عنوان مقاله [English]
A debate is a bilateral conversation in which one of the parties is a supporter of an action, procedure, hypothesis, or a particular theory, and the other is against it, each trying to overcome the other by giving reasons. In this regard, aiming to identify the argumentation style of Parvin Etesami in her debate poems, we conducted this research by applying Toulmin’s theory. In order to answer the research questions, a sample of 12 debate poems was analyzed from these three aspects: a) identifying and naming the poet’s applied warrants, b) identifying her claims and their fields, and c) analyzing her used qualifiers. Consequently, 32 warrants (=topos) were identified in Parvin's poems, and then named, among which a) history and experience, b) preventive measures of danger and threat, c) controlling sensual desires, d), talent and ability, and e) name-interpretation were at the top of all applied warrants. On the other hand, the warrants applied were the basis for claims and recommendations in a variety of fields including co-operation, punctuality, world-view, refreshment and recreation, maternal love and effort, aesthetics, truth-wisdom, denial of racism, unity, equality, prosperity, experience, caution against dangers, fighting government and administrative corruption, anti-crime arguments, anti-superstition, hope, psychology and pathology of poverty, self-sufficiency, perfectionism, opportunism, realism, justice, kinship, and marriage. Another finding showed that qualifiers which indicate high degrees of certainty such as bayad (=must), nabayad (=shouldn’t), hargez (=never), and basi (=much) were highly frequent in the poet’s argumentation style.