Analytical Research on the Expression of Argumentative Discourse from the Perspective of Generalized Argumentation—In the Example of Jack Ma’s Verbal Advocacy of 996 Work System*

Xiaoqi Zhang

Abstract. This article focuses on the expressive analysis of argumentative discourse,aiming to extract the expression rules of Generalized Argumentation.This article first attempts to give a framework for analyzing the expression of argumentative discourse(that is,the expression analytic framework),and elaborate the four elements and their relationships in the framework;then,based on this framework,the article explains the specific research procedure(that is,expression analytic procedure);at last,with the expression analytic framework and procedure as methods,the article analyzes the argumentative discourse of Jack Ma’s advocacy of 996 working hour system and obtains expression rules in order to show their feasibility.

1 Introduction

Proposed in the background of contemporary argumentation research,Generalized Argumentation theory inherits argumentation thoughts of Toulmin and Pragmadialecticians.Toulmin Model becomes concerned with the functional relationship among argument components instead of formal relationship,and reflects the fielddependency of argument.Based on Speech Act Theory in pragmatics,Pragma-dialectics describes argumentation as a kind of speech act,and emphasizes to reveal the typical argumentative patterns in different communicative domains.Generalized Argumentation theory complies with the functionalization and contextualization trend of argumentation research([1],p.92),and takes on a pragmatic analysis of argument instead of a semantic one ([5]).Modern argumentation theories mainly adopt the method of theoretical analysis to study argumentative practices of mainstream culture.Whereas,Generalized Argumentation theory takes interest in argumentative activities of various socio-cultural communities including those of the mainstream culture,and based on the data through fieldwork investigation,it aims to obtain argumentation rules of some community and its members through case analysis and interpretation([4]),which could add to the methods of argumentation research as well as help to broaden its remit.

Theories of argumentation can be divided into two different kinds:those of analysis and those of appraisal.The former presents the argumentation structures and patterns based on which the latter carries out its assessments.It is in this sense that the analysis of argumentative discourse lays foundation for argumentation studies.Generalized Argumentation theory takes argumentation as a social interaction and adopts a bottom-up manner in the analysis of argumentation practices for the sake of propriety.This bottom-up manner does not assume an a priori conception of what is rational,nor does it advocate rational reconstructions of argumentative discourses with the help of pre-established argumentative models or rules.Rather,it sticks to a socio-cultural interpretation in analyzing empirical data of argumentative practices,attempting to find out,in the multifarious argumentative practices,the implicit argumentation structures and rules used in particular socio-cultural communities by looking at the argumentative discourse in an ever-changing context in combination to the socio-cultural background of argumentation practices.To achieve this goal,Generalized Argumentation theory comes up with the localized procedure.([5,4])

The localized procedure of Generalized Argumentation theory has the following five steps([5,4]):

(1)to collect relevant socio-cultural background information related to argumentation such as values,traditions,customs and the like.

(2)to collect empirical argumentation data through fieldwork investigation.

(3)to analyze the data in (2)on the basis of (1)and find candidate argumentation rules and strategies by interpreting the argumentation discourse actions involved.

(4)to justify the reasonableness of the candidate argumentation rules and strategies according to(1).

(5)to test the argumentation rules justified in(4)in the feld.

Of these steps,the third does not only encompasses an analysis of argumentative discourses but also require acquisition or abstraction of four kinds of rule on the basis of the analysis:context comprehension rule,function rule,expression rule and division rule.It is worth noting that rule-finding is the basic problem for research in Generalized Argumentation theory.Thus,the third step plays a key role in the localized procedure.However,no specific analytic framework,not to mention a clear working procedure,has so far been proffered in Generalized Argumentation theory with regard to how analysis of argumentative discourses could be implemented so as to find out aforesaid four kinds of argumentation rule.Considering that different analytic focuses and procedures are there to be had in corresponding to argumentation rules of different kinds,we need to bring forth differentiated research frameworks and procedures for acquiring each kind of argumentation rule.In this paper,we opt for one kind—expression rule and attempt to provide it with corresponding analytic framework and procedure.

