read the examples and answer the question. you can just read the example and put it in different words
1 In the book ‘They Say/I Say’, in order to argue persuasively, a writer needs to be ‘in dialogue with others, then summarizing others’ arguments are central to your arsenal of basic moves’ (Graff and Birkenstein p. 30). It is important that you put yourself in dialogue with others because writers need to map their claims relative to those of other people, when strong assertions are made. It is important to know how to sum up what others are saying (Graff and Birkenstein p.30). It is also important that you refer to the past words of others, like Martin Luther King (p. 33). Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein make it known that in order to keep an audience engaged, ‘a writer needs to explain what he or she is responding to’ and needs to be ‘either before offering that response or, very early in the discussion’ (p. 20). A writer should not keep their readers in suspense for too long. Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein state that arguments need to be presented as ‘part of some larger conversation, indicating something about the arguments of others that you are supporting, opposing, amending, complicating, or qualifying’ (p. 21). Writers who make strong claims need to mirror with what is relative to those of other people. Graff, Gerald, and Cathy Birkenstein. They Say / I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic 2 In chapters 1 and 2 of They Say/I Say, Graff and Birkenstein make the assertion that one must acknowledge the "larger conversation" at hand as well as be in "dialogue with others" by discussing what the other side claims while making an argument in order for their contention to be well rounded and credible. This is important, because just as in the example of Dr. X in the book, the argument must be able to be fully understood in order for the audience to make a conclusion for themselves. Dr. X's fault in his speech, was failing to explain to their listeners what, exactly, was impacted by their point of view. By only discussing the specific topic of interest, the speaker left the audience confused as to why exactly the speech was necessary, why it matters. Additionally, writers must address the other side of an argument in order for their readers to be able to make their own interpretation of the matter. If I were to write an essay about the dangers of marijuana and its effects, without acknowledging its medicinal purposes or its legality in some states, my assertion would be entirely biased and, therefore, lose credibility. If my argument is too one sided to provide adequate information to my readers, it could be considered misinformation and the readers would only 'nod' at the essay, instead of internalize it and form an opinion for themselves. 3 Graff and Birkenstein advise that acknowledging "the larger conversation" in academic writing is crucial not only to maintaining and building your argument but also organizing and delivering it in a way that keeps your audience interested and engaged. By "starting with a summary of others’ views,", be it the opposing side or someone you agree with, you are introducing the argument and the problem so the audience has a clear understanding of the context of the situation (Birkenstein and Graff, 21). Even when starting a conversation with someone, a person must start off with what is happening so the people involved in the discussion can see how they came up with their stance and why they did so; no one states, "I think x is wrong and here is why," off the bat, because it seems too random and abrupt in a conversation. By providing widely maintained views first or the other side of the controversy, the writer is providing context. Another reason why this strategy is important is because it forces the writer "to see [one's] argument from their perspective" ( Birkenstein and Graff, 31). This broadens the writer's possibilities on how to tackle an argument using criticism and opposing views as a framework to deliver their own points. They might ask themselves," How can I address point A of what X says? Why did X say this- what evidence pointed them towards this conclusion? Point B of what X says might be true but what they don't discuss point d ," etc. etc. Graff, Gerald, and Cathy Birkenstein. "They Say / I Say": the Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. 3rd ed., W.W. Norton & Company, 2014. 4 In They Say/ I Say in the first chapter I learned a lot about the necessities to be a good writer. The first chapter is primarily about hoe you should put the pieces together with what you are writing about and then give an understanding of your point of view referenced as the "they say" pg.4. In the second chapter it is mainly discussing how to write a good overall summary called "list summaries". The summary is extremely important because you use the information that excites you and you write about it and should have a good "spin" like the authors said. With this being said the larger conversation is extremely important to acknowledge because it will get the reader listening and wanting to read more. The reader is the main person you think about when writing so your writing should be intriguing to draw the reader in and wanting more. 5 Hello Armanya! Thank you for your response. I especially enjoyed your analysis of chapter 2 and the way writers ought to summarize works they use in their discussions. I do believe, however, that instead of primarily summarizing the pieces of a work that "excite" you, a writer should give a well-rounded summary, accurately depicting the original author's argument to ensure the argument is properly discussed. After such a summary, then the writer may express their own ideas that excite them and put a "spin" on the argument from their own perspective. This way, the writer's argument is what is sparking the reader's interest and keeping them engaged in the writing.. According to Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein in They Say/I Say, Chapters 1 and 2, why is it important to acknowledge the “larger conversation” in academic writing? In other words, why is it essential to be “in dialogue with others” and discuss “what others are saying” an issue?