发布求助
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献

Journal of Argumentation in Context最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
The TV addresses of the Swiss government before popular votes 瑞士政府在普选前的电视讲话
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-12-31 DOI: 10.1075/jaic.18049.sch
Juliane Schröter
{"title":"The TV addresses of the Swiss government before popular votes","authors":"Juliane Schröter","doi":"10.1075/jaic.18049.sch","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18049.sch","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper analyzes an important genre in the public debates before popular votes in Switzerland: the TV addresses in which the Swiss government presents its standpoint and main arguments for or against the proposal put to the vote. The paper investigates a series of addresses in order to characterize the argumentation in them. The question is whether the addresses show similarities and, if there are any, what their pragmatic effects on the argumentation might be. The addresses are studied with concepts and methods from linguistics and argumentation theory: with regard to the role of the non-verbal modes, the composition, the relation between argumentation and other practices, the argumentative macro- and micro-structure, and personal references. In all these aspects, recurrent features can be identified. Many of these features can be understood as highly functional for the Swiss political system with its far-reaching direct democratic rights. They effectuate an argumentation that is rather informative than confrontational.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":"8 1","pages":"285-316"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49573694","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
“Doctor, I disagree” “医生，我不同意”
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-12-31 DOI: 10.1075/jaic.18018.lab
Nanon H. M. Labrie
{"title":"“Doctor, I disagree”","authors":"Nanon H. M. Labrie","doi":"10.1075/jaic.18018.lab","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18018.lab","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In medical consultations, disagreements may arise. Yet, patients’ predisposition to engage in a discussion with their doctors to resolve these disagreements may vary. This study aims to develop and validate a measurement tool to assess patient argumentativeness (P-ARG) in general practice. Starting from the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation and Infante and Rancer’s (1982) argumentativeness scale, scale items were developed and subsequently administered to 183 participants. Principal component analysis was conducted to explore the scale structure. Also, convergent and concurrent validity were assessed. The results confirmed a two-factor scale structure and provided preliminary support for its validity. While further refinement is required, the (preliminary) P-ARG scale can be used for research purposes by medical argumentation as well as health communication scholars, e.g., to explore the relationships between doctors’ provision of argumentation, patients’ perspectives thereof, and patient argumentativeness.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":"8 1","pages":"336-353"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41318230","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Niilo Lahti (2017) The maneuvering Paul: A pragma-dialectical analysis of Paul’s argumentation in First Corinthians 4:18–7:40 Niilo Lahti（2017）操纵保罗：保罗在《哥林多前书》4:18–7:40中论证的实用主义辩证分析
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-12-31 DOI: 10.1075/jaic.18002.hie
M. Hietanen
{"title":"Niilo Lahti (2017) The maneuvering Paul: A pragma-dialectical\u0000 analysis of Paul’s argumentation in First Corinthians\u0000 4:18–7:40","authors":"M. Hietanen","doi":"10.1075/jaic.18002.hie","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18002.hie","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews The maneuvering Paul: A pragma-dialectical analysis of Paul’s argumentation in First Corinthians 4:18–7:40","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":"8 1","pages":"383-391"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46026592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Scientific arguments in policy-making 决策中的科学论证
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-09-25 DOI: 10.1075/jaic.18040.and
C. Andone, J. A. Hernández
{"title":"Scientific arguments in policy-making","authors":"C. Andone, J. A. Hernández","doi":"10.1075/jaic.18040.and","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18040.and","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper focuses on the use of scientific insights for\u0000 justifying decisions in policy-making. Because in policy-making the politician\u0000 argues for a future course of action by pointing at its positive consequences,\u0000 the burden of proof should concern not only the scientific arguments, but also\u0000 the pragmatic arguments. We show how the political justificatory process takes\u0000 place that combines the two argument types, and we propose criteria for\u0000 assessing the quality of the justifications. Based on our theoretical findings,\u0000 we provide a case-study analysis of the Paris Agreement on climate change in\u0000 which we demonstrate how the politicians attempt to meet their burden of proof\u0000 imposed by pragmatic and scientific argumentation.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48351934","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
On philosophical argumentation 论哲学论证
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-09-25 DOI: 10.1075/jaic.19007.lea
F. Leal
