{"title":"Examining argumentative style","authors":"F. H. Eemeren","doi":"10.1075/jaic.20022.eem","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this theoretical expose, it is argued that the notion of argumentative style is more encompassing and at the same time\n more specific than the more familiar notion of linguistic style. According to van Eemeren, argumentative styles always have three\n dimensions: the selection of standpoints, starting-points, arguments or other argumentative moves (topical choice dimension), the adjustment\n of argumentative moves to the frame of reference and preferences of the listeners or readers (audience demand dimension), and the choice of\n verbal or non-verbal means for advancing argumentative moves (presentational dimension). In argumentative discourse, the three dimensions of\n argumentative style manifest themselves in the argumentative moves made in trying to resolve a difference of opinion (analytic overview),\n the dialectical routes chosen in making these argumentative moves (argumentative pattern) and the strategic considerations brought to bear\n in this endeavour (strategic design). Van Eemeren explains what this means in practice by discussing the distinctive features of the three\n dimensions of two general categories of argumentative styles that can be regularly encountered, in one variant or other, in argumentative\n discourse: detached argumentative styles and engaged argumentative styles.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.20022.eem","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10
Abstract
In this theoretical expose, it is argued that the notion of argumentative style is more encompassing and at the same time
more specific than the more familiar notion of linguistic style. According to van Eemeren, argumentative styles always have three
dimensions: the selection of standpoints, starting-points, arguments or other argumentative moves (topical choice dimension), the adjustment
of argumentative moves to the frame of reference and preferences of the listeners or readers (audience demand dimension), and the choice of
verbal or non-verbal means for advancing argumentative moves (presentational dimension). In argumentative discourse, the three dimensions of
argumentative style manifest themselves in the argumentative moves made in trying to resolve a difference of opinion (analytic overview),
the dialectical routes chosen in making these argumentative moves (argumentative pattern) and the strategic considerations brought to bear
in this endeavour (strategic design). Van Eemeren explains what this means in practice by discussing the distinctive features of the three
dimensions of two general categories of argumentative styles that can be regularly encountered, in one variant or other, in argumentative
discourse: detached argumentative styles and engaged argumentative styles.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Argumentation in Context aims to publish high-quality papers about the role of argumentation in the various kinds of argumentative practices that have come into being in social life. These practices include, for instance, political, legal, medical, financial, commercial, academic, educational, problem-solving, and interpersonal communication. In all cases certain aspects of such practices will be analyzed from the perspective of argumentation theory with a view of gaining a better understanding of certain vital characteristics of these practices. This means that the journal has an empirical orientation and concentrates on real-life argumentation but is at the same time out to publish only papers that are informed by relevant insights from argumentation theory.