in the sample speaking performance of TOEFLiBT

ABSTRACT This study aims to examine types and linguistic features of arguments in the speaking samples of TOEFL iBT test in order to help learners of TOEFL iBT have a better insight in s

TẠ THỊ PHƯỞNG

LANGUAGE OF ARGUMENTS USED

IN THE SAMPLE SPEAKING PERFORMANCE

OF TOEFL IBT

Field: English Linguistics

Code: 8220201

Supervisor: NGŨ THIỆN HÙNG, Ph.D

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I hereby certify my authorship that the Master thesis entitled

“Language of arguments used in the sample speaking performance of TOEFL iBT” is entirely the result of my own research, except where otherwise

referenced or acknowledged This thesis has not been submitted for any degree or diploma at any other institutions

Binh Dinh, 2020

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dr Ngu Thien Hung for his patience, encouragement, valuable guidance and beneficial criticism throughout my research Without his great support, this thesis would not have been accomplished in time

I am extremely grateful to all my lecturers who provided us with essential knowledge for this thesis

Special thanks goes to my classmates who gave me their help during the time I conducted the study

I would like to thank my school-board, my colleagues who spent their golden time encouraging me to do this thesis

Last but not least, I would like to express my special thanks to my family, especially my parents and my husband who gave me unconditioned love and support, which is very significant for me to fulfill this work

ABSTRACT

This study aims to examine types and linguistic features of arguments

in the speaking samples of TOEFL iBT test in order to help learners of TOEFL iBT have a better insight in studying this kind of language A combination of qualitative and quantitative methods is applied to seek descriptive information of language of arguments Eighty speaking samples containing arguments collected aims at identifying arguments’ types and linguistic features of this kind of language The results reveals that both inductive and deductive arguments are employed in the TOEFL iBT speaking test In terms of semantic features, six process types are found in the arguments used by the test takers In terms of syntactic features, premises and conclusion of arguments are absolutely dominated by Declarative mood with the subject-finite position to indicate the role of the test takers and the readers/listeners Regarding the use of clause types in terms of syntactic features, the findings show that different types of clauses are employed by the test takers with different rates It is hoped that the results of this study will provide useful knowledge of arguments in TOEFL iBT speaking and contribute to the teaching and learning of TOEFL iBT, especially for those who are interested in this kind of language

