From different angles, sides and levels to demonstrate a certain point of view and a certain thing, each level and side is a "sub-argument". The sub-argument is the development and explanation of the central argument and the concretization of the central argument. Therefore, the premise of refining sub-arguments is to first determine the central argument and express it in the form of sentences. The common methods to refine sub-parameters are:

1. Ask the reason method-that is, ask a "why"

Questioning the cause method is to trace the conditions and reasons of this conclusion by taking the central argument as the conclusion, or to penetrate into the essence through the phenomenon, or to reveal the reasons of the problem, thus forming a sub-argument. Because causality is the universal connection between all things and phenomena, it is a widely used method to use causality analysis to form arguments in argumentative writing.

Example 1: The topic of the composition for the college entrance examination in Beijing is: Write an argumentative essay with the theme of "security", which contains the meanings of "stability", "security", "tranquility", "ease" and "contentment". Words: no less than 800 words.

Refining: First, expand the topic (topic) into a sentence (central argument), such as: safety is the premise of ensuring production. Then ask the reason for the phenomenon expressed in this sentence, and get the sub-argument: (1) Without safety, production will be threatened; (2) Without security, the life of workers cannot be guaranteed; (3) Without security, it is impossible to achieve the goal of long-term profitability.

Exodus 2: As the old saying goes, "No rules can make Fiona Fang". Modern people say that how to innovate is to break the traditional framework and break through the rules. Please write the title "Rules".

Analysis: first expand the topic (topic) into a sentence (central argument): without rules, it is difficult to be round. Then put forward the reasons for the phenomenon expressed in this sentence, and get sub-arguments: ① Without rules, individuals cannot become talents; ② Without rules, the collective can't be stable; Without rules, the country cannot develop. Lan Zi said: These three arguments are not about reasons, but about the consequences of "no rules" and the explanation of "it is difficult to make a square".

Example 3: The essay "The answer is colorful" is the topic of the college entrance examination.

Abstract: The topic "Rich and colorful answers" is a sentence (central argument) in itself, which needs no expansion. Questioning the reason of the phenomenon expressed in this sentence, we get sub-arguments: (1) The world is ever-changing and things are complicated; (2) People look at problems in different ways and angles; (3) hold different standards when judging things.

2. questioning method-that is, ask a "how to do"

The so-called questioning method is to solve the problem of "how to do" in argumentation and put forward specific measures and ways to solve the problem. These specific measures and methods are often the arguments of the article. To refine sub-arguments with "questioning method", we must first establish the central argument.

Example 1: Jiangxi college entrance examination, titled "face"

Refining: First expand the topic (topic) into one sentence (that is, the central argument): the "face" of the city (that is, the overall image to outsiders) should be beautified. Then ask the way to beautify: (1) beautify the natural environment; (2) improving urban public security; (3) Improve the civilized quality of citizens.

Example 2: Hunan college entrance examination, entitled "Talking about Emotion"

Refining: First, expand the key word "passion" in the topic "Talking about passion" into one sentence (that is, the central argument): People should have passion, and then ask: How can people have passion? So I got three arguments: (1) indomitable, not afraid of wind and frost, not afraid of cold rain; ⑵ Brave and fearless, brave and not afraid of sacrifice; (3) Self-confidence and optimism, no matter how many storms you experience, you can always see the clouds. Lan Zi said: There are some problems in these three sub-arguments, which are also common problems of our classmates. It seems that it is good to write three sub-arguments, whether they are on the same logical level or not, whether they are repetitive or overlapping. These three arguments are all about how to face the difficulties in life. In fact, life is not only difficult, but also rich. Mencius' words can be used to explain the spirit, forming three sub-arguments: wealth can't be lewd, poverty can't be moved, and power can't be bent. If we really want to use these three arguments, it is not impossible. If it is revised, it can be changed to: (1) Unswervingly: Keep working in the right direction; ⑵ Brave and fearless: go forward bravely, not afraid of difficulties, not afraid of sacrifice; (3) I am confident and optimistic, and I am naturally useful. Although there are many storms, I can always see the sunshine through the clouds. )

Example 3: Proposition composition "Learn to appreciate others".

