The article I chose holds the following elements of an argument:
It obviously holds a claim, as previously explained in our first assignment. It holds warrant in stating that a company's name must captivate the customer's attention, for most people are attracted to catchy phrases that stand out from the norm. The data presented was a list of bad company names, each followed with brief grounds as to why the name choice was poor.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I think that you're generally correct in how you break down the argument via the Toulmin model, but you give very little info here to help the reader see what you're stating. For starters, you should articulate exactly what the claim is (even if stated in an earlier blog post). How you word this will determine whether the data and warrant make sense.
ReplyDeleteIt could be stated thusly:
Claim: Companies should select names carefully
(because)
Data: customers can react badly to a company's name.
Warrant: people will react poorly to a bad name, even if the product or service is good