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vii

LIST OF TABLES viii

LIST OF FIGURES ix

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 RATIONALE 1

1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES 2

1.2.1 Aim 2

1.2.2 Objectives 2

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 3

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 3

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 3

1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY 4

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 5

2.1 ARGUMENT 5

2.1.1 Definition of argument 5

2.1.2 Classification of argument 6

2.2 TOEFL IBT TEST 8

2.3 SEMANTIC FEATURES OF LANGUAGE OF ARGUMENTS 9

2.3.1 Material process 10

2.3.2 Mental process 11

2.3.3 Relational process 12

2.3.4 Verbal process 13

2.3.5 Behavioural process 14

2.3.6 Existential process 14

2.3.7 Circumstances 15

2.4 SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF LANGUAGE OF ARGUMENTS 15

2.5 PREVIOUS STUDIES RELATED TO THE STUDY 19

2.6 SUMMARY 21

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES 23

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN 23

3.2 RESEARCH METHODS 23

3.3 RESEARCH PROCEDURES 24

3.4 DATA COLLECTION 24

3.4.1 Sampling 24

3.4.2 Method of sampling 25

3.4.3 Coding scheme 25

3.5 DATA ANALYSIS 25

3.6 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY 26

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 27

4.1 TYPES OF ARGUMENTS 27

4.1.1 Deductive argument 28

4.1.2 Inductive argument 31

4.2 SEMANTIC FEATURES OF LANGUAGE OF ARGUMENTS 37

4.2.1 Semantic features of premises 37

4.2.2 Semantic features of conclusion 48

4.3 SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF LANGUAGE OF ARGUMENTS 52

4.3.1 Syntactic features of premises 54

4.3.2 Syntactic features of conclusion 68

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 74

5.1 CONCLUSIONS 74

5.2 IMPLICATIONS 75

5.3 LIMITATIONS 76

5.4 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 77

REFERENCES 78

APPENDIX A 1

APPENDIX B 5

Cloc: Locative Compliment

Co: Object Compliment

Cs: Subject Compliment

F: Finite

NG: Nominal Group

O: Object

Od: Direct Object

Oi: Indirect Object

Op: Prepositional Object

LIST OF TABLES

4.1 Frequency of occurrence of type of arguments 27

4.2 Frequency of occurrence of process types of premises 38

4.4 Frequency of occurrence of process types of conclusion 48

4.7 Summary of basic clause types and syntactic patterns of

the clause expressing premises

67

4.8 Frequency of occurrence of clause types in conclusion 68

4.9 Summary of basic clause types and syntactic patterns of

the clause expressing conclusion

72

LIST OF FIGURES

4.1 Types of arguments in independent tasks and integrated

tasks

28

4.2 Frequency of occurrence of clause types in premises 54

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 RATIONALE

English can be seen as the most widely language because people use English every part of the world English is used for different purposes such as communicating, applying for a job in a foreign company or enrolling in an English-speaking university For the assessment of their English proficiency, learners need to be recognized with the standardized tests such as TOEIC (Test

of English for International Communication), IELTS (International English Language Test System) or TOEFL iBT (Test of English as a Foreign Language, internet -Based Test) As we all know, TOEFL iBT is one of the major English-language tests that are widely used by many employers and universities around the world to assess the language skills of non-native speakers

The TOEFL iBT consists of four sections: reading, listening, speaking and writing While questions in the reading and listening TOEFL iBT test are all multiple-choice, tasks in speaking and writing sections are known as constructive tasks because it requires learners’ argumentation in their

performances According to Carnagey and Esenwein (1915), “argumentation

is the process of producing conviction by means of reasoning” It is “a set of arguments used to explain something or to persuade people” (Cambridge

dictionary) Besides writing, speaking is the other skill that need speaker’s good argumentation In order to deal with tasks in speaking section, the test takers need to use well-structured and persuasive arguments to give opinions

in independent tasks and show how they solve problems arising from the integrated tasks It is obvious that a successful performance of TOEFL iBT speaking test depends on the language of arguments used in the performance Thanks to arguments, the ideas presented by the test takers are more cogent and persuasive

It can be seen that the issues of arguments have been focused on different aspects by different scholars such as Weston (2017), Stirling (2009) and Swatridge (2014) Studies of some linguistic features of different skills of TOEFL iBT have also been conducted However, little has been written about issues related to the language of arguments used in speaking performance of TOEFL iBT Thus, there is still rooms for the exploration and description of this kind of language By analyzing the language of arguments, we will understand deeply about the structure and meaning of language so that learners can have the knowledge of using arguments effectively in giving opinions For the above reasons, I decide to conduct a study with the title

“Language of arguments used in the sample speaking performance of TOEFL

iBT” to shed light on the linguistic features of this kind of language

1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES

1.2.1 Aim

This study aims at examining arguments’ types and linguistic features

of language of arguments in the sample speaking performance of TOEFL iBT and providing the learners as potential test takers with an insight into the use

of arguments in expressing opinions in a TOEFL iBT speaking test

1.2.2 Objectives

To achieve the aim of the study, the following objectives are intended:

- To identify types of arguments used in the TOEFL iBT speaking sample;

- To examine linguistics features of language of arguments in terms of syntactic and semantic features;

- To propose some suggestions for English learners for better understanding of arguments as well as for further studies

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The focus of the study is mainly on the analysis of language used in arguments in the TOEFL iBT speaking samples This study describes and discusses types of arguments basing on the framework of Bassham et al (2010) and syntactic and semantic features of language of arguments basing

on Downing and Locke’s (2006) framework, which is the mixture of traditional English grammar and functional linguistics

Eighty speaking samples containing arguments used for analysis are

selected from the TOEFL iBT books as well as from websites for learning TOEFL iBT In the study, only arguments collected from the speaking samples are analyzed

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The results of this study are expected to contribute to the knowledge about language of arguments and provide the learners as the potential test takers a better insight into the language of arguments used in the TOEFL iBT speaking test More specifically, the study provides arguments’ types used by the learners as well as semantic and syntactic structures that are commonly used in the TOEFL iBT speaking test

In addition, the result of the study can be used as a reference for further researchers who want to explore this kind of language

1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY

This study is divided into 5 chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction - presents the background information of the study; consisting the rationale of the study, the aim and objectives, research questions, scope of the study, the significance and organization of the study

Chapter 2: Literature review- presents the overview of the TOEFL iBT test and presents theoretical background related to arguments that supports the study In addition, previous studies related to the topic are also mentioned in the study

Chapter 3: Research methods and Procedures- presents the research methods employed in the study, research procedures, data collection and data analysis

Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion – identifies and analyzes types and linguistic features of language of arguments, analyzes semantic and syntactic features of arguments found in the TOEFL iBT speaking test and then discusses the results from the analysis

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Implications - summarizes the main points

of the study and suggests some implications for the learners as well as for further studies Some limitations are also presented in this chapter

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The chapter provides a theoretical background of the study and reviews previous researches related to the study

2.1 ARGUMENT

2.1.1 Definition of argument

Argument, a term used in Critical Thinking, is a set of statements in which a claim is defended with reasons (Bassham et al., 2010) Having the

same view point, Weston (2017) also states that “arguments are efforts to

support certain views with reasons” More specifically, Bassham et al (2010)

concludes that, an argument is “a group of statements, one or more of which

(called the premises) are intended to prove or support another statement (called the conclusion)”

A premise is a statement in an argument that provides evidence or reasons to support the conclusion There can be one or many premises in an argument

A conclusion is the statement in an argument that the premises are intended to support The conclusion is exactly what the argument is trying to prove There can be only one conclusion in an argument

In order to identify the argument, we have to recognize the premises

and conclusion Morrow & Weston (2011, p.4) propose a strategy to identify

the conclusion by asking yourself what the author of the argument is trying to convince you to believe The strategy to find out the premises is asking what reasons the author gives to try to convince you

Furthermore, the assistance of indicators is also a good way to identify

the argument and its parts “Indicator words are words or phrases that

provide clues that premises or conclusions are being put forward” (Bassham

et al., 2010, p.42) Premise indicators and conclusion indicators are signals for identifying the premises and conclusion

Premises indicator is a word that indicates that a premise is about to come There are some common premise indicators that are usually used in the

argument such as since, for, in view of the fact that, because, given that, as

indicated by, etc For example:

Having fun can be the spice of life but not its main course, because when it is over, nothing of lasting value remains

Conclusion indicator is a word that indicates that the conclusion is

about to follow Some conclusion indicators are therefore, hence, so, that is

why, wherefore, as a result, consequently, etc For instance:

There’s probably no God, so stop worrying and enjoy your life

The following is an example of an argument which the indicator is present:

All humans are mortal (Premise 1)

Socrates is human (Premise 2)

Therefore, Socrates is mortal (Conclusion)

The above example is an argument The first two statements (premises

1 and premise 2) support the last statement (conclusion) With the help of the

indicator ‘therefore”, we can recognize the conclusion of the argument

The indicators, however, are not always present in all arguments and sometimes the passages contain these words are not arguments

claimed or intended to follow necessarily from the premises A properly formed deductive argument is an argument of such a form that if its premises are true, the conclusion must be true too (Weston, 2017) Deductive arguments try to prove their conclusions with logical evidence and reasons

According to Bassham et al (2010, p.58), deductive arguments “attempt to

show that their conclusions must be true given the premises asserted”

2.1.2.2 Inductive argument

Inductive arguments, on the other hand, are arguments in which the

conclusion is claimed or intended to follow probably from the premises (Bassham et al., 2010, p.58) While deductive arguments try to prove their conclusions with inescapable logic, inductive arguments try to show that their

conclusions are plausible or likely given the premise(s) (Bassham et al., 2010,

p.58) In an inductive argument, the conclusion is claimed to follow only probably from the premises For instance:

Bugsy needed money to pay his gambling debts

Bugsy was seen sneaking around outside the bank last night

It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that Bugsy robbed the safe

In arguments, it is necessary to distinguish deductive from inductive arguments We should see whether an argument is treated as inductive or deductive According to Bassham et al (2010, p.64), if the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises, the argument should always be treated as deductive If the conclusion doesn’t follow necessarily from the premises, the argument should be treated as inductive unless the language or context of the argument makes clear that the argument is deductive or the argument has a pattern of reasoning that is deductive The following is an example of

deductive argument:

Alan is a father Therefore, Alan is a male

The conclusion above follows with necessity from the premise Alan

is a father and thus, he must be a male There cannot be another case It must

be true that he is a male Therefore, this example is clearly deductive Now have a look at the next example:

