A Study On The Types Of Dialogue And Argument Schemes In Mealtime Parent-child Argumentation

Since the 1980 s,Parent-child conversation between meals has been one of the focus situations in the study of children's language development.Because mealtime parent-child argumentation is not restricted by the relevant rules in the professional field,it has the characteristics of high freedom and more prone to controversial topics,so family dining has become an important context for parent-child debate.At present,there are few researches on parent-child debate between family meals in China,and a set of mature analysis methods have not yet been formed.Meanwhile,there is a lack of in-depth processing of corpus.In this study,30 preschool children aged 5 to 6 years in Zhejiang were taken as the research object.The first step is to set up a meal parents in the parent-child argumentation between the type of dialogue with argument schemes of corpora coding scheme:adopt NVIVO11 qualitative research tools to establish the dialogue type two master node(persuasion dialogue,the inquiry dialogue)and argument schemes types of four primary node(Argument from practice,Argument from information source,Argument from causal reasoning,Argument from rule-case reasoning).In the second step,according to the coding scheme,the author makes an in-depth analysis of the parents' dialogue types,argument schemes and their fallacies in the parent-child argumentation between meals by combining quantitative and qualitative methods.The third step focuses on the dynamic evolution process of argumentation,selects two cases with high and low argumentation quality,respectively uses the four-step method of argumentation analysis to describe and analyze the application of argument schemes of parents and children,especially evaluates the relevance of parents' application of argument schemes.The fourth step is to discussand analyze the research.The fifth step is to draw the conclusion of this study.In the sixth step,some educational suggestions are put forward.The research found that from the perspective of dialogue types,the mealtime parent-child argumentation was dominated by persuasive dialogue and supplemented by the inquiries dialogue.Among them,the persuasion dialogues are mainly exhortation eating,while the exploratory dialogues seldom appear in the parent-child argumentation between meals.Under the type of persuasion dialogue,the target of the dialogue is to persuade the children to accept their own views.The parents will think more about how to persuade the children quickly and efficiently.In the context of the inquiry dialogue,the dialogue is not aimed at persuading children,and the types of argument schemes commonly used by parents are more abundant,so that children have more freedom to express themselves.At the same time,in the parent-child argumentation between meals,it is easy to appear the transfer of conversation types,including external transfer and internal transfer,and this transfer will bring certain influence on the achievement of the conversation goal.From the perspective of the use of argument schemes,the most commonly used argument schemes by parents is the argument schemes based on practice,followed by the argument schemes based on information source and the argument schemes based on cause and effect,and the least used is the argument schemes based on rule and case.From the analysis of using fallacies of argument schemes,there are two common fallacies of parents in argumentation:one is the transfer fallacies of conversational type,the other is the use fallacies of argument schemes.To make up for the inadequacy of static analysis,this research through the Walton's "recognition and recognition dialogue context,judging the burden of proof,criticism" four footwork depth profiling of parent-child dynamic language section of argumentation between two meals,found that high quality of the parents argumentation has the characteristic such as explanatory,instructive,and the parents' argumentation has most of low quality resort to their own authority.On this basis,the author tries to discuss the development bottleneck of inter-mealtime parent-child argumentation and the reason why parents are prone toerrors in inter-mealtime parent-child argumentation.Based on the existing corpus,it reflects that the development bottleneck of parent-child argumentation between meals in China mainly lies in too many persuasion dialogues.The main reason why parents are prone to argumentation errors is that parents use too much authority and sometimes the language expression is beyond the children's understanding level.Finally,the researchers put forward the corresponding educational suggestions on how to improve the quality of parent-child argumentation:1.Parents should seize children's interest in the topic actively create rich dialogue types;2.Parents can use the four-step method of argumentative evaluation to prudently treat the shift of dialogue types in argumentation;3.Parents should use a combination of argument schemes to clarify their own views from different perspectives so as to guide children effectively and reasonably;4.Parents need to skillfully use critical questions,establish a new family argumentation culture,and help improve children's thinking level and rational thinking ability,so as to learn and grow in argumentation.