Chapter published in:
Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Wu Peng
[Argumentation in Context 12] 2017
► pp. 335359
References

References

Bateman, J.
(2014) Text and image. A critical introduction to the visual/verbal divide. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Birdsell, D. S., & Groarke, L.
(1996) Toward a theory of visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy, 33, 1–10.Google Scholar
(2007) Outlines of a theory of visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy, 43, 103–113.Google Scholar
Blair, A. J.
(2004) The rhetoric of visual arguments. In C. A. Hill, & M. Helmers (Eds.), Defining visual rhetorics (pp. 41–62). Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2015) Probative norms for multimodal visual arguments. Argumentation, 29, 217–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, J. M. R.
(2015) Visual argumentation in political advertising: A context-oriented perspective. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 4, 286–298. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dondis, D.
(1974) A primer of visual literacy. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dove, I. J.
(2012) On images as evidence and arguments. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Topical themes in argumentation theory: Twenty exploratory studies (pp. 223–238). Amsterdam: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) Visual arguments and meta-arguments. In D. Mohammed, & M. Lewiński (Eds.), Virtues of argumentation: Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA) 22–26 May 2013 (pp. 1–15). Ontario: OSSA.Google Scholar
(2016) Visual scheming: Assessing visual arguments. Argumentation and Advocacy, 52, 254–264.Google Scholar
Eckstein, J.
(forthcoming). Radiolab’s sound strategic maneuvers. Argumentation, published online 23 November 2016, doi:Crossref.
Edwards, J. L., & Winkler, C. K.
(1997) Representative form and the visual ideograph: The Iwo Jima image in editorial cartoons. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 83, 289–310. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fahnestock, J.
(2003) Verbal and visual parallelism. Written Communication, 20, 123–152. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Feteris, E. T.
(2013) The use of allusions to literary and cultural sources in argumentation in political cartoons. In H. van Belle, P. Gillaerts, B. van Gorp, D. van de Mieroop, & K. Rutten (Eds.), Verbal and visual rhetoric in a media world (pp. 415–428). Leiden: LUP.Google Scholar
Feteris, E. T., Groarke, L., & Plug, H. J.
(2011) Strategic maneuvering with visual arguments in political cartoons: A pragma-dialectical analysis of the use of topoi that are based on common cultural heritage. In E. T. Feteris, B. Garssen, & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Keeping in touch with Pragma-Dialectics: In honor of Frans H. van Eemeren (pp. 59–74). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fleming, D.
(1996) Can pictures be arguments? Argumentation and Advocacy, 33, 11–22.Google Scholar
Godden, D.
(2017) On the norms of visual argument: A case for normative non-revisionism. Argumentation, 31, 395–431.
Groarke, L.
(1996) Logic, art and argument. Informal Logic, 18, 116–131. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002) Toward a pragma-dialectics of visual argument. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Advances in Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 137–151). Amsterdam: Sic Sat/ Virginia: Vale Press, Newport News.Google Scholar
(2015) Going multimodal: What is a mode of arguing and why does it matter? Argumentation, 29, 133–155. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2017) Editorial cartoons and ART: Arguing with Pinocchio. In A. Tseronis, & C. Forceville (Eds.) Multimodal argumentation and rhetoric in media genres. (pp. 81–110) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Groarke, L., Palczewski, C. H., & Godden, D.
(2016) Navigating the visual turn in argument. Argumentation and Advocacy, 52, 217–235.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K.
(1978) Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.
(2004) An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Held, G.
(2005) Magazine covers–a multimodal pretext-genre. Folia Linguistica, 39, 173–196. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horn, R. E.
(1998) Visual language. Global communication for the 21st century. Macro VU Incorporated.Google Scholar
Jewitt, C.
(Ed.) (2014) The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., & O′Halloran, K.
(2016) Introducing multimodality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Johnson, R.
(2003) Why visual arguments aren’t arguments. In A. J. Blair, D. Farr, H. Hansen, R. Johnson, & C. Tindale (Eds.), Informal logic  at 25: Proceedings of the Windsor conference (pp. 1–13). Ontario: OSSA.Google Scholar
Kjeldsen, J. E.
(2012) Pictorial argumentation in advertising: Visual tropes and figures as a way of creating visual argumentation. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Topical themes in argumentation theory: Twenty exploratory studies (pp. 239–256). Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2015a) The rhetoric of thick representation: How pictures render the importance and strength of an argument salient. Argumentation, 29, 197–215. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2015b) The study of visual and multimodal argumentation. Argumentation, 29, 115–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) Symbolic condensation and thick representation in visual and multimodal communication. Argumentation and Advocacy, 52, 265–280.Google Scholar
Kress, G.
(2010) Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T.
(1996) Reading images. The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lake, R. A., & Pickering, B. A.
(1998) Argumentation, the visual, and the possibility of refutation: An exploration. Argumentation, 12, 79–93. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Machin, D.
