Examining argumentative style

IF 0.6 Q3 COMMUNICATION
F. H. Eemeren
{"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.
考察议论文风格
在这个理论暴露中,它认为论证风格的概念比更熟悉的语言风格的概念更具包容性,同时也更具体。van Eemeren认为,论证风格通常有三个维度:对立场、起点、论据或其他论证动作的选择(话题选择维度),对听者或读者的参考框架和偏好进行论证动作的调整(听众需求维度),以及对推进论证动作的语言或非语言手段的选择(呈现维度)。在论辩话语中,论辩风格的三个维度体现在试图解决意见分歧时所采取的论辩行动(分析概述),在进行这些论辩行动时所选择的辩证路线(论辩模式)以及在这种努力中所采取的战略考虑(战略设计)。Van Eemeren通过讨论在辩论话语中经常遇到的两种一般辩论风格的三个维度的不同特征来解释这在实践中的意义:超然的辩论风格和参与的辩论风格。
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
16
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信