All previous U.S vice president have been woman

Therefore, it is likely that the next U.S vice president will be a woman

It’s clear that this example is an inductive argument Firstly, we can

see the indicator “likely” which shows the uncertainty of the author when

giving the argument Moreover, if the premises are true, the conclusion is not

probably true

In order to determine whether an argument is deductive or inductive,

we should apply four tests: the indicator words test, the strict necessary test, the common pattern test and the principle of charity test These tests are very

helpful for identifying the two types of arguments

2.2 TOEFL IBT TEST

The TOEFL iBT, designed and implemented by Educational Testing Services (ETS) Princeton, New Jersey, USA, is an English language proficiency test used to assess learners’ academic English language

proficiency TOEFL iBT means “test of English as a foreign language,

internet-based test” This kind of test was first introduced in 2005 to replace

the TOEFL paper-based tests (PBT) and computer-based tests (CBT) In this kind of test, the test takers have to do the test on the computers which are connected to the internet and then their answers will be sent via the internet to

be scored by ETS (Stirling, 2009)

Speaking is one of the four sections in the TOEFL iBT test It consists

of two independent speaking tasks and four integrated speaking tasks The

first two tasks are about familiar topics that draw on the students’ own ideas, opinions and experience In integrated tasks, the tasks require the test takers’ reading, listening and speaking skills combination It can be paraphrasing/summarizing tasks or problem-solving tasks In TOEFL iBT speaking, test takers’ good abilities on using arguments to give opinions or solving problems in the tasks will be highly appreciated Thus, getting high scores in these parts much depends on the well-structured arguments presented by the test takers

2.3 SEMANTIC FEATURES OF LANGUAGE OF ARGUMENTS

Butt et al (1996, p.44) state that “most English clauses have a

constituent structure that can be described functionally in terms of participant, process, and circumstance with process being the essential ingredient”

Participant, process and circumstance are semantic categories explaining how phenomena of the real world are represented as linguistic structures Of all the elements, process is the most essential part of a sentence because it is used to refer to what is going on the whole clause and refer to that part of the proposition encoded in the verbal group (Bloor & Bloor, 2004, p.109)

According to Downing and Locke (2006, p.123), the process is a technical term for the action, state, or change of state involved There are three main types of processes: material processes, mental processes and relational processes There are also three subsidiary types: behavioural processes, verbal processes and existential processes Process types include

those of ‘doing’ are material processes Verbs of ‘thinking’,’ hearing’,

‘seeing’, ‘feeling’, ‘liking’, ‘desiring’, etc., are used to express mental

processes Processes of ‘being’ and ‘becoming’ is called relational processes Verbal processes are processes of ‘saying’ Behavioral processes are those of

‘behaving’ Existential are processes of ‘existing’ Each process type is

involved with different types of participant

2.3.1 Material process

Material processes can be seen as the main type of processes It

includes several kinds: ‘doing’, ‘happening’, ‘causing’ and ‘transferring’

The sentences below are examples of material processes:

Material process with one participant

The Prime Minister resigned

Material process with Affected participant

Pele kicked the ball

Agent Process: Material Affected

In the first example, “resigned” represents the material process The only one participant is “The Prime Minister” which is called “Agent” In the one-participant, action processes such as “resigned”, the action does not

extend to another participant However, in the two-participant, as in the

second example, action processes such as “kicked”, the second participant is

affected by the action denoted by the verb in an active clause The two participants are Agent and Affected

If the process extends to an Affected participant, the representation can be made in two forms, either active, in which Agent conflates with Subject, as the second example above, or passive, in which Affected conflates with Subject, as in the example below:

Material process with Affected subject in a passive clause

The ball was kicked by Pele

Affected Process: Material Agent

Material processes of ‘happening’, ‘causing’ are illustrated in the

examples below:

Material process of ‘happening’

Jordan slipped on the ice

Affected Subject Process: Material Circumstance

Material process of ‘causing’

Paul opened the door

Initiating Agent Process: Material Affected

Material processes also contain other participants like “Recipient or

Beneficiary” We can encounter these participants in material processes of

‘transferring’ This kind of processes is realized by such verbs as give, send, lend, charge, pay, offer, owe, etc

Material process of ‘transferring’

Bill’s father has lent us his car

Agent Process: Material Recipient Affected

2.3.2 Mental process

The second main type of processes is mental processes According to

Downing and Locke (2006, p.139), “mental processes are those through

which we organize our mental contact with the world” This is the processes

of sensing There are four main types of mental processes: cognition, encoded

by such verbs as know, understand, believe, doubt, remember and forget; perception, encoded by verbs such as see, notice, hear, feel and taste; affectivity, such as like, love, admire, miss and hate; desideration such as

hope, want, desire and wish Sentences below are examples of mental

processes:

Mental process of ‘cognition’

I don’t know anyone of that name

Experiencer Process: Mental Phenomenon

Mental process of ‘affection’

They enjoy walking in the woods

Experiencer Process: Mental Phenomenon

Mental process of ‘perception’

