A. Rocci, S. Greco, Rebecca G. Schär, Josephine Convertini, Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont, Antonio Iannaccone
{"title":"The significance of the adversative connectives aber, mais, ma (‘but’) as indicators in young\n children’s argumentation","authors":"A. Rocci, S. Greco, Rebecca G. Schär, Josephine Convertini, Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont, Antonio Iannaccone","doi":"10.1075/jaic.00008.roc","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Adversative connectives have been analyzed as articulating explicit and implicit facets of argumentative moves and\n have been thus recognized as potential argumentative indicators. Here we examine adversative connectives Ger.\n aber, Fr. mais, It. ma (‘but’) in young children’s speech in the context of\n the ArgImp project, a research endeavor seeking to understand in which situations children aged between two and six years engage\n in argumentation and how their contributions are structured. Two multilingual corpora have been collected for the project: (1)\n everyday family conversations, (2) semi-structured play activities and problem solving in a kindergarten setting. Through the\n detailed analysis of a small collection of examples, we consider the indicative potential of adversative connectives for\n identifying argumentative episodes in interactions involving young children and for the reconstruction of the inferential\n configurations of children’s contributions to these argumentative discussions. The results show that fully fledged argumentative\n interpretations of adversatives occur as a possibility in children’s speech, and that adversative connectives can be used\n profitably to identify less apparent argumentative confrontations and implicit standpoints in children’s speech.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.00008.roc","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: 12
Abstract
Adversative connectives have been analyzed as articulating explicit and implicit facets of argumentative moves and
have been thus recognized as potential argumentative indicators. Here we examine adversative connectives Ger.
aber, Fr. mais, It. ma (‘but’) in young children’s speech in the context of
the ArgImp project, a research endeavor seeking to understand in which situations children aged between two and six years engage
in argumentation and how their contributions are structured. Two multilingual corpora have been collected for the project: (1)
everyday family conversations, (2) semi-structured play activities and problem solving in a kindergarten setting. Through the
detailed analysis of a small collection of examples, we consider the indicative potential of adversative connectives for
identifying argumentative episodes in interactions involving young children and for the reconstruction of the inferential
configurations of children’s contributions to these argumentative discussions. The results show that fully fledged argumentative
interpretations of adversatives occur as a possibility in children’s speech, and that adversative connectives can be used
profitably to identify less apparent argumentative confrontations and implicit standpoints in children’s speech.
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.