Argumentative Strategies and Stylistic Devices

The extended pragma-dialectical argumentation theory assumes that people engaged in argumentative discourse manoeuvre strategically. In argumentative reality, the strategic manoeuvring is often carried out according to an argumentative strategy. Language users make an effort to present their strategic manoeuvres in a specific way and the analysis of the stylistic choices in actual argumentative discourse is the most important basis for identification and analysis of argumentative strategies. In this article, it is shown what requirements must be satisfied by a systematic stylistic analysis of argumentative discourse, and the results of such an analysis are illustrated by means of a case study.

Download Full-text

Strategisch manoeuvreren in plenaire Tweede Kamerdebatten

Tijdschrift voor taalbeheersing ◽

10.5117/tvt2020.2.002.vanh ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 42 (2) ◽

pp. 111-128

Author(s):

Ton van Haaften

Keyword(s):

Argumentation Theory ◽

Added Value ◽

Activity Type ◽

Argumentative Discourse ◽

Political Debate ◽

Strategic Manoeuvring ◽

Activity Types ◽

Dialectical Argumentation ◽

Argumentative Activity

Abstract Strategic manoeuvring in plenary debates in the Second Chamber of Dutch ParliamentThe (extended) pragma-dialectical argumentation theory assumes that people engaged in argumentative discourse manoeuvre strategically. In argumentative reality, the strategic manoeuvring is carried out within specific argumentative activity types. In this paper it is argued that pragma-dialectics offers a fruitful approach to study political debate. The approach and its added value are discussed and illustrated on the basis of a specific type of political debate in a specific argumentative activity type: the plenary debate in the Second Chamber of Dutch Parliament.

Download Full-text

On the relation between argumentative style and linguistic style

Journal of Argumentation in Context ◽

10.1075/jaic.20014.haa ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Ton van Haaften ◽

Maarten van Leeuwen

Keyword(s):

Strategic Plan ◽

Stylistic Analysis ◽

Argumentative Discourse ◽

Linguistic Style ◽

Difference Of Opinion ◽

Argumentative Strategies ◽

Dialectical Analysis ◽

Constitutive Element

Abstract Argumentative style is assumed to be instrumental to the implementation of an arguer’s strategic plan to resolve a difference of opinion in his/her favor. One important constitutive element of argumentative style are linguistic choices. It is therefore crucial to pay close and systematic attention to linguistic choices and their argumentative functions in the analysis of argumentative style. In this paper we discuss how a linguistic-stylistic analysis can be conducted systematically by making use of methodological insights from the so-called “linguistic-stylistic approach”, and how such an analysis can be integrated with a pragma-dialectical analysis of argumentative discourse. Our aim is to show how such an integration could be helpful in analysing the presentational aspect of an argumentative style, and how the outcomes of such an analysis could be linked to another aspect of argumentative style, namely the strategic considerations implemented in the argumentative discourse and more particularly the argumentative strategies involved.

Download Full-text

A Pragma-Dialectical Approach to Trade Friction Discourse: A Case Study of a Public Letter in Sino-US Trade Friction on Tire Special Safeguard

Sinología hispánica ◽

10.18002/sin.v3i2.5258 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 3 (2) ◽

pp. 1

Author(s):

Wu Peng ◽

Zhao Rui

Keyword(s):

Analytical Framework ◽

Font Size ◽

Argumentative Discourse ◽

The Public ◽

Trade Friction ◽

Dialectical Approach ◽

Difference Of Opinion ◽

Argumentative Strategies ◽

Opening Stage

Based on the analytical framework ofStrategic Maneuvering, this paper analyzes andevaluates the public letter from China Chamberof Commerce of Metals, Minerals & ChemicalsImporters & Exporters (CCCMC) and China RubberIndustry Association (CRIA) to Obama andUnited States Trade Representative (USTR) onJuly 27th, 2009 to reveal the discursivestrategies and their corresponding linguisticrealizations manipulated in tire special safeguardcase. The research results show that, strategicmaneuvering in CCCMC & CRIA’s public lettersis integratedly realized through choice of topicalpotential, catering for audience demands andchoice of presentational devices, which issupported by such argumentative strategies aspresupposition, contrast, appeal to audience'svalues, appeal to authority, vagueness,repetition, statistics, appeal to opponent ’ sconcession, and the like. CCCMC & CRIA’s publicletter has its shortcomings in clarification ofdifference of opinion in the confrontation stage,in choice of starting in the opening stage, inchoice of topics in the argumentation stage andin manipulation of such specific argumentativerhetoricstrategies as ‘contrast’ and ‘statistics’.In view of China’s merits and deficiency, Chinashould: (1) clarify the confrontation, opening,argumentation and concluding stages of theargumentative discourse and flexibly set thedialectic and rhetoric aims of these four stagesaccording to the context; (2) strategicallymaneuver among topical potential, audiencedemand and presentational devices, in line withthe established dialectic and rhetoric aims indifferent argumentative stages; (3) recognizethe institutional context of trade frictiondiscourse and the importance of languageexpression, and cultivate an assertive image.

