Chapter 12
Visual arguments in activists’ campaigns
A pragmadialectical perspective
This chapter contributes to the ongoing debate on the possibility and realizations of visual arguments, focussing on advertisements produced by NGOs as part of their campaigns – image-based messages that are inherently argumentative and whose reach, thanks to the Web, extends well beyond the time and space constraints of the campaigns themselves. One of the nodes of such a debate concerns whether visuals can express at the same time the two parts of an argument (standpoint and supporting argument), and how each of them can be identified. The analysis carried out here heads into this direction, by putting to use categories from Kress and van Leeuwen’s ‘grammar’ of visual design and combining them with the tenets of the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Review of the literature
- 3.Material and method
- 4.Analysis
- 5.Discussion and conclusion
-
Notes
-
References
References (58)
References
Alcolea-Banegas, J. (2009). Visual Arguments in Film. Argumentation, 23: 259–275. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Andrews, R., Costello, P. J. M., & Clarke, S. (1993). Improving the Quality of Argument: Final Report. Hull, England: University of Hull, School of Education, Centre for Studies in Rhetoric.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Balthrop, W. (1980). Argument as linguistic opportunity: A search for form and function. In J. Rhodes & S. Newell (Eds), Proceedings of the Summer Conference on Argumentation (pp. 184–213). New York: McGraw Hill.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Birdsell, D. S., & Groarke L. (1996). Toward a theory of visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy, 33 (1), 1–10.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Birdsell, D. S., and Groarke L. (2008). Outlines of a Theory of Visual Argument. Argumentation and Advocacy 43 (1), 103–113.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Blair, J. A. (2012)2. The possibility and actuality of visual arguments. In C. W. Tindale (Ed.), Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation, Selected Papers of J. Anthony Blair (pp. 23–39). Dordrecht: Springer (First edition Argumentation and Advocacy, 1996).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bowman, J. W. (1968). Graphic Communication. New York: Wiley.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Buchanan, R. (1989). Declaration by design: Rhetoric, argument, and demonstration in design practice. In V. Margolin (Ed.), Design Discourse: History, Theory, Criticism (pp. 91–109). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Beaugrande, R. & Dressler, W. (1981/2001). Introduction to Text Linguistics. Harlow: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Degano, C. (2014). Textuality on the Web: A Focus on Argumentative Text Types. In H. L. Lim & F. Sudweeks (Ed.), Innovative Methods and Technologies for Electronic Discourse Analysis (pp. 414–436). Hershey PA: IGI Global. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Delicath, W. J, & Kevin M. D. (2003). Image Events, the Public Sphere, and Argumentative Practice: The Case of Radical Environmental Groups. Argumentation, 17, 315–333. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eemeren, F. H. van, & Grootendorst R. (1984). Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed Towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion. Dordrecht: Floris Publications. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eemeren, F. H. van, & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. A Pragma-dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eemeren, F. H. van, & Grootendorst R. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eemeren, F. H. van, Grootendorst R, & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2002). Argumentation: Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation. Mahwa (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eemeren, F. H. van, Grootendorst R., Jackson S., & Jacobs S. (1993). Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse. Studies in Rhetoric and Communication. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eemeren, F. H. van, Houtlosser P. (2002). Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Maintaining a Delicate Balance. In F. H. van Eemeren, & Houtlosser, P. (Eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric. The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis (pp. 131–159). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eemeren, F. H. van, Houtlosser P., Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2007). Argumentative Indicators in Discourse: A Pragma-Dialectical Study. Dordrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eemeren, F. H. van, Grootendorst R., & Kruiger T. (1984). The Study of Argumentation. New York: Irvington.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fleming, D. (1996). Can pictures be arguments? Argumentation & Advocacy, 33 (1), 11–22.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fox, F. R. (1994a). Beyond ‘The Empty Eye’: A conversation with S. I. Hayakawa and Alan R. Hayakawa. In R. F. Fox (Ed.), Images in Language, Media, and Mind (pp. 183–192). Urbana, IL: NCTE.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fox, F. R. (1994b). Where we live. In R. F. Fox (Ed.), Images in Language, Media, and Mind (pp. 69–91). Urbana, IL: NCTE.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fraser, N. (1992). Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the Public Sphere (pp. 109–142). [URL]. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
