Mobile Menu
New
Books
Forthcoming titles
New in paperback
New titles by subject
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
Book Series
Journals & Yearbooks
New serials
Latest issues
Currently in production
Catalog
Books
Active series
Other series
Collections
Open-access books
Text books & Course books
Dictionaries & Reference
By JB editor
Journals & Yearbooks
Active serials
Other
By JB editor
Software
Browse by person
Browse by subject
Advanced Search
Downloadable lists
Printed catalogs
E-book collections
Online Resources
Customer Services
Contact
Amsterdam (Main office)
Philadelphia (North American office)
Directions
Book Orders
General
US, Canada & Mexico
E-books
Examination & Desk Copies
Journal Subscriptions
General information
Access to the electronic edition
Terms of Use
Journal collections
Journal mutations
Rights & Permissions
Mailing List
E-newsletter
Book Gazette
For Authors
Proposals for Books
Proposals for Book Series
Proposals for Journals
Submissions to Journals
Editorial Manager
Ethics Statement
Kudos
Open Access Policy
Rights Policy
For Librarians
Evidence-Based Acquisition
E-book Collections
Journal Collections
Open Access information
Journal mutations
Part of
Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren and Peng Wu
[
Argumentation in Context
12] 2017
► pp.
363
–
367
◄
previous
Index
A
abusive argumentum ad hominem
228, 230, 235, 251
accountab(i)l(it)y
38, 141, 256–257, 259–260, 262n10, 266, 272, 285, 312, 313–314
ad hominem
see
argumentum ad hominem
adjudication
7, 55n32, 130, 132, 135, 195–196, 213, 219
advertisement/advertising
5, 77–91, 92, 348
analytical transformation
see
reconstructive transformation
antistrophos
4, 23, 30, 33, 124
argument(ation) by/from example
6–7, 32, 134, 151–152, 157–175, 324
argumentation stage
26, 29n27, 31–32, 44n13, 46, 63, 67, 70–71, 74, 78, 81, 94–95, 97–98, 101, 104–105, 127, 134–135, 150, 164, 166, 245, 251, 276, 278, 288, 290–291, 301, 306, 311, 323–333
argumentation theory
4, 11–14, 16, 18–22, 24–25, 30, 125, 126n7
argumentative activity type
77–79, 81, 110n4 , 134, 136, 339
argumentative characterization
29, 29n27, 84, 134–135, 151, 355
argumentative means and criticisms
29n27, 134–135, 151, 157
argumentative move
3, 12, 14, 27–29, 38–39, 47–49, 51, 53n30, 55, 124, 126, 128, 178, 181, 196, 232, 244–246, 311, 313–315, 337, 345–346
argumentative predicament
45
argumentative strategy
51, 128, 186–188, 226, 229, 266–267
argumentative technique
see
technique
argument scheme
1, 9, 16, 16n7, 82, 94–96, 103, 106, 150, 154, 166, 283, 288, 290, 294, 296–298, 300–301, 323, 325, 330–331, 344
argument scheme rule
27n24, 55, 301
argumentum ad hominem
53n30, 227–230, 245
associated perlocution
43
audience demand
28, 31, 94, 100, 125–127, 136, 171, 196, 245, 269, 283, 290–293, 296, 313, 315–316, 318, 329–330, 345–346
B
background information
342, 348, 353
Big Rhetoric
16–17, 22
burden of proof
62, 67–70, 74, 101, 104, 115, 190, 255–256, 258–262, 267, 283, 293, 297
C
causal argument(ation)
9, 95, 166, 294, 296–298, 300–301
Chinese ministry of foreign affairs (MoFA) press conference
225–227, 230–232, 244–252
circumstantial argumentum ad hominem
228–230, 251
civic discourse
15n6
civil proceedings
64–65, 70, 72
classifying the facts
7, 196, 211, 219
code of conduct for critical discussion/reasonable discussants
27, 27n24, 229, 244
communicative act complex
4
communicative activity type
28–29, 29n27, 32, 54–55, 56, 79, 84, 110–113, 117, 129–136, 151, 179–180, 229–230, 284, 310–311, 313, 322, 331–332
communicative domain
3–4, 22n18, 28, 129–132, 310
communion(-seeking)
130, 132, 133n18, 135, 269n2, 313, 319, 346
comparison argument(ation)
153, 166
composite audience
311, 315
conceptualization stage
1
concluding rule
27n24
concluding stage
26, 29n27, 31–32, 44n13, 46, 62–63, 67, 73–75, 79, 81, 127, 134–135, 150, 164, 256n1, 277–278, 288, 290–291, 301, 312
confrontational strategic maneuver(ing)/strategy
128, 139–140
confrontation stage
26, 29n27, 31–32, 46, 53n30, 62, 67–68, 74, 78, 81, 98, 127, 134–135, 149, 164, 188, 229, 231, 235, 238, 242–245, 257n3, 275, 278, 288, 290–292, 301, 306, 311, 317, 322–323, 327
consultation
5–6, 78, 84–85, 88, 90, 109–117, 119–120
context
2–7, 9–10, 20, 24–25, 28–30, 50n23, 54, 55n34, 98, 109–110, 120, 129, 133n17, 135–136, 139–140, 145, 202, 205–206, 212–218, 220, 231, 247, 252, 257, 267, 272, 283–284, 310–311, 314–317, 320–321, 325–327, 331–332, 338–340, 342–343, 347, 349, 355
contextualization stage
2–3, 344
conventional acceptability/validity
see
intersubjective validity
coordinative argumentation
9, 97, 102n8, 294–298, 300–301, 323–324, 328, 330n22
corporate social responsibility (CSR) report
318
correctness condition
38, 40, 101, 104, 168
critical discussion
1–5, 14, 22n17, 26–29, 31–32, 38, 41, 49–55, 59–62, 68–69, 71–75, 78–79, 81, 83, 98, 114, 123–124, 129, 132, 134, 136, 138, 139n24, 160–161, 164, 182, 184, 184n11, 229, 231–232, 244–245, 251–252, 257n3, 270, 283–284, 288–290, 297, 301–302, 311, 314, 321, 323, 327, 332, 338, 340n2, 343, 343n6, 344
critical question
71, 83, 96, 103–104, 150, 167, 257, 265, 298–300, 323, 330–331, 338, 344
D
debate in the European Parliament
6–7, 83n5, 129, 132, 136n21, 139, 145–157, 159–160, 160n2, 161–166
deliberation
6, 22n18, 123, 130–135, 141–142, 151, 179–181, 258n4, 284
democracy
17n8, 130n13, 131, 137–131, 141, 179–181, 216–220, 276, 286–287
derailment of strategic maneuvering
3–4, 5n26, 5n27, 53, 85, 175, 315, 332
descriptive standpoint
11–12, 30, 32, 44n13
dialectical dimension/perspective
3–4, 13–14, 18–19, 20–26, 28, 28n26, 30–33, 39–40, 46–47, 51n26, 52–53, 55, 60–75, 70–79, 85, 94–95, 97–98, 100, 106, 111, 115, 124–125, 128, 138–139, 141, 160–161, 169, 178, 180, 182, 195, 226, 251, 260, 269–270, 275, 277, 302–303, 311, 317, 322–323, 326, 336, 339, 343, 345, 347
dialectical reasonableness
see
reasonableness
dialectical transformation
see
reconstructive transformation
dialectification
38
direct personal attack
232–236, 246–250
direct-to-consumeradvertisement (DTCA)
5, 77, 80–85
disclosure
285, 294, 310, 313n9, 314–316, 318, 322, 324n17, 328n21
