LESSON MANUSCRIPT

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION SKILLS

Review on English Grammar and Composition

A. Agreement between the subject and the verb

1a. The Singular Verb

Rule: Use singular verb for the following:
a. Compound subjects taken a single units
b. Subjects referring to amount, quantity, distance and number
c. Titles and names of countries
d. Words ending in s
e. Many a
f. The number
g. With, together with, like, as well as
h. Each, every, everybody, anybody, nobody, one of
i. The only
2a. The Plural Verb
Rule: Use plural verb for the following:
a. Compound subjects linked by and
b. Subject referring to a multiple number
c. Police, cattle, people
d. A number
e. One of these

B. The Use of Articles

1b.Two type of Articles
1.1 Indefinite Article
1.2 Definite Article
Rule: ‘A’ and ‘an’ are known as indefinite articles because they are used with nouns
that have an indefinite or general sense while ‘the’ is a definite article because it is used
with nouns which have a definite or particular senses.
2b. Exceptions when ‘the’ Article is Unnecessary
Rule: 1. We do not use ‘the’ if we use uncountable nouns that refer to certain
ideas or things in general.
2. We do not use articles before plural nouns that refer to all members of
a class, things or people
3. We do not use articles when we refer to an indefinite number of things
or people of a particular category
4. We do not use ‘the’ before the majority of place, names, languages,
game, proper nouns, fields of study and certain illnesses/ complaints
3b.Use of articles with idiomatic expressions
Rule: ‘The’ is not used in certain idiomatic expressions (especially with
prepositions such as by and at
4b. Consonant and Vowel sounds
Rule: ‘A’ is used before a consonant while ‘an’ is used before a vowel sound
5b. Functions of ‘a’ and ‘an’
Rule: ‘A’ or ‘an’ can be used
When we mean one or each
When we wish to refer to an unidentified member of class and
When we wish to refer to a representative member of a class

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

C. Punctuation Marks
Types and Uses
1c. The Full Stop
Used to indicate the end of a statement, mild command or an indirect question
2c. The Question Mark
Used for a direct question, a series of question and to express a doubt
3c. The Exclamation Mark
Used after an interjection, a strong statement or a command
4c. The Comma
Used within a sentence. It is the most common and also the most misused
punctuation mark
5c.The Semi-colon
Used to separate two related main clauses. Usually the second clause is an
explanation or clarification of the first
6c. The Colon
Used before a list, to introduce a long quotation and to balance two parts of a
sentence of equal importance
7c. The Apostrophe
Used to indicate possession, omission and forms the plural of letters, figures and
words
8c. The Quotation Marks
Used to show a direct quotation or speech
9c. The Dash or Dashes
Shows and interruptions or a break in though, a special emphasis or a summarized
viewpoint
10c. The Brackets
Two types:
a. The Round
b. The square
The brackets enclose an insertion, a set of figures, an additional remark and when
sic is used

D. Verbs
It forms an essential element in a sentence for it helps to provide it with
meaning. Technically, a sentence cannot exist without a verb. A verb shows the
action or state in a sentence.
1d. Auxiliary
It acts as a helping verb. It helps to show tense or voice in a sentence.
Two types of Auxiliaries
a. Primary
b. Modal

Primary Auxiliaries
Verbs to do - do, does, did
Verbs to have – has, have, had
Verbs to be – is, am, are, was, were, be, been, being

Modal Auxiliaries
Can, could, may, might, must, ought, will, would, shall, should, used to, need,
dare

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

 2d. Transitive and Intransitive Verb
A Transitive verb requires a direct object. A preposition is not placed immediately
after it while an intransitive verb does not require a direct object. A preposition
comes after it, followed by the object
3d. Phrasal Verb
A verb readily combines with either a preposition or an adverb to form a phrasal
verb, a single meaningful unit.
E. Prepositions
A preposition is a linking word. It connects one word to another word or phrase
to another phrase

Types of Preposition:
1e. The Preposition of Place
Indicates location or a direction
2e. The Preposition of Time
Indicates time or duration
3e. Comparative Preposition
As and like indicate comparison
4e. Prepositional Phrase
A phrase that starts off with a preposition is called a prepositional phrase.
It adds information to a sentence

F. Tenses
What is said, done or written is governed by a time dimension. This dimension in
English is tense. As tense effects only action, it effects only the action word, the verb.

1f.The Present Time

a. The Simple Present Time
Refers to a regular action
b. The Present Continuous
Refers to an action that has time dimension
A temporary action
An action that has a future reference
c. The Present Prefect Tense
Refers to a past action that still affects the present
A recent action
A question which makes a causal reference to a past experience
Already, since, yet, been sentences

d. The Present Perfect Continuous

Is used for an action that is carried from past to the present

2f. The Past Time

a. The Simple Past Tense
Refers to an accomplished action
A reference point in the past
Politeness
Indirect speech
b. The Past Perfect Tense
Points out the earlier of two past actions
Used with already, yet, been in sentences
Indirect speech

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

 c. The Past Perfect Continuous Tense
Refers to a past action of some duration
Been is used with this tense
Indirect speech

3f. The Future Time

a. will/shall + verb
This refers to the expected action
The intended action
b. will + the present continuous tense
This refers to a planned action that is about to take place
c. will + the perfect tense
This refers to an action that is calculated to be completed at a fixed time
in the future. (This action is sometimes called the past in the future; A reference
point is set in the future and from there a look is taken backwards).
d. Will + the present continuous tense
This refers to a past – in – the – future action. But in this case the action
is carried on for a while.
e. Present tense + time phrase
Focuses on a specific event in the future
f. present continuous + time phrase
This refers to a thought – of or planned action
The continuous form is less definite than the simple present
form

G. Common Sentence Errors

a. Run- on sentences
A run-on sentence consists of two sentences or ideas written as one
without appropriate punctuations or connecting word separating the ideas. It can
either be a comma splice, where two complete ideas are separated by a comma only
or a fused sentence where there is no punctuation at all between ideas
b. Misplaced Modifier
This refers to modifiers or descriptive phrases that are not placed beside
or near the word (s) they are supposed to modify or describe resulting in ambiguous
or confusing sentences.
c. Fragments
A fragment consists of phrases or groups of words that lack either a
subject or verb and does not express a complete thought.
d. Dangling Modifier
A sentence has a dangling modifier if the subject of the main idea or
main clause is not the one that phrase modifies

e. Faulty Parallelism
Faulty parallelism occurs when a sentence contains elements different
grammatical kind. This sentence error disrupts the reader’s flow of thought and
expectations. In contrast, a sentence with parallel structure consists of words or
phrases of the same kind.

Writing and Composition

H. Preparation and Critiquing of Common Correspondences used in the station/ PNP units
a. Civilian Letter addressed to an elected Government official
b. Letter of Inquiry

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

 c. Request for Transfer of Assignment
d. Invitation Letter
e. Letter of Commendation
f. Etc.

I. Developing Speeches Based on the Rules of Correct Usage of English Language (Composition
writing, Writing of Speeches shall be anchored on the different ceremonies done in the PNP)
a. Speech for Monday Flag Raising ceremony
b. Speeches for a Launching program in the PNP
c. Speeches for Retirement Ceremony
d. Speeches for Police Service Anniversary
e. Speeches for Independence Day Celebration
f. Speeches during Turn-over ceremony
g. Speeches for Pinning and Donning of Ranks
f. Speeches during Necrological Services

J. Public Speaking (The class will be divided into 8 groups. Each group will be assigned an
activity/ ceremony undertaken in the PNP. Members of each group will be given an assigned
public speaking part in the program).

Argumentation and Debate

Argumentation theory, or argumentation, is the interdisciplinary study of how
conclusions can be reached through logical reasoning; that is, claims based, soundly or
not, on premises. It includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue,
conversation, and persuasion. It studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in
both artificial and real world settings.
Argumentation includes debate and negotiation which are concerned with
reaching mutually acceptable conclusions. It also encompasses eristic dialog, the branch
of social debate in which victory over an opponent is the primary goal. This art and
science is often the means by which people protect their beliefs or self-interests in
rational dialogue, in common parlance, and during the process of arguing.
Argumentation is used in law, for example in trials, in preparing an argument to
be presented to a court, and in testing the validity of certain kinds of evidence. Also,
argumentation scholars study the post hoc rationalizations by which organizational
actors try to justify decisions they have made irrationally.

Key Components of Argumentation

 Understanding and identifying arguments, either explicit or implied, and the

goals of the participants in the different types of dialogue.
 Identifying the premises from which conclusions are derived
 Establishing the "burden of proof" — determining who made the initial claim
and is thus responsible for providing evidence why his/her position merits
acceptance.
 For the one carrying the "burden of proof", the advocate, to
marshal evidence for his/her position in order to convince or force the opponent's
acceptance. The method by which this is accomplished is producing valid, sound,
and cogent arguments, devoid of weaknesses, and not easily attacked.