Garzone, G., Catenaccio P., & Poncini G. (Eds). (2007). Multimodality in Corporate Communication. Web Genres and Discursive Identity. Milano: Franco Angeli.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gombrich, H. E. (1982). The visual image: Its place in communication. In E. H. Gombrich (Ed.), The Image and the Eye: Further Studies in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation (pp. 137–161). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goodnight, G. T. (1991). Controversy. In D. Parson (Ed.) Argument in Controversy: Proceedings of the seventh SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation (pp. 1–13). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds) Syntax and Semantics (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Groarke, L. (1996). Logic, Art and Argument. Informal Logic, 18 (2/3), 105–129. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Groarke, L (2002). Toward a pragmadialectics of visual argument. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Advances in Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 137–151). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Groarke, L. (2009). Five Theses on Toulmin and Visual Argument. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen, Pondering on Problems of Argumentation: Twenty Essays on Theoretical Issues (pp. 229–239). Dortrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Groarke, L, & Tindale C. W. (2004). Good Reasoning Matters!: A Constructive Approach to Critical Thinking. Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hermeren, Göran. (1969). Representation and Meaning in the Visual Arts. Lund: Scandinavian University Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hintikka, J., & Bachman J. (1991). What if . . . ? Toward excellence in reasoning. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jamieson, K. H. (1988). Eloquence in an Electronic Age: The Transformation of Political Speechmaking. New York: Oxford UP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Johnson, R. (2005). Why ‘Visual Arguments’ aren’t Arguments. In H. V. Hansen, C. Tindale, J. A. Blair & R. H. Johnson (Eds), Informal Logic at 25. University of Windsor, CD-ROM.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kjeldsen, E. J. (2007). Visual argumentation in Scandinavian political advertising: A cognitive, contextual, and reception oriented approach. Argumentation and Advocacy, 43, 124–132.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kjeldsen, E. J. (2012). Pictorial Argumentation in Advertising: Visual Tropes and Figures as a Wayof Creating Visual Argumentation. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory: Twenty Exploratory Studies (pp. 239–255). Argumentation Library. Dortrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kneupper, W. C. (1978). On argument and diagrams. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 14, 181–186.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London / New York: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kress, G., & van Leeuven T. (2006). The Grammar of Visual Design. London / New York: Routledge (second edition).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lake, A. R., & Pickering, B. A. (1998). Argumentation, the Visual, and the Possibility of Refutation: An Exploration. Argumentation, 12, 79–93. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Manovich, L. (1998). Cinema as a Cultural Interface. In W3LAB, <[URL]>. Reprinted in J. Olsson (Ed.) (2000). Arresting Movements: From Pre-Cinema to Digital Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Medhurst, M. J., & DeSousa, M. A. (1981). Political cartoons as rhetorical form: A taxonomy of graphic discourse. Communication Monographs, 48, 197–236. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
O’Keefe, D. J. (1977). Two concepts of argument. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 13, 121–128.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
O’Keefe, D. J. (1982). The concepts of argument and arguing. In J. R. Cox, & C. A. Willard (Eds), Advances in Argumentation Theory and Research (pp. 3–23). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Olson, K. M., & Godnight T. G. (1994). Entanglements of Consumption, Cruelty, Privacy and Fashion: The Social Controversy over Fur. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 80, 249–276. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Postman, N. (1985). Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: Penguin.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shelley, C. (1996). Rhetorical and demonstrative modes of visual argument: Looking at images of human evolution. Argumentation and Advocacy, 33 (2), 53–68.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shelley, C. (2003). Aspects of visual arguments: A study of the ‘March of Progress. Informal Logic, 21 (2), 92–112.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Slade, C. (2003). Seeing Reasons: Visual Argumentation in Advertisement. Argumentation, 17, 145–160. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Toulmin, E. S., Rieke R. D., & Allan Janik. (1979). An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Toulmin, E. S. (2003). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Werlich, E. (1983). A Text Grammar of English. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Săftoiu, Răzvan & Noémi Tudor
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.