Refining: the title is the central argument and does not need to be expanded into sentences. Focusing on "how to learn to appreciate others", this paper puts forward three specific ways to solve the problem (namely, three sub-arguments): learn to appreciate others and ask yourself to have an open-minded and cheerful style; Learn to appreciate others, that is, to try our best to explore the bright spots in others, learn from them, and not seek perfection or envy talents; Learning to appreciate others means helping each other, learning from each other, learning from each other's strengths and improving together.

3. Ask the result method-that is, ask a "what will happen"

The method of questioning results is based on the central argument determined by the topic (topic) to infer the results (significance, value and influence) that will be produced under this premise.

Example 1: The topic "The answers are colorful"

Refining: On the premise of "rich and colorful answers", we can explain the meaning (result) of "rich and colorful answers". In this way, we can think: (1) In the field of thinking, it is precisely because of the diversity of answers that there are so many inventions and creations and the situation of "a hundred schools of thought contend"; (2) In the field of literature and art, it is precisely because of the rich and colorful answers that the styles and creative methods are diverse, and a hundred flowers blossom; (3) In the economic field, it is precisely because of the diversity of answers that our economy is prosperous and our social life is colorful.

Example 2: Take "Embrace Life" as the topic.

Abstraction: The topic of "embracing life" is the central argument and does not need to be expanded into sentences. It is extracted from the inference result: (1) If you embrace life and love it, you will be willing to pay for it; (2) Embrace life and love life, and you will have the strength to struggle; (3) Embrace and love life, and you will create a better life. (These three arguments are not at the same level, but (1) and (2) lead to (3), that is, you are willing to pay for your life and have the power to struggle, so as to create a better life. It can be revised as: (1) Embrace life and love life, so as to realize the beauty of life and have the ability to discover beauty; (2) Embrace and love life, so as to face the ugliness of life and have the power to turn evil into good; Only by embracing and loving life can we transcend the mediocrity of life and have the confidence to create a new life. )

Example 3: The topic "This mountain looks at the height of that mountain"

Abstraction: The topic "This mountain looks at that mountain" is the central argument, and there is no need to expand it into a sentence. It is extracted by inference results: ① People will never be satisfied when one mountain looks at another; (2) If one mountain looks at the other, people will strive for perfection; When one mountain looks at another, one will go forward bravely.

4. Ask the object method-that is, ask a "who participated"

Query object method is to express the central argument determined by the topic (title) in a sentence, and then see who (things, things) can be involved in the predicate of this sentence, and then complete or list it in detail, that is, it becomes a sub-argument.

Example 1: Guangdong college entrance examination, titled "Carving an angel in your heart"

Refine: Make the topic concrete as "Carve an angel in your heart with love" and take this as the central argument. The people involved in the predicate "Diao" are:, Li,, and so on. Therefore, it can be combined into three contents in the text of the article: (1) Cong Fei carved angels in his heart with love; (2) Li carved an angel in his heart with love; (3) Hong Zhanhui and others carved angels in their hearts with love.

Example 2: Writing on the topic of "the most beautiful color"

Refining: Add the topic to "What is the most beautiful color", so that we can get the following arguments: (1) Green is the most beautiful color, because it is the color of life; (2) Red is the most beautiful color, because it symbolizes enthusiasm; White is the most beautiful color because it symbolizes purity.

5. Ask the content method-that is, ask a "what is involved"

Questioning the content method is to express the central argument determined by the topic (topic) in one sentence, then see who (things, things) the object of this sentence can relate to, and then make up or list it in detail, that is, it becomes a sub-argument.

Example 1: Jiangxi college entrance examination, titled "face"

Refining: expand the topic into one sentence: The Three Kingdoms Opera is a "face-saving" drama (the central argument), and then decompose the object "face-saving" drama in detail, leading to three sub-arguments: (1) The Three Kingdoms Opera is about Cao Cao's "face-saving" drama; ⑵ The Drama of Three Kingdoms is a drama about Zhuge Liang's "face". (3) The Three Kingdoms Opera is a drama about Guan Yu's "face".

Example 2: The title "Reject a loser"

Refining: the topic is the central argument. The concrete decomposition of "loser" can form three sub-arguments: (1) rejecting mediocre and incompetent people (advocating both ability and political integrity); (2) Rejecting cowards and boring people (advocating boldness); (3) Reject short-sightedness (advocate aiming too high).