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

  In a debate, fulfillment of the burden of proof creates a burden of rejoinder.
One must try to identify faulty reasoning in the opponent's argument, to attack the
reasons/premises of the argument, to provide counterexamples if possible, to
identify any fallacies, and to show why a valid conclusion cannot be derived from the
reasons provided for his/her argument.

Internal Structure of Arguments

Typically an argument has an internal structure, comprising the following

1. a set of assumptions or premises

2. a method of reasoning or deduction and
3. a conclusion or point.
An argument must have at least two premises and one conclusion.
Often classical logic is used as the method of reasoning so that the conclusion
follows logically from the assumptions or support. One challenge is that if the set of
assumptions is inconsistent then anything can follow logically from inconsistency.
Therefore, it is common to insist that the set of assumptions be consistent. It is also good
practice to require the set of assumptions to be the minimal set, with respect to set
inclusion, necessary to infer the consequent. Such arguments are called MINCON
arguments, short for minimal consistent. Such argumentation has been applied to the fields
of law and medicine. A second school of argumentation investigates abstract arguments,
where 'argument' is considered a primitive term, so no internal structure of arguments is
taken on account.
In its most common form, argumentation involves an individual and an
interlocutor/or opponent engaged in dialogue, each contending differing positions and
trying to persuade each other. Other types of dialogue in addition to persuasion
are eristic, information seeking, inquiry, negotiation, deliberation, and the dialectical method
(Douglas Walton). The dialectical method was made famous by Plato and his use
of Socrates critically questioning various characters and historical figures.

Kinds of Argumentation

1. Conversational argumentation
The study of naturally-occurring conversation arose from the field of
sociolinguistics. It is usually called conversation analysis. Inspired by ethnomethodology,
it was developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s principally by the sociologist Harvey
Sacks and, among others, his close associates Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson.
Sacks died early in his career, but his work was championed by others in his field, and
CA has now become an established force in sociology, anthropology, linguistics, speech-
communication and psychology.[5] It is particularly influential in interactional
sociolinguistics, discourse analysis and discursive psychology, as well as being a
coherent discipline in its own right. Recently CA techniques of sequential analysis have
been employed by phoneticians to explore the fine phonetic details of speech.

Empirical studies and theoretical formulations by Sally Jackson and Scott Jacobs,
and several generations of their students, have described argumentation as a form of

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

managing conversational disagreement within communication contexts and systems that
naturally prefer agreement.

2. Mathematical argumentation

The basis of mathematical truth has been the subject of long debate. Frege in
particular sought to demonstrate (see Gottlob Frege, The Foundations of Arithmetic,
1884, and Logicism in Philosophy of mathematics that arithmetical truths can be derived
from purely logical axioms and therefore are, in the end, logical truths. The project was
developed by Russell and Whitehead in their Principia Mathematica. If an argument can
be cast in the form of sentences in Symbolic Logic, then it can be tested by the
application of accepted proof procedures. This has been carried out for Arithmetic
using Peano axioms. Be that as it may, an argument in Mathematics, as in any other
discipline, can be considered valid only if it can be shown that it cannot have true
premises and a false conclusion.

3. Scientific argumentation

Perhaps the most radical statement of the social grounds of scientific knowledge
appears in Alan G.Gross's The Rhetoric of Science (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1990). Gross holds that science is rhetorical "without remainder, meaning that scientific
knowledge itself cannot be seen as an idealized ground of knowledge. Scientific
knowledge is produced rhetorically, meaning that it has special epistemic authority only
insofar as its communal methods of verification are trustworthy. This thinking represents
an almost complete rejection of the foundationalism on which argumentation was first
based.

4. Interpretive argumentation

Interpretive argumentation is a dialogical process in which

participants explore and/or resolve interpretations often of a text of any medium
containing significant ambiguity in meaning.

Interpretive argumentation is pertinent to the humanities, hermeneutics, literary

theory, linguistics, semantics, pragmatics, semiotics, analytic philosophy and aesthetics.
Topics in conceptual
interpretation include aesthetic, judicial, logical and religious interpretation Topics
in scientific interpretation include scientific modeling.

5. Legal argumentation

Legal arguments are spoken presentations to a judge or appellate court by a

lawyer, or parties when representing themselves of the legal reasons why they should
prevail. Oral argument at the appellate level accompanies written briefs, which also
advance the argument of each party in the legal dispute. A closing argument, or
summation, is the concluding statement of each party's counsel reiterating the important
arguments for the tier of fact, often the jury, in a court case. A closing argument occurs
after the presentation of evidence.

