Prototypical Argumentative Patterns

Exploring the relationship between argumentative discourse and institutional context

Editor

Frans H. van Eemeren

| ILIAS & Leiden University & University of Amsterdam

Hardbound – Available

ISBN 9789027211286 | EUR 90.00 | USD 135.00

e-Book –

ISBN 9789027265067 | EUR 90.00 | USD 135.00

Prototypical Argumentative Patterns reports about a research project started at the University of Amsterdam in 2012. In this project distinctive argumentative patterns have been identified in argumentative discourse in the political, the legal and the medical domain. These patterns consist of constellations of argumentative moves in which, in order to deal with a particular kind of difference of opinion, in defence of a particular type of standpoint, a particular argument scheme or combination of argument schemes is used in a particular kind of argumentation structure. The composition of these prototypical argumentative patterns can be explained by referring to the institutional characteristics of the communicative activity types in which they occur. By exploring the relationship between argumentative discourse and the institutional context, Frans van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, Corina Andone, Eveline Feteris and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans have provided a new and illuminating perspective on the context-dependency of argumentative discourse.

[Argumentation in Context, 11] 2017. ix, 184 pp.

Publishing status: Available

https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.11

Table of Contents

Preface	vii–viii
Acknowledgment	ix
Chapter 1. Introduction Frans H. van Eemeren	1–6
Chapter 2. Argumentative patterns viewed from a pragma-dialectical perspective Frans H. van Eemeren	7–30
Chapter 3. The role of pragmatic problem-solving argumentation in plenary debate in the European Parliament Bart Garssen	31–52
Chapter 4. The role of pragmatic and majority argumentation in reports of European parliamentary committees of inquiry Corina Andone	53–70
Chapter 5. The role of pragmatic argumentation in the justification of judicial decisions Eveline T. Feteris	71–92
Chapter 6. The role of pragmatic argumentation in over-the-counter medicine advertisements Francisca Snoeck Henkemans	93–108
Chapter 7. Argumentative patterns with argumentation by example in legislative debate in the European Parliament Bart Garssen	109–124
Chapter 8. Argumentative patterns with symptomatic argumentation in the justification of judicial decisions Eveline T. Feteris	125–138
Chapter 9. Argumentative patterns with symptomatic argumentation in over-the-counter medicine advertisements Francisca Snoeck Henkemans	139–156
Chapter 10. The dependency of argumentative patterns on the institutional context Frans H. van Eemeren	157–180
Authors	181–182
Index	183

“ Prototypical Argumentative Patterns is strongly recommended to all scholars interested in argumentation. [T]his book makes a compelling argument for the valuable integration of the study of prototypical argumentation in argumentation theory. In this sense, it offers new directions to argumentation analysis and provides the instruments to engage in specific domains that, nowadays, are of core interest to the study of argumentative practice.””

Sara Rubinelli, University of Lucerne and Swiss Paraplegic Research, in Journal of Argumentation in Context, 7:3 (2018).

Cited by

Cited by 7 other publications

Fairclough, Isabela

2019. Deontic power and institutional contexts. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1 ► pp. 136 ff.

Kienpointner, Manfred

2021. Review of van Eemeren (2018): Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:2 ► pp. 262 ff.

Renkema, Jan & Christoph Schubert

2018. In Introduction to Discourse Studies,

van Eemeren, Frans H.

2018. In Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective [Argumentation Library, 33], ► pp. 33 ff.

van Eemeren, Frans H.

2018. In Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective [Argumentation Library, 33], ► pp. 149 ff.

van Eemeren, Frans H. & Wu Peng

2017. In Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics [Argumentation in Context, 12], ► pp. 1 ff.

Wang, Bin & Frank Zenker

2021. Slippery Slope Arguments in Legal Contexts: Towards Argumentative Patterns. Argumentation

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 september 2021. 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.

Subjects & Metadata

Communication Studies

Linguistics

Discourse studies

Pragmatics

Philosophy

BIC Subject: CFG – Semantics, Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis

BISAC Subject: LAN009030 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / Pragmatics

ONIX Metadata

ONIX 2.1

ONIX 3.0

U.S. Library of Congress Control Number: 2017022881 | Marc record