discursive technique
see
technique
doctor-patient consult(ation)
see
consultation
E
effectiveness
3–4, 14–16, 20, 23–25, 27–28, 30–33, 41–47, 51, 51n25, 53, 79, 81–83, 90, 100, 103, 123–125, 127, 161, 178, 191, 226, 229, 244, 248, 250–270, 275–276, 278, 282–283, 297, 301–303, 311, 313, 318–324, 338
empirical counterpart four stages
29, 29n30, 81, 134, 257n3
empiricalization stage
1
endoxa
13, 30–31, 345n8
ethos
16, 19, 27n24, 32, 119, 226, 228, 293
European parliamentary debate
see
debate in the European Parliament
European predicament
136n21, 145, 163
evaluative standpoint
11–12, 30, 32, 352, 354
extended pragma-dialectics
3–4, 29, 33, 59, 94, 123, 129, 178, 191, 194–195, 229–230, 311
externalization (stage)
1, 38, 269n7
extrinsic constraint
see
institutional precondition
F
fallacy
1, 3–5, 7, 13–15, 25, 27–29, 47–56, 95n2, 123, 133n17, 160–161, 168, 173, 190, 226–230, 238, 245, 267, 270, 344
formal dialectic
13–14, 21, 125, 228
freedom of speech
7, 148n3, 193–194, 205, 214–221
freedom rule
27n24, 54n30, 252, 283, 297
front cover
336, 347–354
functionalization
37–38
G
genre of discourse/oratory
5, 19–20, 78–79, 84–85, 88, 90, 129–135, 151, 171, 181n2, 284, 310, 336–337, 347–348
governmental crisis communication/discourse
283–284, 303
H
hasty generalization
7, 160, 168, 171, 173, 175, 189
health brochure
5, 93–99, 104–105
health communication
4, 106
hyperbole
8, 189–212, 269–278, 347
I
ideal model
38–39, 50, 59–60, 62, 64, 71, 78–79, 83, 98, 338
identification procedure
40, 72
identity condition
38
illocution(ary effect)
38, 41–44
illocutionary perlocution
4, 43
inciting discrimination
193, 205–207, 210n17
inciting hatred
194, 203–208, 210n17, 214–215, 220–221
indirect personal attack
237–239, 246, 248, 250
inference procedure
40
informal consent
84, 91, 109, 110n3, 114, 117, 119–120
initial situation
29n27, 82, 84, 117, 134–135, 149, 151, 157, 164, 256–261
institutional constraint
see
institutional precondition
institutional point
3, 5, 9, 28–29, 60–61, 74, 78–79, 81, 83–85, 91n6, 131, 133–134, 136, 150, 179–180, 232, 284, 310, 317, 348
institutional precondition
2–3, 6–10, 29, 78–79, 83, 90, 130n14, 132–137, 143, 145, 150, 173, 180, 181n2, 185, 194–195, 219, 227, 229–232, 245–252, 258–262, 264, 266, 283–287, 291, 294–297, 303–311, 331–332, 339, 347
instrumentalization stage
2
insult(ing language)
140, 193–194, 196–203, 205, 208, 214, 218–219, 220
interactional act
42
interactional act complex
37
intersubjective acceptability/validity
39–41, 343
J
judge
5, 59–60, 63–75, 195, 200–201, 208, 214, 218n30, 219, 219n31, 221
L
language use rule
27n24, 184, 188
legal domain/speech
19–20, 28, 30, 56, 59–75, 129, 132, 135, 166, 194–195, 199, 218–220
legislative debate
6–7, 159–161, 162n3, 163–166, 169–174
logos
16, 19–20, 27n24, 32, 226, 273
M
medical advertising
see
advertisement/advertising
medical consultation
see
consultation
mixed audience
311
multimodal argumentation
4, 9–10, 332–335
multiple argumentation
102n8, 294, 301, 323, 325, 328
multiple audience
311
N