Tom saw a snake

Experiencer Process: Mental Phenomenon

Mental process of ‘desideration’

I want to stay overnight

Experiencer Process: Mental Phenomenon

There are two main participants in mental processes: Experiencer (or Senser) and Phenomenon The Experiencer is the participant who sees, feels, thinks, likes, etc Phenomenon is the second participant that which is perceived, known, liked, etc

2.3.3 Relational process

The third main type of processes is Relational processes According to

Downing and Locke (2006), “relational processes express the notion of being

in a broad sense” This kind of processes is divided into two main patterns:

The Attribute and the Identifying The participant in the Attributive structure

is the Carrier, the entity ascribed to the Carrier is an Attribute:

Relational process of Attribute

Their eldest son was a musician

Carrier Process: Relational Attribute

Relational process of Possession

These keys are my brother’s

Possessed/ Carrier Process: Relational Possessor/ Attribute

Identifying processes is the second main type of relational processes

“The function of this kind of process is to identify one entity in terms of

another.” (Thompson, 2014, p.102) The two participants are the Identified -

is identified in terms of the other, the Identifier Identifying processes are reversible

Relational process of Identification

Mont Blanc is the highest mountain in Europe

Identified Process: Relational Identifier

2.3.4 Verbal process

Verbal processes are processes of saying or communicating There are

two participants in the verbal processes, the Sayer and the Said The Sayer is the participant that is involved in any verbal processes The other participant

is the Said which is what is said or asked or reported This participant is

typically human who do the act of “saying, telling, repeating, asking,

answering, or reporting” Verbal processes are intermediate between material

and mental processes because “saying something is a physical action that

reflects mental operations.” (Thompson, 2014)

Verbal Process

She had to say her name twice

In the example above, “She” is the Sayer, who does the act of

“saying” Verbal process is “had to say” and “her name twice” is the Said

Another participant in this process is “Recipient” which is required with the verb “tell”:

Verbal Process with Recipient participant

Jill told him what she knew

Sayer Process: Verbal Recipient Said

2.3.5 Behavioural process

Behavioural processes are intermediate between material and mental

processes According to Halliday (2014, p.301) “behavioral processes are

process of (typically human) physiological and psychological behaviour, like breathing, coughing, smiling, dreaming and staring” Thompson (2014,

p.110) gives an example about behavioural process as follows:

Behavioural process

The boy laughed an embarrassed laugh

Behaver Process: Behavioural Behaviour

stretch, hang, remain, occur, follow, appear’ The only one participant in this

kind of processes is the Existent:

Existential process

There ‘s a good film on at the Scala

Process: existential Existent

2.3.7 Circumstances

Circumstantial element is a part of the semantic structure of the sentence which covers a great variety of meaning Eggins (2004, p.222) states that circumstances can occur with all processes types and usually marked by adverbial groups or prepositional phrases Some common circumstances are place and time, manner, contingency, accompaniment, modality, degree, role, matter and evidence

2.4 SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF LANGUAGE OF ARGUMENTS

In order to understand how the structure of language is constructed in general as well as to see how words are combined in specific, we have to examine its syntactic features by analyzing the structure of a clause Syntactically, the independent clause (or simple sentence) has two main parts: Subject and Predicate

The Subject is present in declarative and interrogative, but is not required in the imperative It can be prototypically realized by nominal groups It also realized by embedded clauses or many other groups and clauses

The Subject determines number, person and gender concord with the Subject Complement, and of reflexive pronouns at Cs, Oi and Od

Predicate can consist entirely of the Predicator, realized by a verbal

group, or together with one or more other element Predicator determines the number and type of other elements Predicator function is realized by both finite and non-finite lexical and primary verbs

Subject and predicator are the two major functional categories of a clause Predicator presents in all major types of clause It is realized by finite and non-finite lexical and primary verbs

Subject (S) Predicator (P)

The plane landed

After the subject and predicator, object (O) is the most central element

of all clause constituents There are two main types of object: direct (Od) and indirect (Oi) Direct object often follows the verbs in clauses with one object and follows the indirect object in the clauses with two objects In a clause, direct object is realized by a nominal group, finite or non-finite clause

Indirect object only occurs with verbs which take two objects such as ‘give,

send’ This object stands between the verb and the direct object It is typically

realized by a NG:

He showed the policeman his driving license

The subsidiary type of object is the prepositional object (Op)

The Prime Minister can’t account for the lost of votes

Complement, together with subject, predicator and object, is another major constituent of the clause There are two main types of Complement: subject Complement (Cs) and object Complement (Co) Subject Complement

is used to complete the predicate by adding information about the subject referent It can be realized by AdjGs and NGs and by clauses

