CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSIONS, PEDAGOGICAL RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

4.1 Conclusions
The study has come up with the following conclusions: 1- Accusation is the most common pragmatic strategy of getting into argumentation in the selected novels. This is clearly shown in its percentages in the three novels respectively (that is, 50%, 64.285%, and 46.153%). 2- The notion of argumentative competence (i.e. abiding by the combination of both the effective and the appropriate arguing) as developed in this study has proved its correctness and adequacy. This is evident in the percentages of its employment (that is, 87.5%, 71.428%, and 100%) in the three novels respectively. 3- Disagreement and psychological disengagement are the most common pragmatic strategies of getting out of argumentation in Jane Eyre (in that they have 37.5 % for each among the other strategies). Disagreement is the most common pragmatic strategy of getting out of argumentation in Wuthering Heights (in that it has 50% among the other strategies); and agreement is the most common pragmatic strategy of getting out of argumentation in The Tenant of Wildfell Hall (in that it has 38.461% among the other strategies). 4- The developed model has been found to be useful and adequate for pragmatically analyzing argumentation in the selected novels.

159 5- There is a strong relationship between argumentation and some of the major themes in the three novels. 6- Argumentation can be triggered by any strategy, i.e. it is not specified only by the strategies mentioned in this study which is limited to three novels. In real life situations, argumentation can be triggered by, for instance, asking a question, complaining, etc. 7- Through the analyzed examples, it has been shown that arguing competently, that is, effectively and appropriately, does not guarantee how the final stage is concluded (i.e. positively or negatively). This means that it is a matter of personal decision whether arguers are convinced or not. 8- Strikingly, the analysis of the data has shown that abiding by the Cooperative Principle (i.e. observing the conversational maxims consistently) is not a very dull affair (See p. 67). In argumentation, interactants have to keep to the Cooperative Principle and its four maxims (rather than violate them) in order to be described as effective arguers. 9- In argumentation, keeping to the Politeness Principle is very important. This is evident when revealing that in the majority of situations in which this principle has not been appealed to, argumentation terminates with a quarrel, which is a very dispreferred strategy of concluding argumentation. 10- Saussures resembling language to a game of chess applies, to a great extent, to the very language of argumentation with the difference that in argumentation the two players (i.e. arguers) see very well in that each makes her/his moves in response to those of the other, unlike Saussures players of whom one is blind and the other sees very well.

160

4.2 Pedagogical Recommendations

With reference to the conclusions arrived at in this study, it is pedagogically recommended that: 1- Teachers should develop the argumentative competence of their students. That is, they should train them to abide by the Cooperative Principle and the Politeness Principle when engaging in argumentation. 2- Students should avoid appealing to inappropriateness (i.e. violating the Politeness Principle) when arguing with others. Violating this principle leads, in the majority of cases, to quarreling which is not one of the manifestations of a civilized society. 3- Students should learn to develop their argumentation not only in speaking but also in writing. This is of great importance in writing prcis, essays, or researchpapers, as it gives insights into the students knowledge of the topic under investigation. The notion of argumentative competence as developed here can, also, be of help in this regard. 4- Argumentation should be given more attention in undergraduate studies in order to make students capable of expressing their opinions properly, in addition to accepting those of others with open-mindedness. In other words, students should be taught to let others express themselves as properly and freely as they (i.e. the students) like to express themselves. 5- Argumentative situations should be included in the materials of the textbooks taught to students in pre-university and university stages to familiarize them with such situations.

161

4.3 Suggestions for Further Research

To confirm the findings of this study, the following are suggestions for future research: 1- A pragmatic study of argumentation in some dramatic texts. 2- A pragmatic study of argumentation in trials. 3- A pragmatic study of argumentation in interviews, press conferences, etc. 4- A pragmatic study of argumentation in religious or political debates. 5- A comparative pragmatic study of argumentation between two (or more) writers whether novelists or dramatists. 6- A contrastive pragmatic study of argumentation in English and Arabic novels or dramas.