Key Techniques in Expository and Persuasive Discourse
Understanding Illustration in Expository Discourse
The main points of a passage are contained in its topical sentences. For these sentences to be fully understood, several other sentences must cooperate with them. This cooperation is generally known as illustration.
To explain or clarify the topical sentence in expository discourse, illustration analyzes the topic or issue. This process mirrors how we ordinarily observe and reason about our world, making use of specific linguistic devices known as the techniques of illustration.
Core Techniques of Illustration
The primary techniques of illustration in expository discourse include:
- Definition
- Exemplification
- Identification
- Contrast
- Classification and Division
- Cause and Effect
- Process Analysis
Applying these techniques leads to different methods of textual development. For example, using the first technique results in the development of a topic by definition, while using the second results in development by exemplification, and so on.
The Role of Subtopics in Textual Progression
A sentence used within one of these illustration techniques can be developed further, giving rise to a subtopic. This subtopic might serve as a minor piece of information or be expanded into one or more paragraphs, potentially displacing the original topic in importance and becoming the new main focus of the passage.
In summary, textual progressivity is achieved through two powerful resources:
- The techniques of illustration
- The emergence of subtopics, which often arise from sentences used in the illustration process
Exposition, Persuasion, and Argument Compared
Another modality of discourse is persuasion, or persuasive discourse. While literary essays, journalistic articles, and scientific papers are typical examples of expository discourse, persuasive discourse is commonly found in political propaganda, advertising, and religious preaching.
Shared Foundations of Exposition and Persuasion
Some specialists consider persuasive discourse a variation of expository discourse for two main reasons:
- To construct a convincing and logically ordered argument, persuasion employs the same illustration techniques found in expository discourse, which are used by communication professionals, preachers, and teachers.
- Both discourse types share the general goal of presenting reasonable, sound information to appeal to the receiver’s understanding. In other words, both rely on the logical and systematic organization of information.
Distinguishing Aims and Strategies
Despite their similarities, the specific aims of exposition and persuasion differ. Expository discourse provides information to explain or clarify, making an idea or thought more comprehensible. In contrast, persuasive discourse provides information to convince the receiver, aiming to elicit a specific conviction, action, or emotion. Persuasion may also need to arouse the receiver’s feelings to prompt action.
Persuasion can be defined as the process of inducing a voluntary change in someone’s attitudes, beliefs, or behavior through the transmission of a message. While both exposition and persuasion aim to clarify, persuasion and argumentation clarify in order to convince. Persuasion often encourages further reflection, whereas argumentation seeks to directly influence the receiver’s actions or behavior.
Argumentation vs. Persuasion
Distinguishing between argumentation and persuasion presents a challenge. While argumentation traditionally appeals to reason and persuasion to emotion, this distinction is often blurred because:
- Most messages combine both reason and emotion; it is rare for either strategy to be used in isolation.
- A text seldom acknowledges that it is appealing to emotions rather than reason.
For example, some advertisements for beauty products claim to be “argumentative” by citing scientific facts. However, these “facts” are often dubious. The real goal is to impress or overwhelm the reader with alleged evidence that they may not fully understand, effectively appealing to emotion under the guise of reason.