According to Generalized Argumentation theory,expression rules answers the question of“how to do”,that is,in a given context how discourse is generated to carry out a given function?([5,4])Therefore,in order to acquire the expression rule of discourse,researchers should make a specific analysis of discourse and focus on how discourse is used to express argumentative function,thus revealing the discoursefunction mechanism.In this connection,we will focus our attention on analyzing the expression of argumentative discourse in this paper,attempting to put forward a framework guiding how to do analysis concerning discourse expression (called expression analytic framework)and a corresponding analytic procedure so as to provide a clear and systematic way to obtain the expression rule of argumentative discourse.On basis of these,we will apply the proposed framework to analyzing the discursive expression in a particular discourse,that is,Jack Ma’s verbal advocacy of 996 work system,concretely demonstrating how the analytical framework and procedure for discursive expression proposed hitherto can be used to obtain the expression rules of generalized argumentation.By so doing,we could show the applicability of our analytic framework and procedure.

2 Analysis of Expression of Argumentative Discourse

A pragmatic approach to the contemporary discourse analysis features the Perspective View of pragmatics of Verschueren and Normative Pragmatics theory of Jacobs.The Perspective View of pragmatics([8])studies the functioning of language in actual contexts of use,focusing on the mutual adaptation of language and context.Normative Pragmatics ([2,3])emphasizes a study on the rhetorical strategies of discourse,thus revealing the persuasion rationale of discourse.As is well known,argumentation is a highly complex social action.Before an argumentative discourse is produced,a decision needs to be made as to what function the discourse to be produced is to carry out.After that,it is to be decided how a discourse is to be formed in order to carry out the function.The realization of the function does not only depend on context and language but also depends on the strategies to be used.These three are closely related to one another and the use of the three are all guided by the underlying expression rules.Therefore,in this paper we will deal with the analysis of discursive expression with regard to not only the recognition of discourse functions,the strategies,context and language together with their relations that would impinge on the realization of the functions,but also dedicate to obtain expression rules for guiding the production of discourse.

To do this,this paper provides an analytical framework (expression analytic framework)to analyze the expression of argumentative discourse and specifies the procedure for discourse expression analysis(expression analytic procedure).The expressive analysis of argumentative discourse is aimed at addressing the issue of abstraction of expression rule,which helps to find out expression rule from discourse by recognizing and specifying elements of expression rule and their relations.Therefore,the process of analyzing argumentative discourse is at the same time the process of abstracting expression rule.When we have made a clear analysis of the implementing process of discourse,we will be clear about the specific use of expression rule.

It needs pointing out that since the expression rules abstracted in the discourse analysis unavoidably take on some personal preferences and linguistic habits of the individual arguers,which have reflected the practical argumentative thinking from the individual perspective of arguers,there is a need for further appraising and defending so as to decide whether these rules comply with the social norms and linguistic customs and whether they can work as prototypical rules in that society.This paper is only focused on the analysis of argumentative discourse.However,the expressive analysis of discourse reveals the expression design of discourse,which lays a good foundation to research on discourse appraisal.

2.1 Expression analytic framework

Expression rule is generally formulated as following:in a certain context,argumentation participants,in order to realize some argumentative function,should carry out a certain argumentative discourse action.In other words,it stipulates:in argumentation,who in what context uses what argumentative discourse to realize a certain function?([5])It is a complicated whole composed of different elements and belongs to social norms.Expression analytic framework is taking aim at revealing the inner structure of the expression rule as a whole,providing a method to analyze and abstract the expression rule.According to the definition given above,the expression of argumentative discourse involves the following elements:the situational context in which argumentation is taking place,the socio-cultural background,the social status and identity of participants,the discourse functions given,the strategies employed,the contextual contents motivated,the linguistic expressions chosen and their relations.To tidy up all these elements,we have four key elements:context,function,strategy and language.They constitute the underlying elements of expression rule,and their interrelationships in the argumentative activity form the deep structure of expression rule,which is what expression analytic framework tries to describe.In the following,we are going to give the expression analytic framework by specifying each of the four elements and elaborating on their relations,so as to show how researchers could use such a framework in analyzing argumentative discourses and abstracting expression rules.

1)Context

Since expression rule involves the context in which argumentative discourse is embedded,expression analytic framework is supposed to consider this element.Though context is composed of various elements,in our analysis,however,not every contextual element is actively involved in the argumentative process.So,it is necessary to make a distinction between indefinite context and relavant context.Indefinite context refers to those pure realities and in principle all elements could potentially be relavant contextual elements,but only those cognitively motivated by the language users can be taken as parts of relavant context([8],p.77,p.109,p.112).In this sense,relavant context can be seen as cognitive context.So,the context we analyze is in fact the relavant context which is constrained within a range of elements.