A couch potato is someone who lies watching television all day

Object complement is the element that completes the predicate with an AdjG or a NG Object complement is often placed immediately after the direct object

I found the house empty

Downing and Locke (2006) also propose some basic syntactic patterns

- Subject-Predicator-Direct Object (S-P-Od)

- Subject-Predicator-Prepositional Object (S-P-Op)

- Subject-Predicator-Indirect Object-Direct Object (S-P-Oi-Od)

- Subject-Predicator-Direct Object-Prepositional Object (S-P-Od-Op)

- Subject-Predicator-Direct Object-Object Complement (S-P-Od-Co)

- Subject-Predicator-Direct Object-Locative Complement (S-P-Od-Cloc) Syntactically, an independent clause can have the variation in clause structure that makes for different clause types: declarative, interrogative, imperative and exclamative (Downing and Locke, 2006, p.13) These moods help to recognize the structure of a clause as well as the meaning that the

author wants to convey According to Downing and Locke (2006, p.181),

“the declarative, interrogative and imperative moods of a clause are distinguished by variation in one part of the clause, called the mood element”

The mood element consists of Subject (S) and Finite (F) The ordering of Subject and Finite helps to identify whether a clause is declarative, interrogative, imperative or exclamative The mood structure is summarized

in the table below:

Table 2.1 Mood structure

no subject, base form of verb

Jane sings

Does Jane sing?

What does Jane sing? How well Jane sings! Sing!

(Downing and Locke, 2006, p.181)

The Declarative clauses

The declarative is the basic clause type which the Finite is the first or only element of a verbal group and realized by either a verbal operator (is, can, has, etc.) or a tensed (past or present) form of the lexical verb as in the example below:

We are meeting again tomorrow

The Interrogative clauses

In this clause type, the Finite verb precedes the Subject, the rest remaining the same There are two main types of interrogative, the yes/no type and the Wh-type

In the Yes/no type, the speaker asks for confirmation or denial of the content and the answer is Yes or No

Are we meeting again tomorrow?

In Wh-interrogatives, the Finite stands before Subject and after the Wh-word The Wh-word can be part of a group or phrase

What do you want (Od)

The Exclamative clauses

Downing and Locke (2006) claims that the exclamative clause type often starts with a wh-element and followed by a nominal group or adjective/adverb The Subject-Finite ordering in the exclamatives like the declarative clause and the elements following the wh-word are brought to the

front of the clause

Wh- element

What a shock they’ll have!

The Imperative clauses

There’s no overt Subject in an imperative clause It differs sharply from the other clause types as in the following examples:

Be careful!

Come on! Hurry up!

2.5 PREVIOUS STUDIES RELATED TO THE STUDY

Up to now, there have been several studies exploring about TOEFL iBT test by different researchers Le Thi Nhu Lien (2011) conducts a study

into linguistic devices of signal implications in the conversations extracts in TOEFL iBT The study presents the types of implicature in terms of the observation or violation of the maxims of conversation The author emphasizes that in most implicature cases recorded in the analysis of data from document in TOEFL iBT is the function of the standard language conversation, observed four conversational maxims: Quality-Quantity-Manner-Relevance A number of language units involved in the tectonic language function as adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, adjectives, interjections and some set phrases are also identified by the author

In terms of pragmatics, Vo Thi Ha Tien (2016) investigates

pragmatic features in TOEFL iBT Listening practice tests The findings

show that the speech acts used in these lectures have various pragmatic functions with a diversity of illocutionary acts Various syntactic structures such as declarative, interrogative, imperative, exclamative and even some minor clauses can be used for both direct illocutions and indirect illocutions Different syntactic features of discourse markers such as single word, set proposition phrase, free phrase, clause and sentence are also revealed in the research

Huynh Ngoc Mai (2011) carries out an analysis with the purpose of seeing how the synonymous and antonymous expressions used in TOEFL iBT reading tests The author concludes that synonymous expressions appeared more than antonymous ones He also describes syntactic realizations of synonymous and antonymous expressions in the reading passages of TOEFL iBT They are verbs as predicative, subject complement, adjective phrase complement; nouns as subject, object, prepositional complement; adjectives

as attributive as pre-modifier, attributive as post-modifier, predicative as subject complement and adverb as adjunct

