Eemeren, Frans H. van, Houtlosser, Peter, Snoeck Henkemans, A.F.
2007, X, 234 p.
Springer eBooks may be purchased by end-customers only and are sold without copy protection (DRM free). Instead, all eBooks include personalized watermarks. This means you can read the Springer eBooks across numerous devices such as Laptops, eReaders, and tablets.
You can pay for Springer eBooks with Visa, Mastercard, American Express or Paypal.
After the purchase you can directly download the eBook file or read it online in our Springer eBook Reader. Furthermore your eBook will be stored in your MySpringer account. So you can always re-download your eBooks.
Presents an analysis of words and expressions that can be indicative of argumentative moves
Systematically based on a well-developed theory of argumentation
Covers all stages of a critical discussion
Makes use of the newly developed technical tool of dialectical profiles
Immediately connects with the practice of argumentative discourse by starting from everyday examples
Argumentative Indicators: A Pragma-Dialectical Study identifies and analyses English words and expressions that are crucial for an adequate reconstruction of argumentative discourse. It provides the analyst of argumentative discussions and texts with a systematic set of instruments for giving a well-founded analysis which results in an analytic overview of the elements that are relevant for the evaluation of the argumentation. In the book a systematic connection is made between linguistic insights into the characteristics of argumentative discourse and insights from argumentation theory into the resolution of differences of opinion by means of argumentation.
Content Level »Research
Keywords »Argumentation Theory - English - dialectical profiles - discourse - formal logic - informal logic - issue - linguistic indicators - logic - pragma-dialectics
1. The identification of argumentative indicators. 1.1 Argumentative moves and argumentative indicators. 1.2 The pragma-dialectical approach to argumentative discourse. 1.3 Organisation of this study.
2. The ideal model of a critical discussion as a theoretical framework. 2.1 Dialectical stages in a critical discussion. 2.2 Pragmatic characterisation of argumentative moves as speech acts. 2.3 Dialectical profiles for pragmatic patterns of moves.
3. Indicators of confrontation. 3.1 Dialectical confrontation profiles. 3.2 Indicators of standpoints. 3.2.1 Tools for the identification of standpoints. 3.2.2 Propositional attitude indicating and force modifying expressions. 3.3 Indicators of disputes. 3.3.1 Doubt as an indicator of a single non-mixed dispute. 3.3.2 Indicators of a mixed dispute. 3.3.3 Indicators of a qualitative multiple dispute.
4. Indicators of the distribution of the burden of proof. 4.1 The distribution of the burden of proof. 4.2 Dialectical profiles for establishing the burden of proof. 4.3 Analysing the distribution of the burden of proof. 4.3.1 Indicators of a challenge to defend a standpoint. 4.3.2 Indicators of the acceptance of a one-sided burden of proof. 4.3.3 Indicators of refusing a one-sided burden of proof. 4.3.4 Indicators of sequence issues in a two-sided burden of proof.
5. Indicators of starting points for the discussion. 5.1 The identification of starting points. 5.2 Dialectical profile for establishing a starting point. 5.3The analysis of establishing starting points. 5.3.1 Indicators of a proposal to accept a proposition as a starting point. 5.3.2 Indicators of responses to a proposal to accept a proposition as a starting point.
6. Indicators of argument schemes. 6.1 The use of argument schemes in a critical discussion. 6.2 Clues for analogy argumentation. 6.2.1 Dialectical profile for the analogy relationship. 6.2.2 Clues in the presentation of argumentation by comparison. 6.2.3 Indications in criticism of argumentation by comparison. 6.2.4 Indications in the follow-up of argumentation by comparison. 6.3 Indications for symptomatic argumentation. 6.3.1 Dialectical profile for the symptomatic relationship. 6.3.2 Indications in the presentation of symptomatic argumentation. 6.3.3 Clues in criticism of symptomatic argumentation. 6.3.4 Clues in the follow-up of symptomatic argumentation. 6.4 Indications for causal argumentation. 6.4.1 Dialectical profile for the causal relationship. 6.4.2 Clues in the presentation of causal argumentation. 6.4.3 Clues in criticism of causal argumentation. 6.4.4 Clues in the follow-up of causal argumentation. 6.5 Some complications.
7. Indicators of the argumentation structure. 7.1 Dialectical profiles for different types of complex argumentation. 7.2 Indications in the verbal presentation of arguments. 7.2.1 Univocal indications for a subordinative relationship. 7.2.2 Non-univocal indications for subordinative argumentation. 7.2.3 Univocal indications for multiplicity. 7.2.4 Non-univocal i