Types of Dialogue, Dialectical Relevance

Abstract Using tools like argument diagrams and profiles of dialogue, this paper studies a number of examples of everyday conversational argumentation where determination of relevance and irrelevance can be assisted by means of adopting a new dialectical approach. According to the new dialectical theory, dialogue types are normative frameworks with specific goals and rules that can be applied to conversational argu-mentation. In this paper is shown how such dialectical models of reasonable argumen-tation can be applied to a determination of whether an argument in a specific case is relevant are not in these examples. The approach is based on a linguistic account of dialogue and text from congruity theory, and on the notion of a dialectical shift. Such a shift occurs where an argument starts out as fitting into one type of dialogue, but then it only continues to makes sense as a coherent argument if it is taken to be a part of a different type of dialogue. Key words Conversational argumentation, dialectical approach, dialectical relevance, textual congruity, types of dialogue. The theory of dialogue types can be traced back to Aristotle’s Topics an