Besides researches about the TOEFL iBT, argument in critical thinking has also attracted the interests of some scholars’ in guiding the learners to have good skills to make an effective argument (Weston, 2017; Swatridge, 2014) More specifically, Stirling (2009) proposes some useful speaking and writing strategies to help learners develop an argument more effectively so that they can achieve high scores in the TOEFL iBT test

Related to argumentation, different studies in this area have been carried out by some Vietnamese researchers Typically, Vo Thị Thanh Nga (2006) compares commonly-used connectors expressing contrastive argumentation in English and Vietnamese in terms of semantic and functional features

Furthermore, a research with the title “A contrastive analysis of

common connectors in argumentation in English and Vietnamese” was

investigated by Tran Le Truc Thu (2009) which discusses the semantic and functional characteristics of connectors expressing supportive argumentation

2.6 SUMMARY

In conclusion, this chapter has presented the literature review as well

as theoretical background that supports the study including the argument as well as the TOEFL iBT test More specifically, the related theories and terms related to the study have been introduced in this chapter It is clear that all the researches related to the TOEFL iBT above have focused on different skills except for the speaking skill Furthermore, argument, despite existing for a long time, has not been studied deeply in terms of its linguistic features Therefore, a study about the syntactic and semantic features of arguments found in the speaking samples of TOEFL iBT is necessary to be investigated Plus, the analysis of linguistic features of arguments is based on the framework of Downing and Locke (2006) which helps to understand deeply

about the use of this kind of language Last but not least, main types of arguments found in the TOEFL iBT speaking test are also made clear thanks

to the framework of Bassham and his partners (2010)

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

The study was to identify the two main types of arguments as well as describe and analyze language of arguments used in the sample speaking performance of TOEFL iBT in terms of syntactic and semantic features To this end, this descriptive study was conducted with the employment of qualitative and quantitative methods to seek descriptive information about types as well as linguistic features of arguments

3.2 RESEARCH METHODS

In the study, the descriptive research was used to give a detailed description of arguments’ types and linguistic features of language of arguments

The study employed both qualitative and quantitative method to seek descriptive information of types and linguistic features of arguments Document analysis method is used to collect qualitative information about types and linguistic features of arguments by using speaking samples of TOEFL iBT More specifically, with the data collected from the speaking samples, the arguments were observed and then classified into two major types based on their distinctive features, deductive and inductive arguments Then, the percentage of frequency of occurrence of these types was presented with the assistance of quantitative method

In addition, premises and conclusion of each argument were described and analyzed in terms of syntactic and semantic features The qualitative method was applied in this stage to help to find out linguistic features of each argument

With the help of quantitative approach, the study presented the percentage of occurrence of different clause types as well as the mood types

used in the arguments Semantically, arguments were examined with the reference to different types of processes used for arguments, the result of which were utilized for the discussion in terms of their functional attributes

3.3 RESEARCH PROCEDURES

To carry out the study properly, the following steps were taken:

- Doing literature review of studies of language of arguments to identify gaps for problems to be examined in the research

- Putting questions for guiding the research in seeking both qualitative and quantitative information for the objectives set up to achieve the aim of study

- Designing research as a descriptive and explanatory study with both qualitative and quantitative approach

- Collecting the data from TOEFL iBT materials

- Dividing the arguments into 2 groups: independent tasks (INDE) and integrated tasks (INTE)

- Identifying types of arguments: induction and deduction by observing the premises and conclusion

- Investigating linguistic features of premises and conclusion of each argument The analysis of syntactic and semantic features of each argument was carried out within the clause

- Discussing the results of linguistic features of premises and conclusion

- Drawing the conclusions and suggesting some implications in using arguments in TOEFL iBT speaking test for language users and further researchers

3.4 DATA COLLECTION

3.4.1 Sampling

In order to serve the data collection and analysis of study, 80 TOEFL iBT speaking samples containing arguments were chosen as the data for

analysis 75 samples were taken from TOEFL iBT books introduced by Educational Testing Service (ETS), namely, Building skills for TOEFL iBT, Developing skills for TOEFL iBT and Mastering skills for TOEFL iBT 2nd Edition The rest was randomly collected from three websites for TOEFL iBT: https://www.bestmytest.com,

the data In independent tasks, the arguments expressing personal-opinion

argument were chosen As for integrated tasks, the arguments expressing problems-solving argument were collected

