Cover not available
Part of
Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Peng Wu
[Argumentation in Context 12] 2017
► pp. 159–176

Chapter 10
The strategic use of argumentation from example in plenary debates in the European Parliament

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The pragma-dialectical model of critical discussion and legislative debates
  • 3.Debates on legislation in the European Parliament
    • 3.1Regulations on plenary debates
    • 3.2Characteristics of plenary legislative debates in the European Parliament
  • 4.Argumentation from example
    • 4.1Evaluating argumentation from example
  • 5.Techniques for strategic manoeuvring using argumentation from example
    • Topical potential
    • Audience demand
    • Presentational devices
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.12.10plu
References (24)
References
Atienza, M. (2005). Reasoning and Legislation. In Luc J. Wintgens (Ed.), The theory and practice of Legislation. Essays in Legisprudence. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 297–317.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H. and R. Grootendorst (1984). Speech acts in argumentative discussions. A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions towards solving conflicts of opinion. De Gruyter/Foris, Berlin/ Dordrecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992). Argumentation, communication and fallacies. A pragma-dialectic perspective. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H. and P. Houtlosser (1999). Strategic manoeuvring in argumentative discourse, Discourse Studies 1, pp. 479–497. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). Theoretical construction and argumentative reality. An analytical model of critical discussion and conventionalized types of argumentative activity. In: D. Hitchcock and D. Farr (Eds.), The uses of argument. Proceedings of a conference at McMaster University, 18–21 May 2005, pp. 75–94.Google Scholar
(2006). Strategic maneuvering: a synthetic recapitulation. Argumentation, 20, 381–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Seizing the occasion: parameters for analysing ways of strategic manoeuvring. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard and B. Garssen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam: Sic Sat. pp. 375–381.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H., P. Houtlosser and A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (2007). Argumentative indicators in discourse. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eijlander, P. (2004). Gelegenheidswetgeving. Een rechtsstaat onwaardig? Ars Aequi, 53, 7/8, 484–491.Google Scholar
European Parliament (2007). Rules of procedure of the European Parliament, 16th Edition. Brussels: E.P.
Freeley, A. J. and D. L. Steinberg (2009). Argumentation and debate. Critical thinking for reasoned decision making. 12 th edition. United States: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Fuller, Lon L. (1964). The Morality of Law. (pp. vi, 202).Yale University Press, 1964. Google Scholar
Garssen, B. (1997). Argumentatieschema’s in pragma-dialectisch perspectief. Amsterdam: IFOTT.Google Scholar
Hill, B. and R. W. Leeman (1997). The art and practice of argumentation and debate. California: Mayfield publishing company.Google Scholar
Ilie, C. (2003). Discourse and metadiscourse in parliamentary debates. Journal of language and Politics 2, 1, 71–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacCormick, N. (2005). Legislative Deliberation: Notes from the European Parliament. In Luc J. Wintgens (Ed.), The Theory and Practice of Legislation. Essays in Legisprudence. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 285–296.Google Scholar
Osborn, M. and S. Osborn (2005). Public Speaking. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
Plug, H. J. (2009). The argumentative use of examples: the Burqa-ban case. In: E. T. Feteris, H. Kloosterhuis and H. J. Plug (Ed.). Argumentation and the application of legal rules. Amsterdam: Rozenberg. Google Scholar
(2010). The strategic use of argumentation from example in plenary debates in the European Parliament. Controversia. International Journal of Debate and Democratic Renewal, 7 (1), pp. 38-56.Google Scholar
Plug, H. J. and A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (2008). Apologies for Metaphors as a Strategic Manoeuvre in Political Debates. In L. Dam, L. Holmgreen and J. Strunck (Eds.), Rhetorical aspects of discourses in present-day society. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press, Chapter 5.Google Scholar
Proksch, S. and J. B. Slapin (2008). ‘Position-Taking in European Parliament Speeches’. Presentation Midwest Science Association Chicago.
Rendall, S. (1992). Examples, Counterexamples (Review: Exemplum: The Rhetoric of Example in Early Modern France and Italy by John D. Lyons). Comparative Literature, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 59–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wallton, D. H. (1998). Ad hominem arguments. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Google Scholar
Zarefsky, D. (2008). Strategic maneuvring in political argumentation. Argumentation, vol. 22, no. 3, 317–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Svačinová, Iva
2021. Demosthenes’ strategic maneuvering in theFirst Olynthiac. Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:3 ► pp. 315 ff. DOI logo
Omar, Ahmed Abdulhameed
2019. The strategic use of argumentation from example in re-evaluating a people. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:2 ► pp. 214 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2019. Strategic Maneuvering for Political Change [Argumentation in Context, 16], DOI logo

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.