Including a conflicting point of view and evidence in an argument can significantly enhance its persuasiveness by demonstrating a writer's thorough understanding of the topic and addressing potential counterarguments. For instance, in "The Trouble with Text Speak," the author asserts that techspeak is destroying the English language and cites a study showing that students who frequently use it perform poorly on grammar tests (Article One). This point of view resonates with readers who are concerned about language decline. Conversely, in "The English Language: New and Improved," the author argues that the evolution of language is natural and even beneficial, using historical examples like the transition from Old English to its contemporary forms to illustrate the adaptability of language (Article Two). By incorporating the perspective that techspeak is a legitimate adaptation and providing evidence that frequent texters can still employ proper grammar when needed, the opposing article effectively acknowledges the concerns of traditionalists while advocating for the acceptance of new forms of communication. This approach can help readers feel more informed and engaged, as they see both sides of the argument, allowing them to arrive at a more nuanced understanding rather than a one-sided conclusion. Therefore, presenting conflicting viewpoints not only enriches the discussion but also fosters critical thinking among readers, making the overall argument more compelling and comprehensive.
Works Cited:
- "The Trouble with Text Speak."
- "The English Language: New and Improved."