It is worth noting that: (1) For compositions with no clear topic, such as material composition and topic suggestion composition, you can express your views in one sentence first, and then refine your arguments according to the above methods; (2) In specific compositions, the above five kinds are sometimes used at the same time, such as: an excellent composition by Guangdong candidates, and three sub-arguments: Hong Zhanhui is responsible for carving himself into an angel with a responsible heart; Xu Benyu carved himself into an angel with a grateful heart; Li carved himself into an angel with persistent heart. Three sub-parameters are applied to the fourth and fifth methods.

Second, the argument statement.

The requirements for using sub-arguments are: deduction, separation and arrangement; At the same time, it needs language to express epigrams.

1. "Deduction" means that several arguments listed should answer the same question from the same angle. If some people say from the perspective of "what", some people say from the perspective of "why" and some people say from the perspective of "how to do it", it is difficult to concentrate arguments when writing articles. For example, some students listed the following outlines on the topic of "the pleasure of reading": reading is bitter, but there is joy in it; Reading can make people smart, so it's fun; Reading must have a purpose and a method in order to really enjoy it. These three articles each return to a question, instead of answering the same question from the same angle, that is, there is no "deduction". (This kind of defect is different from the hierarchical structure we are talking about. If hierarchical structure is used, it should be expressed in depth around one aspect, not all aspects. For example, ask questions: reading is hard, how can it be interesting? Problem analysis: reading is hard, but the result is fun. The result is not the ultimate success or failure, but its own growth. Solve the problem: Don't be afraid of suffering, turn suffering into pleasure. )

2. "Separation" means that the boundaries between the listed arguments are clear, not overlapping and overlapping, and there is no inclusion relationship. The following outline listed by a classmate on the topic of "the pleasure of reading" is not separated: reading can increase knowledge, enrich the mind and have fun; Reading is an elegant spiritual activity and two kinds of fun; Reading can improve quality, cultivate sentiment and entertain and educate. "Improving quality" mentioned in the third article actually includes "increasing knowledge and enriching the mind" mentioned in the first article, while "cultivating sentiment" and "elegant spiritual activities" also overlap, leading to logical confusion and unclear thinking.

3. "Orderly" means that the order of argumentation should be logical and reasonable. Also on the topic of "the pleasure of reading", the outline of the following classmate has the problem of poor arrangement: reading can solve people's troubles and cheer up; Reading can give people rich knowledge and high wisdom; Reading can make people love life and work; Reading can make people set up lofty ideals and cultivate noble sentiments. These sub-arguments all explain "reading pleasure" from the perspective of "why", so they are interpreted accurately. However, they are inseparable, and it seems that 1 and 3 can be merged. There is also the issue of order. 1 and 2 should be said first? I'm afraid it has to be 2 before 1; Which should I say first, the third or the fourth? I'm afraid it will be three forty-five. If 1 and 3 are combined, the more reasonable order should be: reading can give people rich knowledge and high wisdom; Reading can make people set up lofty ideals and cultivate noble sentiments; Reading can cheer people up, love life and work.

The following summary meets the requirements of "reservation", "separation" and "smooth arrangement":

(1) For young people, answer the question from the perspective of "why": reading can increase knowledge; Reading can distinguish right from wrong; Reading can increase talents; Reading can cultivate sentiment.

⑵ For some middle-aged people who have lost learning opportunities, answer questions from the perspective of "why": reading can supplement knowledge; Reading helps to work; Reading is good for educating children.

(3) For the elderly, answer the question from the perspective of "why": reading can make the elderly feel safe (God); Reading can make you old (wise); Reading can make old people feel useful. It can be revised as follows: reading can make the elderly stronger; Reading can make the elderly feel useful; Reading can make the elderly feel safe. )

(4) For those who are not good at reading, answer questions from the perspective of "how to do it": have correct guiding ideology; Pay attention to the combination of "Bo" and "Shen"; Pay attention to apply what you have learned. (it can be modified: it is necessary to clarify the reading goal; Pay attention to proper methods; Apply what you have learned. )

5. For those who don't like reading, answer the question from the perspective of "what is it": reading has fun in "learning and thinking" (knowledge acquisition); The pleasure of reading lies in "knowing everything" (emotional sound); The fun of reading lies in "applying what you have learned" (mastering skills).

As can be seen from the above outline, the same answer is "why", because the content of the answer is different for different objects. The so-called "deduction" should be like this if it is strictly required. From the perspective of "sequential arrangement", the sub-arguments are in a parallel relationship, while others are progressive.