Structure of argument essay

T he final step in this in depth analysis of the structure of this book is the translation of this result, this bhâvita , into the actual titles the paramparâ came up with. In this respect another element is added to the story: the element of the different subjects discussed in the book. In : 1-2   S'ukadeva Gosvâmî as the first philosopher-king after Krishna, the first mahârâja-âcârya explains that: ' In this [book, the S'rîmad Bhâgavatam] are discussed the following [ten] subjects: primary creation [sarga], how the interactions of life and the lifeless came about [visarga], the planetary order [sthâna], the maintenance of belief [poshana], the impetus for action [ûtaya], the administrative eras [manvantaras], stories about the Lord His appearances [îs'a-anukathâ], returning to God [nirodha], liberation in devotional service [mukti] and the summum bonum [the life of Krishna, âs'raya].   T he great sages reduce the purpose of [the first nine] characteristics of this [Bhâgavatam] to the clarification of the summum bonum. This they deduced from either the words themselves used in the text or from their purport.' In : 9-11 he further dilates on this saying: 'The creation [of this universe, sarga ], the subsequent creation [of different worlds and beings, visarga ], the maintenance [the sustenance, the vritti or sthâna] and protection [the rakshâ or poshana of the living beings], the reigns [of the various Manus], the dynasties [ vams'as ], the narrations about them [vams'a-anucaritam], the annihilation [of different kinds, pralaya or samsthâ], the motivation [of individuality or hetu] and the supreme shelter [of the Fortunate One or apâs'raya], o brahmin, are the ten characteristic topics of a purâna as understood by the authorities on the matter; some state that relative to the greater ones, the lesser purânas deal with five'. These verses inspired the paramparâ, the disciplic succession in the person of Swami Prabhupâda to present the book with the titles given in the last row of the table below. In fact in his argument that what is laid out above  is more or less intuitively combined with these ten topics. The titles mustn't be seen as direct translations of these ten topics though, since they are diffusely discussed throughout the work. S'rîla Jîva Gosvâmî explicitly reminds us of the fact that 'one should not try to assign each of the ten topics to a particular canto. Nor should the S'rîmad-Bhâgavatam be artificially interpreted to show that it deals with the topics successively. ' The titles assigned by the paramparâ just remind one of the ten subjects as far as a certain emphasis is made by a certain canto or kânda . The actual in depth structure is realized by the full scope of the table below summarizing this discussion.

The notion of argument structure is important enough to have merited chapters in handbooks, encyclopedias, and comparable works, though it has not been the subject of a textbook. Comrie 1993 includes a useful introduction to the notion of argument itself. Andrews 1988 provides a historical perspective on changes in the conception of the lexical entries of verbs from the 1960s through the 1980s, covering a range of theoretical approaches. Moving forward in time, Alsina 2006 focuses on lexicalist approaches to argument structure, as does Butt 2006 . Harley 2010 introduces the treatment of argument structure phenomena in the Minimalist Program. Sadler and Spencer 1998 provides an introduction to argument structure as it interacts with certain morphosyntactic processes, a topic also treated in Alsina 2006 .

Employees and work groups in flat organizations tend to be more adaptable in changing or unique circumstances, due to their smaller hierarchies and lack of bureaucracy. When front-line employees are empowered to handle customer complaints without management approval, for example, complaint resolution can progress more efficiently, boosting customer satisfaction. Work groups assigned to unique projects, for example, can often craft their own unique operational processes in flat organizations, without seeking the approval of upper management.

Structure of argument essay

structure of argument essay


structure of argument essaystructure of argument essaystructure of argument essaystructure of argument essay