Download Full-text

The greatest possible being needn't be anything impossible

Religious Studies ◽

10.1017/s0034412514000468 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 51 (4) ◽

pp. 531-542

Author(s):

PATRICK TODD

Keyword(s):

Existence Of God ◽

Divine Attribute ◽

Argumentative Strategy ◽

Relevant Attribute ◽

Argumentative Strategies

AbstractThere are various argumentative strategies for advancing the claim that God does not exist. One such strategy is this. First, one notes that God is meant to have a certain divine attribute (such as omniscience). One then argues that having the relevant attribute is impossible. One concludes that God doesn't exist. For instance, Dennis Whitcomb's recent paper, ‘Grounding and omniscience’, proceeds in exactly this way. As Whitcomb says, ‘I'm going to argue that omniscience is impossible and that therefore there is no God.’ This is not, I hope to show, a very promising way to start a paper. If having a given property is impossible, the greatest possible being need not have that property. Accordingly, the argumentative strategy in question is doomed to failure. The upshot of this article is a quite general one concerning how arguments against the existence of God in fact must proceed.

Download Full-text

JUST WAR IN THEORY AND PRACTICE: THE LEGITIMATION OF SWEDISH INTERVENTION IN THE THIRTY YEARS WAR

The Historical Journal ◽

10.1017/s0018246x02002522 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 45 (3) ◽

pp. 499-523 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

PÄRTEL PIIRIMÄE

Keyword(s):

Seventeenth Century ◽

International Law ◽

Just War ◽

Humanitarian Intervention ◽

Theory And Practice ◽

Normative Language ◽

Argumentative Strategy ◽

Police Action

This article attempts to establish a connection between the practical legitimation of war and the theories of international law, examining Sweden's efforts to justify her intervention in the Thirty Years War in 1630. Swedish argumentative strategy is analysed in the light of two major traditions of thinking about war: theological and humanist ‘just war’ traditions. The article argues that Swedish leaders did not appeal to the more belligerent humanist arguments which would have enabled them to describe their campaign as a just war either on the grounds of pre-emptive defence or humanitarian intervention. Instead, they tried to interpret it as being within the limits set by the more restrictive theological tradition. This strategy eventually forced them to relinquish attempts to present their intervention as a genuine war and to develop an argument of ‘police-action’, even though it resulted in a loss of credibility. The case study suggests that in the early seventeenth century the prevailing normative language of just war was that of the theologians.

Download Full-text

Stylistic analysis for law enforcement purposes: A case study of a language variable as an index of a suspect's caution in phrasing answers

Communication Quarterly ◽

10.1080/01463378109369387 ◽

1981 ◽

Vol 29 (1) ◽

pp. 32-39 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Ronald H. Carpenter

Keyword(s):

Law Enforcement ◽

Stylistic Analysis

Download Full-text

Administrative Judicial Decisions as a Hybrid Argumentative Activity Type

Informal Logic ◽

10.22329/il.v36i3.4722 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 36 (3) ◽

pp. 333 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

H. José Plug

Keyword(s):

Administrative Law ◽

Type I ◽

Activity Type ◽

Strategic Manoeuvring ◽

Judicial Decisions ◽

Argumentative Activity

This article focuses on strategic manoeuvring that takes place in Dutch administrative judi- cial decisions. These decisions may be seen as a distinct argumentative activity type. Starting from the char- acteristics that traditionally are per- tinent to this activity type, I will explore how implications of current discussions on the changing task of the administrative judge may be- come manifest in the judge’s strate- gic manoeuvring by means of the presentation of argumentation and the introduction of additional stand- points. The case study of Dutch administrative law serves to demon- strate what consequences changing institutional demands may have for the starting points of the analysis of argumentation in judicial decisions.

Download Full-text

A World of Difference: The Rich State of Argumentation Theory

Informal Logic ◽

10.22329/il.v17i2.2404 ◽

1995 ◽

Vol 17 (2) ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Frans H. Van Eemeren

Keyword(s):

Communication Theory ◽

Argumentation Theory ◽

Informal Logic ◽

Speech Communication ◽

Argumentative Discourse ◽

Quality Of Democracy ◽

Educational Methods ◽

Differences Of Opinion ◽

The Rich

This paper surveys the contributions to the study of argumentation in the two decades since the work of Toulmin and Perelman. Developments include Radical Argumentativism (Anscombre and Ducot), Communication and Rhetoric (American Speech Communication Theory), Informal Logic (Johnson and Blair), Formal Analyses of Fallacies (Woods and Walton), Formal Dialectics (Barth and Krabbe), and Pragma-Dialectics (van Eemeren and Grootendorst). From the survey it is concluded that argumentation theory has been considerably enriched. If the contributions can be made to converge, a sound basis will be created for developing educational methods for producing, interpreting and evaluating argumentative discourse. Thus, argumentation theory may be instrumental in improving the quality of democracy by furthering a reasonable management of differences of opinion.

Download Full-text