New Rhetoric
15, 16n17, 25, 125, 228, 325
norms for parliamentary language use
181, 183–185
O
obligation to defend rule
27n24, 62n6, 255
opening stage
26, 29n27, 30–32, 44n13, 46, 55, 62–63, 67–70, 72, 74, 78, 81, 127, 134–135, 148–150, 162, 164–165, 183, 276, 278, 288, 290–292, 301, 306, 311, 327
oratio
19, 32
organizational communication
309–310
outcome
29n27, 73, 75, 83–84, 101, 105, 111, 113, 117, 120, 128, 133–134, 137, 150–151, 157, 164, 179, 194, 201–202, 209–210, 213, 218–219, 290, 312
P
parliamentary debate
6–7, 140, 145–146, 149–157, 162–166, 169–175, 177–191, 275, 275n11, 277
pathos
16, 19–20, 20n16, 27n24, 32, 226, 273
perlocution(ary effect/consequence)
38, 42–43, 45, 83–84
personal attack
8, 29, 53n30, 226–252
persuasion research
15, 15n5, 19, 33n29, 52, 105
persuasiveness
14–20, 22, 25, 32, 44n13, 52–53, 82, 88, 105, 116n5, 269, 273–274, 282, 343
plenary debate
129, 136n21, 139, 146–151, 157, 160–175
political debate/domain
6, 19–20, 32, 91n6, 123–142, 149–157, 162–175, 179–191, 218n30, 221, 230, 256–267, 274–278, 284
political deliberation
see
deliberation
political interview
8, 55n34, 110, 129, 132, 134, 140–142, 203n12, 207, 212, 255–267
pragmatic argumentation
5, 93–106, 151–153, 155, 157, 298–301
prescription drug
77–85, 88, 91
prescriptive standpoint
11–12, 30, 32, 44n13
presentational choice
7, 31, 127, 139, 179, 186–191, 248, 250, 311, 316–331
presentational/stylistic device
28, 31, 94, 100–101, 126–128, 136, 161, 169, 172–174, 178, 196, 245, 247–248, 250–251, 269, 290–292, 313, 316–331, 345, 345n8, 347, 355
presentational technique
see
technique
press conference
225–232, 244–248, 250–252, 286, 310n6
primary audience
8, 13, 135, 137, 149, 179, 227, 231–233, 241–245, 250–252, 258n4, 275n11, 278
primary discussion
252
primary institutional precondition
136n21, 181–182, 185, 231
principle of communication
53
principle of cooperation
53
principle of dialectification
38
principle of externalization
37–38, 259n7
principle of functionalization
37–38
principle of reasonableness
53, 229, 338
principle of socialization
37–38
probative burden of proof
260–262
problem (solving) validity
39–40, 123, 260, 262, 264–265, 283, 297
promotion (genre)
5, 78, 84–85, 88–90, 105–106, 153, 286, 318, 348, 351
Q
quasi-discussion
138
R
rational(ity)
14–15, 21, 25, 27n25, 39, 39n3, 39n5, 42–43, 46n17, 59–60, 74–75, 75n12, 131n15, 138, 160, 160n2, 232, 289, 339, 340n2, 343
reasonableness
2–4, 11–12, 14–16, 21, 23–24, 26–33, 38–41, 43–47, 51–53, 69n11, 78–79, 85, 90, 94, 111, 120, 123–125, 127, 142, 161, 165, 178, 180, 183, 189, 195, 226, 228–232, 244, 250–252, 267, 269, 275, 282, 297, 300, 302–303, 311, 313–315, 317, 321, 323, 332, 338–340, 343, 345
reconstruction
see
reconstructive analysis
reconstructive analysis
8–10, 44n13, 50, 50n23, 65–66, 82–83, 100, 103–105, 114, 118, 150, 164–166, 233, 236–243, 265, 271, 283–284, 287, 290–297, 311, 314, 320, 325, 327–328, 330, 337–338, 340–345, 347, 349n9, 350–353, 355
reconstructive transformation
288–289, 341–342, 355
refutation
13, 18–19, 19n14, 32, 225, 260–262