{"title":"On philosophical argumentation","authors":"F. Leal","doi":"10.1075/jaic.19007.lea","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.19007.lea","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Philosophical argumentation presents a puzzle for\u0000 pragma-dialectics: both from the perspective of 2500 years of history and from\u0000 what we can ourselves witness in the present, philosophers seem to be\u0000 exclusively intent on strengthening and elaborating their differences of\u0000 opinion. Nothing like that happens in other academic endeavors. This is an\u0000 anomaly in pragma-dialectical terms because, if philosophical discussants do not\u0000 want to resolve their differences of opinion, then they would seem to be\u0000 unreasonable by definition. In other words, no critical discussion would be\u0000 possible in philosophy because of the peculiar way philosophers argue. The\u0000 anomaly can, however, be dispelled by using the elementary distinction between\u0000 single and multiple differences of opinion. It is argued that, in spite of\u0000 occasional appearances, all philosophical differences of\u0000 opinion are multiple. From that it is argued that the\u0000 ‘institutional point’ (van Eemeren,\u0000 2010) of philosophy is to create the broadest map of arguable\u0000 positions. If this is true, then philosophers may after all be pursuing a\u0000 higher-order kind of consensus, bearing in particular on how many arguments can\u0000 be marshaled around any given philosophical question.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47136138","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
A rhetorical perspective on conspiracies 对阴谋论的修辞观点
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-09-25 DOI: 10.1075/jaic.18006.zag
Roberta M Zagarella, M. Annoni
{"title":"A rhetorical perspective on conspiracies","authors":"Roberta M Zagarella, M. Annoni","doi":"10.1075/jaic.18006.zag","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18006.zag","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In this paper, we analyze the persuasive effects of conspiracy\u0000 theories from a rhetorical and argumentative perspective. In particular, we\u0000 scrutinize a case-study – the story of the “Stamina cure” in Italy –,\u0000 interpreting it as a particular instance of conspiracy theory. First, we explain\u0000 what conspiracy theories are, and why they are relevant within the contemporary\u0000 health debate. Second, we situate our analysis in relation to other theoretical\u0000 accounts, explaining why a discursive approach may be required to study\u0000 conspiracies. Third, we investigate our case-study through the lenses of the\u0000 three “entechnic” proofs of rhetoric: logos, ethos, and\u0000 pathos. We conclude that a rhetorical approach can shed\u0000 significant light on how conspiracies achieve their persuasive effect and it\u0000 provides a first step toward the elaboration of a more comprehensive model to\u0000 better address the practical and political implications of conspiracy\u0000 argumentations.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45738419","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Challenging judicial impartiality 质疑司法公正
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-09-25 DOI: 10.1075/jaic.17026.plu
H. Plug
{"title":"Challenging judicial impartiality","authors":"H. Plug","doi":"10.1075/jaic.17026.plu","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.17026.plu","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Impartiality is one of the core values underlying the\u0000 administration of justice. A complaint about a judge’s supposed lack of\u0000 impartiality may be filed on the grounds of the judge’s verbal behavior. In this\u0000 article I will analyze complaints that concern the judge’s use of rhetorical\u0000 questions during court hearings. I will explore what role these complaints may\u0000 play in the strategic maneuvering of a party who seeks the judge’s\u0000 disqualification.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46856515","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The strategic use of argumentation from example in re-evaluating a people 在重新评价一个民族时策略性地使用实例论证
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-09-25 DOI: 10.1075/jaic.17031.oma
A. A. Omar
{"title":"The strategic use of argumentation from example in\u0000 re-evaluating a people","authors":"A. A. Omar","doi":"10.1075/jaic.17031.oma","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.17031.oma","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 With the help of the extended pragma-dialectical theory, this\u0000 paper aims to analyze how Al Aswany, an Egyptian political columnist who argued\u0000 in favor of the feasibility of democratization before the Arab Spring,\u0000 maneuvered strategically by argumentation from example in two of his columns in\u0000 supporting the standpoint that the Egyptian people had become no longer\u0000 politically inactive. The analysis is conducted in view of the institutional\u0000 preconditions of political columns and the specific rhetorical exigency a\u0000 columnist may face in this specific argumentative situation.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41414837","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Chapter 11. “Argumentexturing” 11章。“Argumentexturing”
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-09-23 DOI: 10.1075/aic.17.11bak
M. Baker, B. Schwarz
{"title":"Chapter 11. “Argumentexturing”","authors":"M. Baker, B. Schwarz","doi":"10.1075/aic.17.11bak","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.17.11bak","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90784091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Chapter 9. Radically reframing the climate debate 第9章。彻底重塑气候辩论
IF 0.8
Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-09-23 DOI: 10.1075/aic.17.09goo
J. Goodwin
{"title":"Chapter 9. Radically reframing the climate debate","authors":"J. Goodwin","doi":"10.1075/aic.17.09goo","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.17.09goo","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2019-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78329209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
首页 上一页 下一页 尾页
0
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
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