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

 6. Political argumentation

Political arguments are used by academics, media pundits, and candidates for
political office and government officials. Political arguments are also used by citizens in
ordinary interactions to comment about and understand political events. The rationality
of the public is a major question in this line of research. Political scientist Samuel L.
Popkin coined the expression "low information voters" to describe most voters who know
very little about politics or the world in general.

In practice, a "low information voter" may not be aware of legislation that their
representative has sponsored in Congress. A low-information voter may base their ballot
box decision on a media sound-bite, or a flier received in the mail. It is possible for a
media sound-bite or campaign flier to present a political position for
the incumbent candidate that completely contradicts the legislative action taken in
Washington D.C. on behalf of the constituents. It may only take a small percentage of
the overall voting group who base their decision on the inaccurate information, a voter
block of 10 to 12%, to swing an overall election result. When this happens, the
constituency at large may have been duped or fooled. Nevertheless, the election result
is legal and confirmed. Savvy Political consultants will take advantage of low-information
voters and sway their votes with disinformation because it can be easier and sufficiently
effective. Fact checkers have come about in recent years to help counter the effects of
such campaign tactics.

Psychological Aspects

Psychology has long studied the non-logical aspects of argumentation. For

example, studies have shown that simple repetition of an idea is often a more effective
method of argumentation than appeals to reason. Propaganda often utilizes
repetition. Nazi rhetoric has been studied extensively as, inter alia, a repetition
campaign.

Empirical studies of communicator credibility and attractiveness, sometimes

labeled charisma, have also been tied closely to empirically-occurring arguments. Such
studies bring argumentation within the ambit of persuasion theory and practice.

Some psychologists such as William J. McGuire believe that the syllogism is the

basic unit of human reasoning. They have produced a large body of empirical work
around McGuire's famous title "A Syllogistic Analysis of Cognitive Relationships." A
central line of this way of thinking is that logic is contaminated by psychological
variables such as "wishful thinking," in which subjects confound the likelihood of
predictions with the desirability of the predictions. People hear what they want to hear
and see what they expect to see. If planners want something to happen they see it as
likely to happen. If they hope something will not happen, they see it as unlikely to
happen. Thus smokers think that they personally will avoid cancer. Promiscuous people
practice unsafe sex. Teenagers drive recklessly.

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

Debate is contention in argument; strife, dissension, quarrelling, controversy; especially a
formal discussion of subjects before a public assembly or legislature, in Parliament or in
any deliberative assembly.

Debate is a method of formally presenting an argument in a disciplined manner. Through logical

consistency, factual accuracy and some degree of emotional appeal to the audience are
elements in debating, where one side often prevails over the other party by presenting a
superior "context" and/or framework of the issue. The outcome of a debate may depend upon
consensus or some formal way of reaching a resolution, rather than the objective facts. In a
formal debating contest, there are rules for participants to discuss and decide on differences,
within a framework defining how they will interact.

Debating is carried out in assemblies of various types to discuss matters and to make
resolutions about action to be taken, often by voting. Deliberative bodies such
as parliaments, legislative assemblies, and meetings of all sorts engage in debates. In particular,
in parliamentary democracies a legislature debates and decides on new laws. Formal debates
between candidates for elected office, such as the leaders debates that are sometimes held
in democracies. Debating is also carried out for educational and recreational purposes, usually
associated with educational establishments and debating societies.  The major goal of the study
of debate as a method or art is to develop the ability to debate rationally from either position
with equal ease.

Informal and forum debate is relatively common, shown by TV shows such as the Australian
talk show, Q&A, the quality and depth of a debate improves with the knowledge and skills of its
participants as debaters. The outcome of a contest may be decided by audience vote, by
judges, or by some combination of the two.

Debate in parliamentary procedure refers to discussion on the merits of a pending question;

that is, whether it should or should not be agreed to. It is also commonly referred to as
"discussion".

Purpose

When a motion has been made and is before the assembly, the process of debate could help
the assembly determine whether to take action on the proposal. Robert's Rules of Order Newly
Revised (RONR) says, "Debate, rightly understood, is an essential element in the making of
rational decisions of consequence by intelligent people." One of the distinguishing
characteristics of a deliberative assembly is that it is "a group of people, having or assuming
freedom to act in concert, meeting to determine, in full and free discussion, courses of action to
be taken in the name of the entire group."

Limits of Debate
Speech and time limits

Under the rules in Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, the right of members to participate in
debate is limited to two ten-minute speeches per day on a question. Riddick's Rules of
Procedure also specifies a default limit of ten minutes. The United States Senate has a limit of
two speeches and no time limit for the speeches. In the United States House of

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

Representatives, debate on most bills is limited to 40 minutes. In state legislative
bodies, Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure limits debate to one speech for each question.

Using Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, a speaker cannot transfer the time to another
member. Also, unlike the practice in Congress, a member of an assembly in an ordinary
society cannot yield the floor to let another member speak on his or her time.

Modification of limits

The group could modify the limits of debate to suit its needs. Modification of the speech and
time limits could be done for a particular motion, a group of motions, or for the meeting
through a motion to limit or extend the limits of debate. The assembly could also remove the
limit on the number of speeches by using Informal consideration or by going into a committee
of the whole or quasi committee of the whole. If the assembly wants the change of limits to be
effective for all its meetings and not just for the current meeting, it could adopt a special rule of
order changing the limits on debate.

On the merits, not the member

Debate on any question should be limited to the merits of the question. Debate should not be
about other members and especially should not involve any personal attacks. To keep the
debate from becoming personal, members should address the chair instead of each other.

No interruption of speaker

A member speaking in debate should not be interrupted unless a rule is being broken or the
urgency of the situation justifies the interruption (correcting a speaker of the facts spoken in
debate does not justify an interruption). An example of an appropriate situation to interrupt a
speaker is if the speaker is starting to make a personal attack on another member.

Not all motions are debatable

All main motions are debatable. Other motions may or may not be debatable. The debatability
of motions depends on the purpose of the motion. For example, the purpose of the motion to
limit debate would be defeated if this motion itself could be debated; therefore, the motion to
limit debate is not debatable.

Chairman should not debate

Except in committees and small boards, the chairman (or whatever title the presiding officer is

called) should not speak in debate to maintain the impartiality required of this position. This
also means that the chairman should not interrupt a speaker so long as that person is following
the rules of the group. In addition, Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised states that "under
legitimate parliamentary procedure, there is no such thing as 'gaveling through' a measure." In
other words, the chairman cannot move so quickly through the proceedings so as to disregard
the rights of members to speak on it.

Speaking Order

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

The member who made the motion is entitled to speak first in debate. Then members are called
on the order in which they are recognized by the chair, although members who have not spoken
yet get preference over those who have. If possible, the chair alternates between someone in
favor and someone against the motion.

Motion to limit or extend limits of debate

Limit or extend limits of debate (RONR)

Class Subsidiary motion

In order when No
another has the
floor?

Requires Yes
second?

Debatable? No

May be Yes; but if vote was affirmative, only unexecuted part of order.
reconsidered? A negative vote on this motion can be reconsidered only until
such time as progress in business or debate has made it
essentially a new question

Amendable? Yes

Vote required Two-thirds

The motion to limit or extend limits of debate is used to modify how much debate is
allowed.

Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR)

Unless the organization's rules say otherwise, each member of a deliberative assembly is
allowed to make two ten-minute speeches on each debatable motion, with a requirement that a
member wait for other members who have not spoken on the question to speak before making
his second speech. The motion to limit or extend limits of debate can decrease or increase the
allowed number of speeches or length of speeches or it can decrease or increase the total
amount of time for debate.
The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure (TSC)

Limit or extend debate (TSC)

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP

 Class Subsidiary motion

In order when another has the No

floor?

Requires second? Yes

Debatable? Yes

May be reconsidered? No

Amendable? Yes

Vote required Two-thirds

The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure implements this concept as the motion to

extend or limit debate. A variety of limits may be imposed on the debate, including:

 Limiting the number of minutes allotted to each member. As TSC normally allows for
speeches of unlimited length, this motion can impose time limits.
 Limiting the number of minutes allotted to the entire debate.
 The number of speeches each member may make.
 The number of speeches that may be made both for and against the motion, regardless
of who makes them.

Alternatively, the motion can also modify or remove limits already imposed. For example, if
each speaker is given three minutes, and a speaker reaches their maximum, they may use this
motion to request an additional 30 seconds to finish their remarks.

Because this motion by definition limits or changes the limits of the freedom of the body, it
requires a vote of two-thirds to pass.

TSC does not normally limit the length of speeches as RONR does, stating, "Parliamentary law
fixes no limit on the length of speeches during debate...Debate can ordinarily be kept within
reasonable time limits by the presiding officer's insistence that all discussion be confined strictly
to the subject." Also, TSC allows the motion to limit or extend debate to be debated, but only
on the merits of the limitations. As with all subsidiary motions, TSC does not allow this motion
to be reconsidered.

Closing Debate

A member can make a motion to close debate immediately. The assembly of an ordinary society
could decide to adopt such a motion by a two-thirds vote or by unanimous consent.

Debate is automatically closed when no one else wants to speak on the motion.

National Forensic Science Training Institute |SLP