refutative burden of proof
260–262
relevance rule
27n24, 283, 297
research program
1–2, 51n25, 142
responsibility condition
43
rhetorical dimension/perspective
2, 4–9, 11, 13–26, 28–33, 45–47, 51–52, 75, 78–79, 85, 89–90, 94–95, 100–103, 105, 111–112, 128, 159–161, 169–171, 173–175, 177–178, 180–182, 186n15, 195, 226, 228–229, 269–278, 281–283, 301–302, 309, 311, 313, 315, 318, 320–323, 325–326, 332, 335–339, 345, 345n8, 347
rhetorical effectiveness
see
effectiveness
rhetorical technique
see
technique
role of the judge
see
judge
rule of law
5, 60–61, 61n1, 63, 66, 73–75, 76, 162n4, 221
rule of procedure
63, 68, 75, 148–149, 162, 164, 173, 260
rule for critical discussion
5, 27–28, 49, 51n26, 161, 283–284, 297, 343n6
S
econdary audience
8, 231–233, 241–245, 249–251, 258n4, 275n11
secondary discussion
252
secondary institutional precondition
136n21, 181–182, 186, 231
secundum quid
see
hasty generalization
sincerity condition
37–38
see
responsibility condition socialization
soundness criterion
3, 5, 29, 51n26, 53–56, 61, 68, 72–73, 75, 96, 113, 120, 167, 195–220, 228, 267, 283, 297, 315, 330, 343–344, 355
speech event
15n5, 50n23, 110–111, 132, 310
spokesperson
8, 225–228, 230–252
stakeholder
9, 281–282, 284, 288–289, 292, 296, 301–303, 310, 312, 314–316, 318n12, 319, 321–322, 326
standard pragma-dialectics
2, 125
standing orders
131, 181–183, 188
standpoint rule
27n24, 283, 297
starting points
16, 22n19, 26, 27n24, 28–32, 44n13, 55–56, 59, 61–64, 67–69, 71–72, 74, 78, 81–84, 113–118, 127, 134–135, 141, 150–151, 157, 171–172, 179, 183, 195, 256n1, 276, 283, 288–293, 302, 311–312, 315, 327, 338, 348
starting point rule
27n24, 283, 297, 302
strategic maneuvering
2–10, 27–30, 33, 33n29, 44–46, 50–75, 78–79, 85, 89–91, 94, 105, 110–120, 123–130, 132–137, 139–142, 145–146, 149–157, 160–161, 169–175, 177–183, 185, 191, 193–196, 199–203, 207–219, 226–252, 269–270, 283–284, 290–297, 301–303, 311, 313, 315–332, 336, 338, 344–348, 350, 355
strategy
see
argumentative strategy
stylistic choice
98, 323–324, 327, 331
see
presentational choice subordinative argumentation
symptomatic argument(ation)
156–157, 166, 330–331
system of antique rhetoric
19, 21–22
T
technique
7, 9, 15–16, 45n16, 54n32, 80, 170–175, 177, 182, 273–274, 311, 313, 316–317, 323, 325–326, 332, 341
Ten Commandments
89–90
see
rule for critical discussion testimonial
testing procedure
32, 40, 72, 100, 259
third-party audience
59, 61, 63, 70, 72, 75, 130n14, 132, 180–181, 181n2, 185–186, 191, 232, 275, 277–278
topical choice/selection
7, 31, 127–128, 136, 196, 219, 246–250, 313–316, 318, 324, 330–332
topical potential
28, 88, 94, 100–101, 105, 125–126, 146, 157, 161, 169–170, 178, 196, 245–248, 250, 269, 283, 290–293, 295, 302, 313, 316, 345–346, 355
transformation
see
reconstructive transformation
trope
269, 273, 337
tu quoque argumentum ad hominem
228–230, 251
U
unexpressed premise rule
27n24, 283, 297
V
validation stage
1
validity rule
27n24, 283, 297, 301
Y
you too personal attack
8, 228–231, 239–241, 243, 246, 249–251