递归参数结构

IF 1.3 2区 文学 Q3 COMMUNICATION
Sung-Jun Pyon
{"title":"递归参数结构","authors":"Sung-Jun Pyon","doi":"10.1007/s10503-024-09644-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The aim of this paper is to critically review the traditional typology of argument macrostructures, particularly, the dichotomy between linked and convergent structure. We have found an argument structure that does not fall under one of those five traditional categories: <i>basic</i>, <i>serial</i>, <i>divergent</i>, <i>linked</i> and <i>convergent</i>. We show that the new argument structure, which we call the <i>recursive</i> structure, is not <i>rare-earth</i>, but <i>ubiquitous</i> in real argumentation. Then, we propose and justify a new approach to diagramming arguments of the structure. The new argument structure is <i>really</i> new because arguments of the new structure are analyzed and evaluated differently from those of the other structures, especially from <i>hybrid</i> arguments considered in the literature. In light of the new argument structure, we present a <i>hypothesis</i> why assumptions and exceptions of a defeasible argument play different roles in dialectical settings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46219,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation","volume":"39 3","pages":"419 - 449"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Recursive Argument Structure\",\"authors\":\"Sung-Jun Pyon\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10503-024-09644-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The aim of this paper is to critically review the traditional typology of argument macrostructures, particularly, the dichotomy between linked and convergent structure. We have found an argument structure that does not fall under one of those five traditional categories: <i>basic</i>, <i>serial</i>, <i>divergent</i>, <i>linked</i> and <i>convergent</i>. We show that the new argument structure, which we call the <i>recursive</i> structure, is not <i>rare-earth</i>, but <i>ubiquitous</i> in real argumentation. Then, we propose and justify a new approach to diagramming arguments of the structure. The new argument structure is <i>really</i> new because arguments of the new structure are analyzed and evaluated differently from those of the other structures, especially from <i>hybrid</i> arguments considered in the literature. In light of the new argument structure, we present a <i>hypothesis</i> why assumptions and exceptions of a defeasible argument play different roles in dialectical settings.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46219,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Argumentation\",\"volume\":\"39 3\",\"pages\":\"419 - 449\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Argumentation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10503-024-09644-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Argumentation","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10503-024-09644-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是批判性地回顾传统的论点宏观结构类型,特别是链接结构和收敛结构之间的二分法。我们发现了一个论点结构,它不属于这五个传统类别:基本的、连续的、发散的、联系的和收敛的。我们证明了新的论证结构,我们称之为递归结构,并不是稀有的,而是在实际论证中普遍存在的。然后,我们提出并证明了一种新的方法来绘制结构的参数。新论证结构是一种全新的论证结构,它的论证分析和评价方式不同于其他论证结构,特别是不同于文献中所考虑的混合论证结构。根据新的论证结构,我们提出了一个假设,为什么一个可否定论证的假设和例外在辩证环境中扮演不同的角色。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The Recursive Argument Structure

The Recursive Argument Structure

The Recursive Argument Structure

The aim of this paper is to critically review the traditional typology of argument macrostructures, particularly, the dichotomy between linked and convergent structure. We have found an argument structure that does not fall under one of those five traditional categories: basic, serial, divergent, linked and convergent. We show that the new argument structure, which we call the recursive structure, is not rare-earth, but ubiquitous in real argumentation. Then, we propose and justify a new approach to diagramming arguments of the structure. The new argument structure is really new because arguments of the new structure are analyzed and evaluated differently from those of the other structures, especially from hybrid arguments considered in the literature. In light of the new argument structure, we present a hypothesis why assumptions and exceptions of a defeasible argument play different roles in dialectical settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Argumentation
Argumentation Multiple-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Argumentation is an international and interdisciplinary journal. Its aim is to gather academic contributions from a wide range of scholarly backgrounds and approaches to reasoning, natural inference and persuasion: communication, rhetoric (classical and modern), linguistics, discourse analysis, pragmatics, psychology, philosophy, logic (formal and informal), critical thinking, history and law. Its scope includes a diversity of interests, varying from philosophical, theoretical and analytical to empirical and practical topics. Argumentation publishes papers, book reviews, a yearly bibliography, and announcements of conferences and seminars.To be considered for publication in the journal, a paper must satisfy all of these criteria:1.     Report research that is within the journals’ scope: concentrating on argumentation 2.     Pose a clear and relevant research question 3.     Make a contribution to the literature that connects with the state of the art in the field of argumentation theory 4.     Be sound in methodology and analysis 5.     Provide appropriate evidence and argumentation for the conclusions 6.     Be presented in a clear and intelligible fashion in standard English
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信