Sri Sri, Saifuddin Ahmad Husin, Sovia Rahmaniah


This research used argumentative discourse which is aimed to find out components of argument and structures of argument that is used by Sir Ken Robinson in TED Talk. Toulmin’s model and Cohen’s theory were used to recognize the components and structures of arguments. The data used for analysis were videos and the transcripts. There are two videos which are being analyzed; “Bring on the Learning Revolution” and “Do School Kill Creativiy?”. It presented five data analysis procedures: compiling (choosing data), disassembling (compling data into smaller potion and coding), reassembling (indicating to categories), interpreting( analyzing the data and explaining the data), and concluding (drawing conclusion) The result revealed that from both videos “Bring on the Learning Revolution” and “Do School Kill Creativiy?”, there were several components components that are used; claim, data, and warrant were 100% used in all arguments, qualifier was 55, 56%, rebuttal was 27,80%, and backing was 88,90%. For the structure of arguments that is used by Sir Ken Robinson in both his videos the percentage coherent structure of pre-order was 66,7%, for post-order was 22,2%, and for hybrid was 11,1%. Then, for linguistic clue showed that re- direction clue had 16,7% then connectives had 83,3%. and evidence relationship had 100%.


Argumentation; Components; Structures; Argumentative Discourse

Full Text:



Besnard, Philippe & Hunter, Anthony (2008). Elements of Argumentation.

Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Brown, H. D. (2010). Language Assessment Principles and Classroom Practices.

New York: Pearson Education.

Cohen, R. (1987, January). Analyzing The Sturcture of Argumentative Discourse.

Computational Linguistics, 13, 11-24.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Second Edition Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design Choosing Among Five Approaches. London: Sage Publications.

Crystal, David. (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University.

Eemeran, F. H. (2001). Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory. Amsterdam

Amsterdam University Press.

Eemeren, F. H. (1984). Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussion. Holland/U.S.A: Foris Publications.

Eemeren, F. H. (2002). Argumentation Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation.

London: Lawrence Erlibaum Associate Publishers.

Ellis, Donald,G (2008). Argumentative Discourse. The International Encyclopedia of Communication.

Fischer, F. a. (1993). The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning.

London: University College London Press Limited.

Freeman, J. B. (2011). Argument Structure: Representation and Theory. New York: Springer.

Hunter, P. B. (2008). Elements of Argumentation . London: The MIT Press.

Mirza, N. M. (2009). Argumentation and Education Theoritical Foundations and Practices. (A.-N. P. Clermont, Ed.) New York: Springer.

Rees, M.A.Van (2001). Characteristics of Argumentative Discourse. Amsterdam: Amsterdam School for Cultural Analysis (ASCA) (UvA) Retrieved from research/ RecordID/ OND1285268

Renkema, J. (1993). Discourse Studies: An Introductory Textbook. Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company.

Rosyidah, N. (2008). A Discourse Analysis on Argumentative Statements Delivered By Democratic Presidential Nominees in The 2008 Presidential Debate of USA During Primary Elections Season. Malang: Unpublished Thesis: Undergraduate Program the State Islamic University of Malang .

TED. (2018, July 22). TEDTalk. Retrieved from TED:

TED. (2018, July 22). TEDTalk. Retrieved from TED:



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Sri Sri, Saifuddin Ahmad Husin, Sovia Rahmaniah

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Printed ISSN : 2086-9606 | Online ISSN  : 2549-2454



LET Journal Indexed by:

Creative Commons License
LET (LINGUISTICS, LITERATURE, AND LANGUAGE TEACHING) licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.