Types of Dialogue, Dialectical Relevance and Textual Congruity

Anthropology and Philosophy 8 (1-2):101-120 (2007)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
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 argumentation. In this paper is shown how such dialectical models of reasonable argumentation 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
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
WALTOD-2
Upload history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View other versions
Added to PP index
2015-01-31

Total views
679 ( #8,150 of 2,448,636 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
45 ( #14,117 of 2,448,636 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.