When we are doing discourse analysis,we need to take relevant context into consideration,including the socio-cultural background,activity types,specific settings(such as time,place),social attributes of participants(such as positions,statuses,ethnicity,gender and age)and mental world (such as purposes,beliefs,emotions and characters)etc..These elements are given to the subcategory of interactional context,which provides basic background to the interpretation and understanding of given discourse and exerts impact on the generation of discourse.

Apart from interactional context,relevant context also encompasses linguistic channel and linguistic context,which are the results of linguistic choices and the constituting elements of context.Linguistic channel falls into verbal channel and nonverbal channel,spoken and written channels.Written channel can further be divided into handwriting and printing channels.Linguistic context,also called inter-textual context,is also a contextual dimension on which linguistic choices depend.Therefore,language is part of context and they are closely related,forming an interdependent relation.

It is worth noting that relevant context is not completely stable but rather is in constant change.Seeing that language is intimately related to context,language users can,as discourse unfolds,mobilize or motivate potential contextual correlates to construct new contexts by means of linguistic choices,thus changing previous relevant context([8],p.109,p.112).The context that is mobilized is called the mobilized context,belonging to relevant context.It is created subjectively by the language user.In light of these,when analyzing relevant context,we should not only take into consideration the more or less fixed background and setting,but also consider the dynamic change of it,putting emphasis on the description and specification of the mobilized context in the process of discourse generation and revealing what roles this part of context plays in the implementation of strategies,the linguistic expression and the realization of functions.Mobilized context is at times not reflected in language but works as a trigger that activates potential beliefs in the audience by means of language;and it is sometimes not untraceable but instead leaves traces on language,becoming contextualization cues([8],pp.110–112).

2)Function

Since expression rule involves the realization of discourse function,therefore it is of necessity to include the element of function in the expression analytic framework.In pursuance of the basic structure of generalized argumentation,arguers first decide on the function of discourse according to the argumentation function rule and then generate discourse that can carry out the function according to argumentation expression rule.([5])Consequently,the first step of analyzing expression involves the recognition of the given function,and after that we analyze the discourse that is to realize the given function.In Generalized Argumentation theory,function refers to“the capacity of one thing casting influence on the other thing under normal condition,particularly the capacity one thing has of having impact on the other thing in the realization of a certain purpose”([5]).Therefore,the function mentioned here accentuates discourse as an objective outcome under normal circumstances,thus distinguishing itself from purposes or objective,the inner subjective wishes of the speaker.Sometimes,function is identical with purpose or objective,which means that the purpose or objective has been achieved.However,there are times when they are not identical,which means that the purpose or objective is not achieved as planned.So,we can decide on the actual discourse function by looking at the actual perlocutionary effects the discourse has produced.

As mentioned above,context exerts influence on the understanding of given discourse,including the interpretation of discourse function.So,recognition of function requires reference to such contextual factors as cultural background,institutional context,activity type,participants’social roles,speakers’intentions,linguistic context and so on.Of these,the activity type plays a significant role in determining the function because activity type extends and restricts expectable function types,and regulates the roles and corresponding set of function types.For example,in an auction,the buyer’s nod serves the function of bidding while auctioneer’s nod represents the function of identifying the buyer’s bidding and does not constitute the bidding function.([7])Linguistic context is also an important factor that impacts how function could be interpreted,because the same discourse will carry out very different functions when located in different linguistic contexts.

However,it is not enough to just consider the contextual factors when determining the function of discourse.Specific linguistic expression (including the content and way of expression)is also indispensable.On the one hand,different contexts can assign different functions to the same linguistic form,and there is no fixed relation between the linguistic form and its function.Therefore,context needs to be considered in determining the function.One the other hand,if the recognition of function relies solely on the context and without considering language itself,it may lead to an endless speculation of the function.At this point,there is necessity to go back to examine the micro-level linguistic details because relevant context often leaves some linguistic traces.This is what is called“double movement”.([8],pp.48–49)So,only when context and language are both considered will the function of discourse finally be recognized.

Besides,it is to be heeded of the multiplicity of function when we are recognizing functions of discourse,that is,one discourse can simultaneously carry out several functions in a certain argumentative move.For example,in conversation,one turn can be composed of more than one turn construction unit(TCU)and every TCU carries out one main action,which means one turn in conversation can encompass several actions and thus carry out several functions.However,generally speaking,in one move there will be one function dominating other functions.It is the overall impression the participants and researchers have towards the move and therefore we could call it the overall function.As for those non-dominant functions,they have their corresponding discourses,such as a TCU.They serve the overall function and are the specific embodiment of the overall function,so we could call them the specific functions.Therefore,in analyzing an argumentative move,we should first of all recognize the overall function.When there is the multiplicity of function of discourse,we then divide the discourse into sub-discourses and determine their specific functions,which depend on the strategies used therein.

3)Strategy

Since expression rule depicts what discourse is employed to carry out a given function,it becomes necessary to make a specific analysis of the discourse soon after the function has been recognized.There are two levels in the analysis:the analysis of strategies and the analysis of language.Strategies are the strategies used in the discourse,which constrains the linguistic expression of the discourse.Therefore,we should start with the strategies analysis.Normative pragmatics stresses the strategic design of discourse,thus demonstrating the functional principle of persuasion.([3])According to perspectivist view of pragmatics,the use of strategies plays an important role in the functioning of language,involving the mutual adaptation of context and language([8],pp.66–68),and the choice of one strategy over another will have impact on the linguistic choice([8],p.56).In this sense,strategies are the macro means for discourses to carry out functions and they will influence the linguistic expression and the manoeuvring of context.Language is the outer representation of strategies in use.Therefore,strategies connect function and language,context and language,thus playing the central role in the expression analytic framework.

Since the implementation of strategies involves the mutual adaptation between context and language,it is a complicated cognitive processing involving such aspects as language,cognition,society and culture etc..Therefore,analysis of strategies is not a purely linguistic analysis but an analysis beyond linguistic level.In analyzing strategies,the linguistic choice on the surface needs to be connected with relevant context.Thus the analysis is taken from the purely linguistic level to more abstract levels of cognition,psychology,society and culture,by which is shown the intimate relations between language and cognition,psychology,society,culture.Through the analysis of strategies,researchers can throw light on the mechanism of function realization of discourse,thus bringing the function-language analysis to a more delicate scale.This,to a certain extent,can make up for the shortcoming of conversation analysis which places too much stress on micro-level linguistic analysis and correct structuralist tendency of conversation analysis.([6],p.367)

Strategies are continuously being created.Therefore,the strategy set is openended,meaning that we can not exhaust all the types of strategy.However,we can generally divide the strategies into two major types:direct strategies and indirect strategies.Direct strategies are those that are made by making an argument,that is,arguers provide assertive illocutionary acts with propositional content to directly support their claims and arguers take responsibility for the commitment made in the proposition.Whereas indirect strategies are those strategies that employ various kind of rhetorical strategies,linguistic strategies in order to procure the acceptance of a certain view.Often than not,the content communicated by indirect strategies is not clearly expressed through language or not expressed through assertive illocutionary force but through indirect inducement.Therefore,they are cancellable and deniable.These two kinds of strategy both have argumentative relevance,that is,both could be used in the service of realizing argumentative functions through discourse.([3])By distinguishing these two kinds of strategies,our analysis of argumentative discourse is no longer confined within the traditional domains of argumentation analysis(like the propositional logic and inference form)but rather delivers a more comprehensive consideration about the means that can be used to carry out argumentative functions,thus integrating the logical approach,which focuses mainly on the argumentative contents and forms,and the rhetorical approach,which concentrates mainly on the strategic tactics,from an function-oriented perspective.

4)Language

After analyzing the strategies used in the discourse,we need to proceed to analyzing how the strategies are represented in language.Linguistic analysis can be further divided into two aspects:content of expression and way of expression.These two aspects are closely connected.Way of expression often has impact on how the content is to be interpreted.Therefore,in analyzing the content of expression,we need to elaborate things in combination with way of expression.

According to the categorization of direct strategies and indirect strategies introduced above,the content of expression,correspondingly,can be divided into direct expression content and the indirect expression content.What is actually communicated by discourse often goes beyond what is said,namely what is expressed directly,because language users construct contextual assumptions by activating potential beliefs,attitudes in context in order to convey more than what is literally meant by words.The content expressed in this way is indirectly inferred by the hearer on the basis of relevant contextual assumptions,and is not expressed directly by language.So the content could be denied or canceled by the speaker.Therefore,indirect expression content is the result of the interaction between language and context,which makes use of language to mobilize the cultural customs,social conceptions,legal provisions,common sense of life and so on that are potential in context.All these contextual contents mobilized constitute the content rule.

Linguistic way of expression is not restricted to the linguistic structures researched in traditional linguistics.There are other semiotic resources.Therefore,we are referring to language in the broad sense in this paper,including the language in its narrow sense(spoken and written language)and non-verbal resources,which include such paralinguistic signs as eye contact,facial expression,body language and many other modalities like photography,music and videos etc..All these semiotic signs are complementary to one another,communally constructing the content of discourse and facilitating the realization the function.

In view of the fact that discourse is largely composed of linguistic structure,so the analysis of expression means of discourse mainly focuses on linguistic structure.The way of expression is open to be chosen on any levels of linguistic structure.First of all,the choice involves some overarching levels,including languages,codes,styles and these choices will systematically influence the choices on other levels.Language choice involves what language to choose,and this depends on such contextual factors as the linguistic competence,linguistic attitudes of the participants as well as the occasion of use.Choice of code involves regional dialects,social dialects and so on,which is mainly related to the relationship between the participants.Choice of style refers to the degree of formality of language,for example,vernacular oral language.This is,in general,related to the situation of language use,social distance between the speaker and the hearer.

The way of expression also involves choices of utterance construction units such as phonetics,lexis and syntax.On the phonetic level,prosody is the most focused area,especially the intonation that serves as contextualization cue to help interpret what is said.Other phonetic features such as pause,stress etc.also play a part in the construction of discourse.On the lexical level,choice of particular words can activate the implicit meanings behind the typical uses.On the syntactic level,sentence types such as interrogative,assertive involve indirect expression issues.Word order,likewise,exerts influence on the expression of meaning.Deviation from basic word order often times is to foreground certain part,thus incurring implicated meanings.

Figure 1:Expression Analytic Framework

Based on the elaboration on the elements of the expression analytic framework and their relations,we could sketch the expression analytic framework as in Figure 1.In the diagram,the rule refers to the expression rule,which,working behind the scene,guides the implementation of strategies,mobilization of context and choice of language,so as to facilitate the realization of discourse function.The implementation of strategies involves the mutual adaptation of language and context.On the one hand,strategy relies on language for specific implementation and restricts the linguistic choices with an eye on context.On the other hand,the use of strategies can mobilize or activate potential beliefs in context to construct new contextual content by means of linguistic choices.Expression analytic framework has represented the interrelation between the inner elements of expression rule,thus forming the expression rule as a whole.Therefore,according to the expression analytic framework,researchers could not only describe the expression rule but also abstract expression rule.

Since strategy,context and language all exert influence on the generation of discourse and have their own roles to play in the realization of discourse function,we divide the expression rule into three sub-categories in this paper:strategic rule,content rule and manner rule.These three kinds of rule share the same underlying structure of expression rule,that is,arguers,in what context use what discourse to realize what function,though the specific content involved is different.Strategic rule involves the types of strategy used in the discourse; content rule involves the contextual content activated in the discourse; manner rule involves the way of expression used in the discourse.

2.2 Expression analytic procedure

Guided by the expression analytic framework,the researchers are now able to analyze the elements involved in discourse expression and abstract the expression rule.However,before carrying out the analysis,it is necessary for the researchers to know how procedurally the framework could be implemented so as to make the framework more operationable.In this paper,we call this procedure the Expression Analytic Procedure.

Before getting down to implementing the expression analytic procedure,researchers need to conduct the analysis according to the localized procedure of generalized argumentation:the first step is to describe the socio-cultural background of argumentation; the second step is to acquire argumentative cases through fieldwork investigation;the third step is to abstract candidate argumentation rules through analysis of argumentative discourses;the fourth and fifth steps are to defend and test the extracted argumentation rules.The expression analytic procedure proposed here in this paper,being part of the localized procedure of generalized argumentation,is carrying the third step of the latter one step further.Expression analytic procedure only abstracts argumentation rules and the defense of the expression rules has to be reserved for further research.For the sake of integrity of discussion,this paper will give a brief appraisal of expression rules in the following case study.

Expression analytic procedure is a procedure for analyzing some argumentative move.For a complete argumentative discourse,it is necessary to decompose it into several argumentative sub-discourses and then to operationalize the analytic procedure on each sub-discourse till the whole argumentative discourse is analyzed.Expression analytic procedure has five steps,the operation of which is dependent on the diagram of expression analytic framework,that is:first,recognize the given function of discourse;then analyze the discourse in terms of strategies implemented,linguistic expression chosen and the contextual contents motivated; last abstract and generalize expression rules.What follows are specific elaborations of steps involved in the expression analytic procedure.

The first step of the expression analytic procedure is to determine the overall function of argumentative moves and demarcate the boundaries to corresponding discourses.First,we need to recognize the overall function of the argumentative moves.According to what has been laid out above,the recognition of function requires a comprehensive consideration of interactive context of discourse,linguistic context and linguistic expressions.Second,we need to demarcate the discourse boundaries corresponding to certain argumentative moves on the basis of overall function of discourse so as to conduct specific analysis of discourses.This seems apparent enough but in fact it is not.For example,discourse function can be carried out not only through vocals or writings but also by way of body language or photography.That is to say,any semiotic resources that can help in realizing function should be given serious consideration and taken into analytic sphere.

The second step is to analyze the strategies used in discourse.The analysis involves types of strategy,contextual condition of strategy implementation and specific functions that arise.Types of strategy does not include only those of direct strategies and indirect strategies but also strategies particularly used such as appeal to authority,appeal to pathos and to comparison etc..One argumentative move can be enforced through different strategies,and each strategy has its own particular function,serving for the overall function.Therefore,if more than one strategy is used in one argumentative move,it becomes necessary to identify the discourse that corresponds to the strategy and to make specific analysis of each strategy.

The third step is to analyze language.This analysis involves how strategies are implemented by way of language including the content and way of expression.As for content of expression,we need not only to point out whether the content of expression is expressed directly or indirectly,but also to interpret the content of expression by looking at the strategies used,way of expression and the contextual content that has been motivated.As with way of expression,we are mainly concerned with analysis of linguistic forms and way of expressions that are playing an important role in implementing strategies,interpreting content of expression and realizing functions such as intonation,lexis,grammatical constructs and rhetorical means.

The fourth step is to abstract,on the basis of above analysis,the expression rules including strategic rule,content rule and manner rule.

The fifth step is to properly refine and generalize the expression rules abstracted in the last step.Since the expression rules abstracted in the last step are carried out against specific discourse expressions,they are highly context-sensitive.Consequently,these rules are confined within very limited range of applicability due to their deep engagement in particular context and content.So it is necessary to generalize the rules abstracted,that is,to decontextualize the rules to a certain degree.In decontextualizing,particulars in the rules are to be removed to the exclusion the necessary contextual conditions for use of the rules.Refined and generalized,these rules can have far broader range of applicability and can be learned by people.

Even though the expression analytic procedure offers no particular step for analyzing context,context plays significant roles in the procedure,ranging from the recognition of function,the implementation of strategies,the interpretation of context of expression,to the abstraction and decontextualization of expression rules.In a word,the influence of context is“seen”everywhere.

It is worthwhile to note that the expression rules obtained through the expression analytic procedure are just candidate rules,whose rationality needs further denfending.So,we need to appraise the rationality of the expression rules in later research.Since three kinds of expression rules are involved in one argumentative move,it could be said that all these three kinds of rules work together to help to realize the discourse function.Since three kinds of expression rules are involved in one argumentative move,it could be said that all these three kinds of rules work together to help to realize the discourse function.Therefore,any candidate rule that fails the rationality test will be seen as a failure of the expression rule as a whole,that is to say,the discourse used in the argumentative move is to be deemed as inappropriate.We are going to demonstrate this in the following case study.

3 Case Study—Jack Ma’s Verbal Advocacy of 996 Work System

In this section,we selected some extracts of the discourse that Jack Ma made in advocacy of the 996 working hour system on Weibo on April 12th,2019,we intend to analyze the expression of the argumentative text and extract the expression rules by employing the expression analytic framework and expressive analytical procedures proposed in this paper.By doing so,we want to show how the expression analytic framework and procedure could be put into practice and take effect.

Before we undertake the analysis of the discourse,we first make a brief description of the background about Jack Ma’s verbal advocacy of the 996 working hour system according to the localized procedure of generalized argumentation.On March 26th,2019,a computer programmer launched a project called“996.ICU”on GitHub,a subsidiary of Microsoft and hosting platform for software development.“996.ICU”literally means“Work 996,and you will be sick in ICU”.This project was intended as a boycott against the prevailing 996 working hour system in the internet industry,that is working from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm,6 days per week.This move was immediately welcomed by a large number of programmers.Ever since then,the topic of the 996 working hour system drew widespread attention and raised tremendous social concerns.The new post-80s and post-90s generations pay more attention to work-life balance and are unwilling to sacrifice their free time and wellbeing by working hard,so they are dissatisfied with the 996 working hour system enforced by entrepreneurs.At the same time,a lot of press and media joined the discussion with reports and comments,pointing out that the 996 working hour system has exceeded the legal overtime and threatens the health of workers.As of April 8th,the project blacklisted 84 companies for work overtime including such renowned ones as Alibaba,JD.com,Huawei,58 Tongcheng and many others.Meanwhile,as the Internet industry enters a recession,many Internet companies have launched large-scale layoffs including Internet giants such as Didi and JD.com.Some Internet companies attempted to reduce operating costs by increasing working hours of their employees,deemed as a strategy to reduce their salaries.Therefore,either laid off or forced to work by 996 system,this has basically become the current living situation of practitioners in the Internet industry.

Then there is the second step of the localized procedure of generalized argumentation which requires to collect argumentative data.In this case,it is to obtain the discourse of Jack Ma’s oral advocacy of the 996 working hour system.This discourse appeared for the first time in an internal talk within Alibaba Group on the evening of April 11th,2019,and Alibaba’s official Weibo released the full text at 15:16 on April 121The full text has now been deleted by Alibaba’s official Weibo,the full text can be found on Jack Ma’s Weibo,the link is as follows:https://weibo.com/2145291155/Hpj9wau6U?filter=hot&root_comment_id=0&type=comment#_rnd1599015970322..A few hours after(18:19),Jack Ma released the full text in his personal Weibo.Due to its length,only the texts that have led to an extensive discussion are selected here,namely the first and third paragraphs of the original text,as shown below:

关于996，现在这是国内的一个很热门的话题，很多企业都有这个问题。我个人认为，能做996 是一种巨大的福气，很多公司、很多人想996 都没有机会。如果你年轻的时候不996，你什么时候可以996？你一辈子没有996，你觉得你就很骄傲了？这个世界上，我们每一个人都希望成功，都希望美好生活，都希望被尊重，我请问大家，你不付出超越别人的努力和时间，你怎么能够实现你想要的成功？

The 996 working hour system is now a very hot topic in China,and many companies face this problem.I personally think that it is a great blessing to work under the 996 working hour system.Many companies and many people think that the 996 working hour system has no future.If you don’t work from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm,6 days per week when you are young,when would you have this opportunity again? You have never worked from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm,6 days per week in your life,would you be so proud of it? In this world,each of us wants to succeed,we all want a better life,and we all want to be respected.I would like to ask everyone,how can you achieve the success you want without surpassing others’efforts?

……

所以今天中国BAT 这些公司能够996，我认为是我们这些人修来的福报。你去想一下没有工作的人，你去想一下公司明天可能要关门的人，你去想想下一个季度公司的Revenue 在哪里都还不知道的人，你去想想你做了很多努力的程序根本没有人用的人……跟他们比，直到今天，我依然这么觉得，我很幸运，我没有后悔12×12，我从没有改变过自己这一点。

Today,companies such as BAT in China can implement the 996 working hour system.I think it is a blessing for us.Think about those who don’t have a job,think about those whose company may close tomorrow,think about those who don’t know where the company’s next quarterly revenue would come from,think what if you have worked a lot harder than anybody else...Compared with them,I still have the same idea to this day.I am very lucky.I have no regrets having worked 12 hours per day.I always remain with my opinion.

Now we are entering the third step of the localized procedure of generalized argumentation.Here we are going to use the expression analytic procedure to analyze the discourse expression and extract the expression rules.The first step of the expression analytic procedure is to determine the overall function of the above discourse.According to the discourse expression,such as “能做996 是一种巨大的福气”,it is clear that the overall purpose of the remarks Jack Ma made is to advocate the 996 working hour system and defend it.Moreover,combined with the background of the remarks and the social status of Jack Ma,it is also possible to infer the function of the Jack Ma’s remarks above.The programmers’ boycott against the 996 working hour system has triggered internet professionals’ dissatisfaction with the prevailing overworking culture in many internet companies.Being one of the companies encouraging overworking,Alibaba was therefore blacklisted.Amid a nationwide economic slowdown,Jack Ma,as the founder of Alibaba,understandably hope,for his company’s benefit,that his workers could work overtime so as to increase profits and reduce cost.Therefore,he decided to speak to his employees to advocate the 996 working hour system which came under criticism,in order to persuade his workers to accept the 996 perception.