3.4.3 Coding scheme

In this study, the independent tasks and integrated tasks are labelled as INDE and INTE respectively For example, if we want to make an analysis of argument number 4 in independent tasks, then we have argument INDE-4 Moreover, each premise and conclusion is marked as P for premise and C for conclusion More specifically, we can label premise 1.2 in independent task,

we have P1.2-INDE The same coding for other premises or conclusion

Secondly, qualitative method was also used for describing and analyzing process types and syntactic elements as well as syntactic structures

of premises and conclusion in independent tasks and integrated tasks

In addition, the quantitative approach was used to find out the frequency of occurrence of deductive and inductive arguments Thus, we had the distribution rates of each type of arguments

Next, premises and conclusion in independent tasks and integrated tasks were taken into careful consideration The frequency of occurrence of process types in semantics as well as the syntactic clause types found in the arguments as well as the mood types of premises and conclusions were shown

in statistics and presented in tables or charts

Finally, the characteristics of arguments were clearly drawn based on the statistics The results of the study were generalized in order to have a complete overview about the linguistic features of arguments used in TOEFL iBT speaking samples A suggestion for further study was also concluded in the study

3.6 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

In terms of reliability, the data collected in this study was not only chosen carefully from three famous TOEFL iBT books which were published

by Educational Testing Service (ETS) - the world's largest private nonprofit educational testing and assessment organization but also from famous TOEFL iBT websites that have been widely read and practiced by many learners and test takers Therefore, the sources of data are reliable and valid Moreover, these TOEFL iBT books were published the 2nd time in 2009, which is still updated and suitable for the learners of TOEFL iBT

As regards the validity, all the procedures of the study were conducted

in a logical order which guarantees the validity

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

As previously mentioned, the study employed the framework of Downing and Locke (2006) for the analysis of syntactic and semantic features

of arguments and Bassham et al.’s framework for analyzing types of arguments This chapter focuses on how the test takers should construct an effective argument in TOEFL iBT speaking test through premises and conclusion This chapter provides a description of frequency of occurrence of types of arguments as well as linguistic features of arguments in independent tasks and integrated tasks and points out some characteristics of arguments in TOEFL iBT

4.1 TYPES OF ARGUMENTS

Arguments have traditionally been divided into two major types: deductive and inductive arguments In order to evaluate an argument, it is necessary to identify these types of arguments correctly While a deductive argument claims that the premises support the conclusion absolutely, an inductive argument claims that the premises support the conclusion, but less than 100% According to the analysis of types of arguments, there are totally

80 arguments taken into analysis, 22 of which are from integrated tasks, the rests are from independent tasks

Table 4.1 Frequency of occurrence of type of arguments

Types Number of frequency Percentage

As illustrated in Table 4.1, inductive argument is the majority of type

of argument, which accounts for 65% On the other hand, deductive

arguments occur with a lower frequency, just 35%

Figure 4.1 Types of arguments in independent tasks and integrated tasks

As can be seen in Figure 4.1, inductive arguments are present both in independent tasks and integrated tasks but with different rates On the other hand, no deductive argument can be found in integrated tasks It seems that in the TOEFL iBT speaking test, test takers are asked to give their opinions or preferable solution Thus, an inductive argument is easier for them to express their own viewpoint or what option they prefer

The detailed analysis of each type of arguments found in the data is discussed in the following sections

4.1.1 Deductive argument

In order to evaluate whether an argument deductive or inductive, it’s necessary to understand how the premises support to the conclusion of the argument In deductive arguments, the conclusion must follow necessarily from the premises and the premises must support the conclusion absolutely The following examples clearly illustrate the deductive arguments:

(4.1)

C: My favourite possession is my digital camera

P1: I love it because it is easy to use It focuses automatically, so I can always take good pictures

P2: Also, it allows me to create lasting memories I like to take pictures of my friends and family on special occasions, so I can

remember what a good time we had (INDE-1)

The argument above is formed basing on two premises P1 and P2 Thus, the conclusion is drawn from these two premises Premise 1 and 2 show the reasons why the author likes his camera with specific and persuasive

evidence like “it is easy to use”, “it focuses automatically”, “it creates lasting

memories” These are good evidence which set a logical conclusive ground

for the truth of the conclusion “the digital camera is favourite possession” In

this argument, we can see the certainty of the arguer in persuading the audience with the given premises Therefore, this argument must be treated as deductive It’s clear that deductive arguments can be found in many arguments in independent tasks, as in the examples below:

(4.2)

C: If I could purchase an expensive item right now, I would buy a laptop computer

P1: First, they are very useful I could use it to play computer games

I could also use it to do my homework, which is what I would like most about having a laptop

P2: Also, I like that it is portable I could carry it with me wherever I

go It is small and light and would fit in my backpack (INDE-12) (4.3)

C: My family’s expectations have helped me