(2007) Introduction to multimodal analysis. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Novitz, D.
(1977) Pictures and their use in communication. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Plug, H. J.
(2013) Manoeuvring strategically in political cartoons: Transforming visualizations of metaphors. In H. van Belle, P. Gillaerts, B. van Gorp, D. van de Mieroop, & K. Rutten (Eds.), Verbal and visual rhetoric in a media world (pp. 429–440). Leiden: LUP.Google Scholar
Shelley, C.
(2001) Aspects of visual argument: A study of the March of Progress. Informal Logic, 21, 85–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tseronis, A.
(2013) Argumentative functions of visuals: Beyond claiming and justifying. In D. Mohammed, & M. Lewiński (Eds.), Virtues of argumentation: Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA) 22–26 May 2013 (pp. 1–17). Ontario: OSSA.Google Scholar
(2015a) Multimodal argumentation in news magazine covers: A case study of front covers putting Greece on the spot of the European economic crisis. Discourse, Context & Media, 7, 18–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2015b) Documentary film as multimodal argumentation: Arguing audio-visually about the 2008 financial crisis. In J. Wildfeuer (Ed.), Building bridges for multimodal research: International perspectives on theories and practices of multimodal analysis (pp. 327–345). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
forthcoming a). Multimodal argumentation: Beyond the verval-visual divide. Semiotica, special issue.
forthcoming b). Insights from Relevance Theory for determin the commitments of image-makers in arguments with multimodal allusions in the front covers of The Economist . International Review of Pragmatics, special issue.
Tseronis, A., & Forceville, C.
(2017a) Arguing against corporate claims visually and multimodally: The genre of suverisements. Multimodal Communication. Published online 13 September 2017 . . Crossref.Google Scholar
(Eds.) (2017b) Multimodal argumentation and rhetoric in media genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, B.
(2005) Visuospatial reasoning. In K. J. Holyoak, & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 209–240). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van den Broek, J., Koetsenruijter, W., de Jong, J., & Smit, L.
(2012) Visual language. Perspectives for both makers and users. The Hague: Eleven International Publishing.Google Scholar
van den Hoven, P.
(2015) Cognitive semiotics in argumentation: A theoretical exploration. Argumentation, 29, 157–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van den Hoven, P., & Yang, Y.
(2013) The argumentative reconstruction of multimodal discourse, taking the ABC coverage of president Hu Jintao’s visit to the USA as an example. Argumentation, 27, 403–424. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H.
(1987) Argumentation studies’ five estates. In J. W. Wenzel (Ed.), Argument and critical practices: Proceedings of the 5th SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 9–24). Annandale, Virginia: Speech Communication Association.Google Scholar
(2010) Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) Identifying argumentative patterns: A vital step in the development of Pragma-Dialectics. Argumentation, 30, 1–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., Krabbe, E. C. W., Snoeck Henkemans, A. F., Verheij, B., & Wagemans, J. H. M.
(2014) Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R.
(1992) Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2004) A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S.
(1993) Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa and London: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P.
(2002) Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse: Maintaining a delicate balance. In F. H. van Eemeren, & P. Houtlosser (Eds.) Dialectic and rhetoric: The warp and woof of argumentation analysis (pp.131–159). Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Theoretical construction and argumentative reality: An analytic model of critical discussion and conventionalised types of argumentative activity. In D. Hitchcock, & D. Farr (Eds.), The uses of argument. Proceedings of a conference at McMaster University (pp. 75–84). Windsor: OSSA.Google Scholar
van Rees, A. M.
(2001) Argument interpretation and reconstruction. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Crucial concepts in argumentation theory (pp. 165–199). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Wenzel, J.
(1990) Three perspectives on argument. In R. Trapp, & J. Schuertz (Eds.), Perspectives on argumentation: Essays in honor of Wayne Brockriede (pp. 9–16). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 6 other publications

Serafis, Dimitris, Sara Greco, Chiara Pollaroli & Chiara Jermini-Martinez Soria
2020. Towards an integrated argumentative approach to multimodal critical discourse analysis: evidence from the portrayal of refugees and immigrants in Greek newspapers. Critical Discourse Studies 17:5  pp. 545 ff. Crossref logo
Tseronis, Assimakis
2018. Multimodal argumentation: Beyond the verbal/visual divide . Semiotica 2018:220  pp. 41 ff. Crossref logo
Tseronis, Assimakis
2021. From visual rhetoric to multimodal argumentation: exploring the rhetorical and argumentative relevance of multimodal figures on the covers of The Economist. Visual Communication 20:3  pp. 374 ff. Crossref logo
Tseronis, Assimakis & Charles Forceville
2017.  In Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in Media Genres [Argumentation in Context, 14],  pp. 2 ff. Crossref logo
van Eemeren, Frans H.
2019. Argumentative Style: A Complex Notion. Argumentation 33:2  pp. 153 ff. Crossref logo
van Eemeren, Frans H.
2021.  In The Language of Argumentation [Argumentation Library, 36],  pp. 17 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 november 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.