VARIATIONS OF ‘WITNESS ARGUMENTS’ IN LEARNING SCIENTIFIC WRITING FOR STUDENTS

Abstract

One of the characteristics of scientific articles is that there are variations in arguments as a form of a writer's scientific accountability for the contents of the article. An argument can be said to be successful if a statement can be fortified with various reasons and evidence (varied arguments). Through the construction of varied arguments, readers can be convinced that the issues raised are scientifically resolved. This article examines the variation of 'witness argument' in teaching scientific writing for students. The basic theory used is Douglas Walton's witness argument model. The variety of witness arguments as a basic reference for learning to write scientifically is considered urgent considering that witness arguments are not only in the form of expert opinion arguments as so far made by most authors, but there are still other types of arguments to fortify position statements. The article uses a literature study approach, which is a study of relevant documents and literatures. Based on the results of the study found three things. First, in scientific writing learning, variations of expert opinion arguments can be made in the form of expert opinion arguments 1, expert opinion arguments 2, and expert opinion arguments 3. Furthermore, as a form of persuasion, analogy arguments and practical reasoning arguments can be added. Second, in the study of scientific writing, fact-hypothesis arguments can be varied in the form of expert opinion arguments 1, expert opinion arguments 2, expert opinion arguments 3, precedent arguments, and exception arguments. Third, other forms of variation for practical reasoning arguments, namely analogy arguments, precedent arguments, expert opinion arguments 1, and expert opinion arguments 2. Through varied argument construction, an article fulfills its merit (reputable).