When interlocutors start to talk at cross purposes it becomes less likely that they will be able to resolve their differences of opinion. Still, a critic, in the confrontation stage of a discussion, should be given some room of manoeuvre for rephrasing and even for revising the arguer’s position. I will distinguish between licit and illicit applications of this form of strategic manoeuvring by stating three soundness conditions
Against the background of the standard pragma-dialectical theory, some fifteen years ago Van Eemeren...
It furthers the dialectic when the opponent is clear about what motivates and underlies her critical...
This book shows how research in linguistic pragmatics, philosophy of language, and rhetoric can be c...
Van Eemeren and Houtlosser concentrate on the tension inherent in argumentative discourse between th...
In public political discussions, an accusation of inconsistency can play a role in a number of discu...
In order for confrontational strategic manoeuvring, aimed at defining in a reasonable way the differ...
The aim of this paper is to indicate how knowledge of the argumentative activity type of a political...
A key and continuing concern within the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation is how to account...
What roles do “winning” and “losing” have to play in argumentative discussions? We say that someone ...
Insight into the strategic design of argumentative discourse can be gained by incorporating insight ...
A critic often conveys what underlies her criticism, but imprecisely, leaving it unclear to the argu...
In this paper the authors give a brief overview of the theoretical background of their research proj...
This paper discusses the ways in which argumentative discourse prototypically manifests itself. As a...
Analyzing argumentative discourse is not a an activity exclusively reserved for scholars in argument...
In this paper, I argue that an account of the effect that the use of adverbials such as ‘actually, i...
Against the background of the standard pragma-dialectical theory, some fifteen years ago Van Eemeren...
It furthers the dialectic when the opponent is clear about what motivates and underlies her critical...
This book shows how research in linguistic pragmatics, philosophy of language, and rhetoric can be c...
Van Eemeren and Houtlosser concentrate on the tension inherent in argumentative discourse between th...
In public political discussions, an accusation of inconsistency can play a role in a number of discu...
In order for confrontational strategic manoeuvring, aimed at defining in a reasonable way the differ...
The aim of this paper is to indicate how knowledge of the argumentative activity type of a political...
A key and continuing concern within the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation is how to account...
What roles do “winning” and “losing” have to play in argumentative discussions? We say that someone ...
Insight into the strategic design of argumentative discourse can be gained by incorporating insight ...
A critic often conveys what underlies her criticism, but imprecisely, leaving it unclear to the argu...
In this paper the authors give a brief overview of the theoretical background of their research proj...
This paper discusses the ways in which argumentative discourse prototypically manifests itself. As a...
Analyzing argumentative discourse is not a an activity exclusively reserved for scholars in argument...
In this paper, I argue that an account of the effect that the use of adverbials such as ‘actually, i...
Against the background of the standard pragma-dialectical theory, some fifteen years ago Van Eemeren...
It furthers the dialectic when the opponent is clear about what motivates and underlies her critical...
This book shows how research in linguistic pragmatics, philosophy of language, and rhetoric can be c...