{"title":"因果关系,论证和连接词","authors":"Ondžej Pešek","doi":"10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper deals with the relation between argumentation and causality. After having defined causality (referring to D. Hume) and its language representation, we distinguish three types of argumentative discourse articulated by an argument-introducing connective (parce que, puisque, car, en effet etc.), i.e. argument for the utterance content, argument for the illocutionary act and argument for the act of enunciation. Afterwards, we examine the relation between argument and conclusion in these three types of discourse from the point of view of causality. We show that causality operates as a principle which the argumentation is based on only in the case of truth-conditional acts. We try to explain some restrictions concerning the distribution of the causally related entities which are observed.","PeriodicalId":40638,"journal":{"name":"Linguistica Pragensia","volume":"12 1","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Causality, Argumentation and Connectives\",\"authors\":\"Ondžej Pešek\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper deals with the relation between argumentation and causality. After having defined causality (referring to D. Hume) and its language representation, we distinguish three types of argumentative discourse articulated by an argument-introducing connective (parce que, puisque, car, en effet etc.), i.e. argument for the utterance content, argument for the illocutionary act and argument for the act of enunciation. Afterwards, we examine the relation between argument and conclusion in these three types of discourse from the point of view of causality. We show that causality operates as a principle which the argumentation is based on only in the case of truth-conditional acts. We try to explain some restrictions concerning the distribution of the causally related entities which are observed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40638,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistica Pragensia\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistica Pragensia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistica Pragensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文讨论了论证与因果关系的关系。在定义了因果关系(参照休谟)及其语言表征之后,我们区分了三种由引语连接词(parce que, puisque, car, en effet等)所表达的议论文语,即话语内容的议论文、言外行为的议论文和发音行为的议论文。然后,我们从因果关系的角度考察了这三种类型话语中论点和结论之间的关系。我们表明,因果关系作为一个原则运作,只有在真理条件行为的情况下,论证才基于这个原则。我们试图解释一些关于所观察到的因果相关实体分布的限制。
The paper deals with the relation between argumentation and causality. After having defined causality (referring to D. Hume) and its language representation, we distinguish three types of argumentative discourse articulated by an argument-introducing connective (parce que, puisque, car, en effet etc.), i.e. argument for the utterance content, argument for the illocutionary act and argument for the act of enunciation. Afterwards, we examine the relation between argument and conclusion in these three types of discourse from the point of view of causality. We show that causality operates as a principle which the argumentation is based on only in the case of truth-conditional acts. We try to explain some restrictions concerning the distribution of the causally related entities which are observed.