Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Pathos in Natural Language Argumentation: Emotional Appeals and Reactions.Barbara Konat, Ewelina Gajewska & Wiktoria Rossa - 2024 - Argumentation 38 (3):369-403.
    In this paper, we present a model of pathos, delineate its operationalisation, and demonstrate its utility through an analysis of natural language argumentation. We understand pathos as an interactional persuasive process in which speakers are performing pathos appeals and the audience experiences emotional reactions. We analyse two strategies of such appeals in pre-election debates: pathotic Argument Schemes based on the taxonomy proposed by Walton et al. (Argumentation schemes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008), and emotion-eliciting language based on psychological lexicons of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Crying Foul to Counter Questionable Tactics.Beth Innocenti - unknown
    How do crying foul strategies, such as accusing an opponent of trying to “terrify” into a decision, pressure arguers to argue well? I submit that they work by making a norm determinate and making manifest the badness of the tactic. I explain why they generate pressure to repair or abandon questionable tactics, particularly when the norms converge with those of a broader political culture.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark