Cover not available
Part of
Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Peng Wu
[Argumentation in Context 12] 2017
► pp. 93–107

Chapter 6
The strategic function of variants of pragmatic argumentation in health brochures

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.A pragma-dialectical approach to pragmatic argumentation
  • 3.Dialectical options in the argumentation stage
  • 4.Choosing pragmatic argumentation to address doubt towards the standpoint
    • 4.1Dialectical relevance of choosing pragmatic argumentation
    • 4.2Rhetorical advantage of choosing pragmatic argumentation
  • 5.Choosing pragmatic argumentation to address criticism
  • 6. Choosing pragmatic argumentation to attack opposing standpoints
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.12.06van
References
Amjarso, Bilal
(2010) Mentioning and then Refuting an Anticipated Counterargument. A Conceptual and Empirical Study of the Persuasiveness of a Mode of Strategic Maneuvering. Amsterdam: SicSat.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L.
(1962) How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Block, Lauren G., and Punam Anand Keller
(1995) “When to Accentuate the Negative: The Effects of Perceived Efficacy and Message Framing on Intentions to Perform a Health-related Behavior.” Journal of Marketing Research 32.2: 192–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst
(1984) Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion. Berlin / Dordrecht: De Gruyter / Floris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1991) “The Study of Argumentation from a Speech Act Perspective.” In Pragmatics at Issue: Selected Papers of the International Pragmatics Conference, Antwerp 17–22 August 1987, edited by Jef Verschueren, vol I, 151–170. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992) Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
(2004) A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Rob Grootendorst, Sally Jackson, and Scott Jacobs
(1993) Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse. Tuscaloosa-London: The University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van and Peter Houtlosser
(2002) “Strategic manoeuvring. Maintaining a Delicate Balance.” In Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis, edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser, 131–160. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) “Theoretical Construction and Argumentative Reality: An Analytic Model of Critical Discussion and Conventionalised Types of Argumentative Activity.” In The Uses of Argument: Proceedings of a Conference at McMaster University, edited by David Hitchcock, 75–84. Hamilton, Ontario: Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.Google Scholar
(2006) “Strategic Maneuvering: A Synthetic Recapitulation.” Argumentation 20: 381–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Peter Houtlosser, and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
(2007) Argumentative Indicators in Discourse. A Pragma-Dialectical Study. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feteris, Eveline T.
(2002) “A Pragma-dialectical Approach to the Analysis and Evaluation of Pragmatic Argumentation in a Legal Context.” Argumentation 16: 349–367. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garssen, Bart J.
(1997) Argumentatieschema’s in Pragma-Dialectisch Perspectief. Een Theoretisch en Empirisch Onderzoek. Dordrecht: ICG Printing b.v.Google Scholar
Hoeken, Hans
(2001) “Anecdotal, Statistical, and Causal Evidence: their Perceived and Actual Persuasiveness.” Argumentation 15: 425–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hornikx, Jos
(2005) Cultural Differences in the Persuasiveness of Evidence Types in France and the Netherlands. Dissertation Nijmegen. Amsterdam: F&N Boekservice.Google Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred
(1992) Alltagslogik. Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern. Stuttgart – Bad Cannstatt: Frommann – Holzboog.Google Scholar
NHS
(2008) “Beating Cervical Cancer Q&A.” Brochure.Google Scholar
(2009) “Arm against Cervical Cancer. Your Guide to the HPV Vaccination.” Brochure.Google Scholar
NVKP Nederlandse Vereniging Kritisch Prikken
(2010) “Dossier HPV.”Google Scholar
Perelman, Chaim and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca
(1969) The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on Argumentation. (Translation of La Nouvelle Rhétorique. Traité de l’Argumentation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1958). Notre Dame / London: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Poppel, Lotte van
(2013) Getting the vaccine now will protect you in the future! Apragma-dialectical analysis of strategic maneuvering with pragmatic argumentation in health brochures. Dissertation University van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Rothman, Alexander J. and Peter Salovey
(1997) “Shaping Perceptions to Motivate Healthy Behavior: The Role of Message-framing.” Psychological Bulletin 121.1: 3–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schellens, Peter Jan
(1985) Redelijke Argumenten. Een Onderzoek naar Normen voor Kritische Lezers. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Searle, John R.
(1969) Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snoeck Henkemans, A. Francisca
(1997) Analysing Complex Argumentation. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman
(1981) “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science, New Series 211.4481: 453–458.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Martínez, Henny Luz Heredia & Elizabeth Artmann
2022. Risk Communication During COVID-19: What Can We Learn from New Zealand?. In Computer Supported Qualitative Research [Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 466], ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 march 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.