Credible as Evidence? Multilayered Audience Reception of Narrative Arguments

IF 0.9 3区哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY

Informal Logic Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.22329/IL.V41I2.6506

Jarmila Bubikova-Moan

引用次数: 2

Abstract

Building on a view of both narration and argumentation as dynamic concepts, this paper considers ways of assessing the credibility of narrative arguments constructed in empirical examples of conversational discourse. I argue that the key in any such exercise is to pay close attention to both structural and pragmatic details, particularly how conversational storytelling gets embedded in the surrounding discourse and how the way this is discursively accomplished vis-à-vis the narrators’ multilayered audience may be reflective of their argumentative goals.

查看原文本刊更多论文

作为证据可信?叙事论点的多层次受众接受

基于叙事和论证都是动态概念的观点，本文考虑了如何评估对话话语实证实例中构建的叙事论证的可信度。我认为，任何此类练习的关键都是密切关注结构和语用细节，特别是对话故事是如何融入周围的话语中的，以及相对于叙述者的多层次观众，这种话语方式是如何反映他们的辩论目标的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Informal Logic PHILOSOPHY-

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Informal Logic publishes articles that advance the dialectic in reasoning and argumentation theory and practice. Primary criteria for the acceptance of articles with a theoretical focus or interest are: (1) the article advances the dialectic or constitutes an interesting comment on it: it presents a cogent argument, objection, interpretation or position that is an advance in relation to the background of issues and controversies on the topic; or it casts the issue addressed in a new and worthwhile light; and (2) the article makes explicit reference to the pertinent literature on its topic, and it discharges the burden of proof imposed by that scholarship. Primary criteria for acceptance of articles devoted to the teaching of informal logic, critical thinking or argumentation include: originality; utility; timeliness; and evidence of the effectiveness of the methods, materials, technologies, etc., proposed. The standard criteria for scholarly publication—topical fit with the subjects covered in the journal; adequacy of coverage to the issue addressed; clarity, organization and literateness of the prose; conceptual clarity and cogency of argumentation—apply ceteris paribus to the selection of all articles, notes and reviews.