The second step is to analyze the strategies used in the discourse.There are more than one strategy that have been employed in the discourse,but we will only focus on one of them,that is,a strategy of glamourizing speech,noticed in the second sentence of the first paragraph“能做996 是一种巨大的福气，很多公司、很多人想996 都没有机会”and the third paragraph“所以今天中国BAT 这些公司能够996，我认为是我们这些人修来的福报。你去想一下没有工作的人……你去想想你做了很多努力的程序根本没有人用的人”.By contrasting 996 against the bad unemployment situation,it stirs fear among the workers about unemployment and by so doing,it establishes the 996 as a kind of“good luck”,thus beautifying the negative aspects of 996 and making the workers accept the 996 working hour system.

The third step is to analyze the strategy in terms of language.As regards content of expression,it justifies layoffs,thus making a contrast with an implicit conception“Having a job is better than having no job at all”.By depicting 996 as a good fortune,it seems to implicate that 996 workers are fortunate and thus should be grateful.In terms of expression manners,parallel constructions are used,as in:“你去想一下没有工作的人，你去想一下公司明天可能要关门的人，你去想想下一个季度公司的Revenue 在哪里都还不知道的人，你去想想你做了很多努力的程序根本没有人用的人”,to evoke the fear of being laid off and make people terrified of the tragic situation of being laid off,thus making the 996 working hour system more appealing.

The fourth step is to extract expression rules.According to the above analysis,we could now extract some expression rules.In particular,the strategic rule is:In the background of the layoff trend in the internet industry,the 996 working hour system is glamorized by comparing it with the current layoff situation so that employees feel comfortable with the 996 working hour system.The content rule is:the conception of“having a job is better than having no job at all”is used to show the good fortune of those who work 996.The manner rule is:parallel constructions are used to evoke the specific situation among the employees facing layoffs,thus contrasting with working 996 and making its superiority outstanding.

The fifth step is to generalize the expression rules extracted from the discourse.Specifically,the strategic rule is generalized as:when there exists a worse situation compared with an unsatisfactory situation,a contrast could be made to glamorize an unsatisfactory situation by comparison,thus making people comfortable with the current situation.The content rule is generalized as:having a job is better than having no job at all.The manner rule is generalized as:parallel constructions can be used to compare the current situation with a worse situation and enhance the sharp contrast the contrast with the disputed situation.

Now we want to make a brief evaluation of the rationality of the above expression rules.First of all,the strategic rule used in the discourse compares the 996 working hour system with the currently bad unemployment situation,thus glamorizing 996 as “good fortune”.It clearly twisted the 996 working hour system.Considering relevant context,when people were discussing the 996 working hour system,their main concern was whether 996 was illegal or whether laborers were exploited of their health and rest or whether they were paid what they deserved.Whereas Jack Ma was avoiding these issues and attempted to distract the discussion by glamorizing 996.Therefore,the rule itself is not rational.Secondly,as for the content rule,the implicit conception “Having a job is better than having no job at all” motivated in the discourse is invalid in that in recent years,news about programmers’ overwork and death has emerged one after another.From a long-term perspective,compared to working 996 at the expense of health and even life,temporary unemployment is not a bad thing.Lastly,concerning the manner rule,a group of parallel constructions are used in order to demonstrate the horrible situation of being laid off and then compare it with 996,which is rational.In sum,two rules among the three are irrational expression rules,therefore the discourse is to be deemed as inappropriate.

4 Concluding Remarks

In this paper,we proposed the expression analytic framework and the specific expression analytic procedure in order to extract the expression rules of generalized argumentation.With the help of the framework and procedures,we analyzed Jack Ma’s advocacy of the 996 working hour system.From the analysis,we generalized three types of rules:strategic rule,content rule and manner rule.This demonstrates that the expression analytic framework and procedures are feasible.They provide researchers with guidelines for the analysis of argumentation and they could help to adequately find the expression rules in argumentative discourse,thus carrying the generalized argumentation theory one step further and helping to improve the research procedure of generalized argumentation.

It needs to be pointed out that this paper focuses on the expression analysis of argumentative discourse and the extraction of expression rules and spent little effort in appraising discourse expression.According to the localized procedure of generalized argumentation,the expression rules obtained through the expression analytic framework and procedure are only candidate rules whose rationality needs further defending and testing.Therefore,future research will be devoted to the appraisal issue of these candidate expression rules and their expression design.