Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Pragma-dialectics and Beyond.Daniel Bonevac - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):451-459.
    Pragma-dialectics is dynamic, context-sensitive, and multi-agent; it promises theories of fallacy and argumentative structure. But pragma-dialectic theory and practice are not yet fully in harmony. Key definitions of the theory fall short of explicating the analyses that pragma-dialecticians actually do. Many discussions involve more than two participants with different and mutually incompatible standpoints. Success in such a discussion may be more than success against each opponent. Pragma-dialectics does well at analyzing arguments advanced by one party, directed at another party; it (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • ‘So what problems bother you and you are not speeding up your work?’ Problem solving talk at work.Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini & Jo Angouri - 2011 - Discourse and Communication 5 (3):209-229.
    Problem solving can be readily described as one of the key activities regularly performed by professionals in any workplace setting. Despite its importance, however, there is relatively little linguistic research which looks at the complex ways in which problems are constructed in discourse. This article sees the enactment of a ‘problem’ as a discursive phenomenon with fluid boundaries. It draws on business meeting data recorded in multinational companies in Europe and focuses on excerpts identified by the participants as having a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Common Ground, Corrections, and Coordination.Nicholas Asher & Anthony Gillies - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (4):481-512.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • (1 other version)Argumentative Polylogues in a Dialectical Framework: A Methodological Inquiry.Marcin Lewiński & Mark Aakhus - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (2):161-185.
    In this paper, we closely examine the various ways in which a multi-party argumentative discussion—argumentative polylogue—can be analyzed in a dialectical framework. Our chief concern is that while multi-party and multi-position discussions are characteristic of a large class of argumentative activities, dialectical approaches would analyze and evaluate them in terms of dyadic exchanges between two parties: pro and con. Using as an example an academic committee arguing about the researcher of the year as well as other cases from argumentation literature, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   36 citations  
  • Argumentation and learning.Baruch B. Schwarz - 2009 - In Nathalie Muller Mirza & Anne Nelly Perret-Clermont (eds.), Argumentation and education. New York: Springer. pp. 91--126.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Logic of Critique.Hengameh Irandoust - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (2):133-148.
    This paper attempts to define the concept of critique, explain its function␣and properties and distinguish it from the close concept of evaluation. It is argued that, beyond the argument, a critique is concerned with the position of the proponent relatively to the reality the argument is about. Moreover, a critique is itself an argument in which assumptions regarding the position of the proponent are justified for a given audience on the basis of the proponent’s argumentative background within a specific domain.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark