219-7677
10
7500817
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers
onix@benjamins.nl
201608250436
ONIX title feed
eng
01
EUR
31010328
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
AIC 4 Eb
15
9789027274823
06
10.1075/aic.4
13
2011050948
DG
002
02
01
AIC
02
1877-6884
Argumentation in Context
4
01
Exploring Argumentative Contexts
01
aic.4
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/aic.4
1
B01
Frans H. van Eemeren
Eemeren, Frans H. van
Frans H.
van
Eemeren
University of Amsterdam
2
B01
Bart Garssen
Garssen, Bart
Bart
Garssen
University of Amsterdam
01
eng
418
xx
398
LAN015000
v.2006
CFA
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
COMM.CGEN
Communication Studies
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.DISC
Discourse studies
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.PRAG
Pragmatics
24
JB Subject Scheme
PHIL.GEN
Philosophy
06
01
In <i>Exploring Argumentative Contexts</i> Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen bring together a broad variety of essays examining argumentation as it occurs in seven communicative domains: the political context, the historical context, the legal context, the academic context, the medical context, the media context, and the financial context. These essays are written by an international group of argumentation scholars, consisting of Corina Andone, Sarah Bigi, Robert T. Craig, Justin Eckstein, Frans H. van Eemeren, Norman Fairclough, Eveline Feteris, Gerd Fritz, Bart Garssen, Kara Gilbert, Thomas Gloning, G. Thomas Goodnight, Dale A. Herbeck, Darrin Hicks, Thomas Hollihan, Jos Hornikx, Isabela Ieţcu-Fairclough, Gábor Kutrovátz, Maurizio Manzin, Davide Mazzi, Dima Mohammed, Rudi Palmieri, Angela G. Ray, Patricia Riley, Robert C. Rowland, Peter Schulz, Karen Tracy, and Gergana Zlatkova.
05
<i>Exploring Argumentative Contexts</i> constitutes an evident proof of the growing attention of argumentation scholars to the context where arguments are applied.
Eddo Rigotti, Università della Svizzera italiana, in Journal of Argumentation in Context Vol. 3:2 (2014), pp. 199-218
05
I would highly recommend it to students or researchers interested in argumentation research in different fields.
Haipeng Hu, Ningbo Institute of Technology, Zhejiang University, in Discourse Studies Vol.16:5 (2014), pp. 699-701
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/aic.4.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027211217.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027211217.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/aic.4.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/aic.4.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/aic.4.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/aic.4.hb.png
10
01
JB code
aic.4.001loc
ix
xii
4
Article
1
01
List of contributors
10
01
JB code
aic.4.002int
xiii
xx
8
Article
2
01
Introduction
1
A01
Frans H. van Eemeren
Eemeren, Frans H. van
Frans H.
van
Eemeren
2
A01
Bart Garssen
Garssen, Bart
Bart
Garssen
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec1
Section header
3
01
Part I. Political context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.01and
1
22
22
Article
4
01
Chapter 1. The reasonableness of confrontational strategic maneuvering in political interviews
1
A01
Corina Andone
Andone, Corina
Corina
Andone
01
The goal of this paper is to evaluate a politician’s responses to an interviewer’s accusation that his current standpoint is inconsistent with an earlier expressed standpoint on the same issue. The author focuses on the case in which the politician responds to such criticism by retracting the earlier expressed standpoint and subsequently reformulating it. Taking a pragma-dialectical perspective on argumentation, the author assesses whether the politician’s sequence of moves contributes to a reasonable resolution of the difference of opinion that is at stake in a political interview. To this end, the author formulates a set of soundness conditions that should be fulfilled if a politician is to reasonably retract a standpoint that is afterwards reformulated. The author applies the soundness conditions to a number of concrete cases taken from BBC political interviews to judge whether the responses are reasonable or not.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.02fai
23
42
20
Article
5
01
Chapter 2. Values as premises in practical arguments
Conceptions of justice in the public debate over bankers’ bonuses
1
A01
Isabela Fairclough
Fairclough, Isabela
Isabela
Fairclough
2
A01
Norman Fairclough
Fairclough, Norman
Norman
Fairclough
01
The paper focuses on a fragment of the public debate (in the UK) on whether or not the inequality of high pay and bonuses for bankers should be tolerated or not in the wake of the financial crisis. Our discussion builds on the view of the structure of practical arguments we advance in our forthcoming book (Fairclough & Fairclough forthcoming), i.e. practical arguments take goal, value, circumstantial and means-goal premises. Drawing on Searle’s (2010) view of the construction of social reality, we advance the view that values enter practical arguments in two ways: as actual <i>concerns</i> (what people actually value, or ‘desire-dependent’ reasons) and as objective, socially recognized, institutional <i>facts</i> (‘desire-independent’ reasons). The former type of reason constitutes the value premise which underlies the goal premise. The latter is part of the circumstantial premise: it is a fact that can motivate action but does not always do so: agents may choose to disregard commitments (values) that they are otherwise bound by. The typical argument in favour of ‘tolerating inequality’ is a prudential argument based on people’s alleged actual interests and concerns: inequality allegedly serves the common good. The moral argument against inequality starts from a normative <i>concern</i> for justice but also from the state’s commitment to justice as an <i>institutional</i> <i>fact</i>. The UK government, for example, is publicly committed to justice and has a duty to act justly, whether it is actually concerned to act justly or not.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.03van
43
58
16
Article
6
01
Chapter 3. Exploiting the room for strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse
Dealing with audience demand in the European Parliament
1
A01
Frans H. van Eemeren
Eemeren, Frans H. van
Frans H.
van
Eemeren
2
A01
Bart Garssen
Garssen, Bart
Bart
Garssen
01
The room for strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse depends not only on the dialectical and rhetorical preconditions inherent in strategic maneuvering but also on various kinds of extrinsic preconditions imposed on strategic maneuvering by the institutional macro-context of the communicative activity type in which the maneuvering takes place. Van Eemeren and Garssen use the communicative activity type of plenary debate in the European Parliament as their case in point for illustrating the problems involved.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.04ril
59
78
20
Article
7
01
Chapter 4. Strategic communication
How governments frame arguments in the media
1
A01
Patricia Riley
Riley, Patricia
Patricia
Riley
2
A01
Thomas A. Hollihan
Hollihan, Thomas A.
Thomas A.
Hollihan
01
The rapidly changing global media environment has dramatically altered the flow of news and information and increased the complexity of foreign policy. National governments must now communicate simultaneously to domestic and international publics who have access to many of the same media sources. There is an emerging awareness that in this environment the media has become an instrument of policy and not merely a means to communicate policy and the result is an increased emphasis on the principles of strategic communication. This study examines the argument strategies of media diplomacy and analyzes media maneuvers following U.S. Vice President Joe Biden’s visit to Israel in March, 2010. A foreign policy controversy developed when the Israeli government announced the construction of 1,600 new housing units on land claimed by the Palestinians, despite U.S. opposition. The announcement and its provocative timing resulted in a complex system of diplomatic arguments and media maneuvers as both sides sought to communicate their strategic objectives to diverse audiences with multiple, conflicting goals.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.05cra
79
94
16
Article
8
01
Chapter 5. Arguments about ‘rhetoric’ in the 2008 US presidential election campaign
1
A01
Robert T. Craig
Craig, Robert T.
Robert T.
Craig
01
Barack Obama’s prowess in the art of rhetoric, for which he had gained a national reputation with a stirring keynote speech to the 2004 Democratic National Convention, was much commented upon during the 2008 US presidential election campaign and became a stimulus for public debate on the necessity, value, and danger of rhetoric as a political-communicative practice. Extending work by Craig (1996, 1999, 2008; Craig & Tracy 2005) on normative concepts and arguments in ordinary metadiscourse (practically-oriented discourse about discourse), this paper presents an initial survey of arguments about rhetoric that appeared in public metadiscourse of the 2008 campaign. Issues that emerged in this debate engaged classic lines of argument between rhetorical and critical traditions of thought concerning the legitimacy of rhetoric, thus showing the continuing relevance of those traditions and their capacity to illuminate essential tensions in democratic public discourse.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec2
Section header
9
01
Part II. Historical context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.06ray
95
114
20
Article
10
01
Chapter 6. Making history by analogy
Frederick Douglass remembers William the Silent
1
A01
Angela G. Ray
Ray, Angela G.
Angela G.
Ray
01
Most scholarship on historical analogies emphasizes the dangers of misperception of current events through facile comparisons with the past. Instead, through a detailed rhetorical and historical analysis, this essay argues that an extended historical analogy that highlights difference as well as likeness has the potential to generate new and productive understandings of recent experience. The essay examines the public lecture “William the Silent,” written and delivered by African American civil rights advocate Frederick Douglass in the aftermath of the U.S. Civil War. This lecture analogizes the history of the Netherlands in the sixteenth century to recent U.S. history, suggesting explanations for political decisions and military strategies. Douglass’s careful comparison and contrast of William of Orange and Abraham Lincoln are key elements of the analogy. Through the analysis presented here, this neglected popular lecture emerges as a significant part of Douglass’s own rhetorical trajectory as he sought to make sense of the recent war and the turbulent peace, as he made history by analogy. The dynamics of this case call attention to the importance of contextualizing analogies by form and function, in order to enrich our understanding of specific analogical uses and to deepen our comprehension of the power of analogy generally.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.07maz
115
134
20
Article
11
01
Chapter 7. Analogy in history
A corpus-based study
1
A01
Davide Mazzi
Mazzi, Davide
Davide
Mazzi
01
Over the last few decades, there has been a remarkable spate of interest for history. Thus, this academic discipline has been tackled for the captivating copresence of narrative and argumentative components in professional historians’ scientific prose. Additionally, a few attempts have been made to classify the most widely spread forms of argument. However, in spite of the inspiring nature of available studies, only tangentially have scholars examined the inherently textual dimension of historical argumentation. The aim of this paper is thus to bring insights into the linguistic construction of argumentation in historical text, by choosing argument by analogy as a case in point. The study is based on a corpus of authentic research articles taken from specialised journals. By combining quantitative with qualitative methods, findings show that the reiterated expression of analogy serves as a clue to understand some crucial features of the organisation of historical text, e.g. the formulation of the writer’s own evaluation and the overall fleshing out of the meta-discursive substance characterising the interactive plane of historical text. The thesis argued here is that analogy is a chiefly interactive device, which combines with a set of discursive tools securing a fruitful relationship between writers and readers in the development of historical narrative and argument.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec3
Section header
12
01
Part III. Legal context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.08man
135
148
14
Article
13
01
Chapter 8. A rhetorical approach to legal reasoning
The Italian experience of CERMEG
1
A01
Maurizio Manzin
Manzin, Maurizio
Maurizio
Manzin
01
My article provides a short summary of the main tendencies in legal argumentation in Italy and a brief introduction to the rhetorical perspective adopted by CERMEG. The years after the end of the WW 2 saw the advent in Italy of a legal-theoretical account developed by N. Bobbio exclusively focusing on the normative nature of law and on a ‘syllogistic’ paradigm of legal reasoning. Nevertheless, Bobbio himself, when editing Perelman’s studies on argumentation during the 1960s, implicitly revealed a certain difficulty in the relationship between the (normative) <i>authority</i> and the (logical) <i>rationality</i> of a judgment. In the s.c. ‘post-positivistic’ period, among Bobbio’s scholars, there have arisen some quite various approaches to legal reasoning. In constant debate with these ones, but from different starting points, a research center on legal methodology (basically inspired by the thinking of F. Cavalla and strictly tied to the legal practice) has taken place in the University of Trento. It proposes an argumentative model based on classical rhetoric. This theory emphasises the metaphysical foundations of the rational operations performed at trial and derives from those some important consequences in the field of legal ethics and practice.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.09fet
149
164
16
Article
14
01
Chapter 9. Strategic manoeuvring in the case of the ‘Unworthy spouse’
1
A01
Eveline T. Feteris
Feteris, Eveline T.
Eveline T.
Feteris
01
In this contribution I give an analysis of strategic manoeuvring in a legal context. I give an analysis of the argumentation in the justification of the decision by the Dutch Supreme Court in the famous case of the ‘Unworthy Spouse’ and I describe how the Supreme Court operates strategically within the space it has within the rules for the discussion in cassation to steer the outcome of the discussion in a particular direction. In my analysis of the discussion strategy I use the concept of strategic manoeuvring developed by van Eemeren (2010) and van Eemeren and Houtlosser (2006, 2007). Starting from this conception I show that the discussion strategy of the Supreme Court can be described as a consistent effort in the different stages of a critical discussion to steer the discussion in the desired direction within the boundaries of the rules for the discussion in cassation.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.10tra
165
178
14
Article
15
01
Chapter 10. Everyday argument strategies in Appellate Court argument about same-sex marriage
1
A01
Karen Tracy
Tracy, Karen
Karen
Tracy
01
Arguments that occur in the legal sphere are often held up as exemplars of good argument conduct, distinctively different from how most ordinary argument proceeds. In this chapter I analyze oral arguments in two cases of the California Supreme Court (<i>In Re Marriage</i>, <i>Strauss v. Horton</i>) as the court considered the legality of its laws regarding same-sex marriage. In both cases, the focal issue concerned whether denying same-sex couples the name “marriage” for their unions constituted a violation of the California law. The first case declared that it did; the second case, following a change to the state constitution defining marriage as one man-one woman, said it did not. After describing three argument strategies that are pervasive in everyday discourse – defining key terms to advantage one’s position, using a vivid analogy to drive home the (un)reasonableness of an action, and using lexical choices that cue a stance on a contentious issues – I illustrate that in the technical sphere of appellate argument these everyday strategies were commonly used. The chapter concludes by considering the significance of this interpenetration of everyday argument practices and technical legal argument.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.11her
179
194
16
Article
16
01
Chapter 11. Student speech in public schools
A case study in definitional argument
1
A01
Dale A. Herbeck
Herbeck, Dale A.
Dale A.
Herbeck
01
In <i>Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District</i> (1969), the United States Supreme Court famously held that public school students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gates.” Recognizing that these rights are necessarily limited, the Court added that school officials retained the authority to punish expression that “would materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.” In that decades that followed, judges applying <i>Tinker</i> have used the case to dramatically limit student speech rights. This result was achieved through two distinct argumentative moves. These decisions subtly broadened a legal standard that originally required <i>actual</i> disruption to include student speech that had the <i>potential</i> to disrupt. At the same time, these decisions delegated the authority to characterize expression to school officials. Using this power to define, it was easy for administrators to repress student speech by asserting that the possibility for disruption was sufficient to satisfy the “material” and “substantial” criteria set out in <i>Tinker</i>. Taken together, these simple definitional moves allowed judges to transform a landmark decision originally intended to protect student speech rights into a powerful precedent that can be offered to restrict student speech.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec4
Section header
17
01
Part IV. Academic context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.12kut
195
212
18
Article
18
01
Chapter 12. Expert authority and ad verecundiam arguments
1
A01
Gábor Kutrovátz
Kutrovátz, Gábor
Gábor
Kutrovátz
01
Discussions of <i>ad verecundiam</i> arguments have always engaged with an essential tension between two kinds of possible approaches. On the one hand, <i>ad verecundiams</i> are typically classed under the heading of ‘fallacies’ as potentially abusive and non-rational argument forms, especially in the field of ‘informal logic’ (Copi, Walton). Similarly, the pragma-dialecticians focus on ‘fallacious’ uses by treating fallacies as violations of the rules of rational discussion. On the other hand, frequent appeals to authority are part and parcel of human cognitive enterprises ranging from lay knowledge to highly specialized scientific research, as recognised by fileds such as social epistemology (Coady, Goldman), the history of science (the problem of testimony – Kusch, Shapiro), or recent trends in the social studies of science and technology (‘studies of expertise and experience’, Collins, Evans). Recently Walton approaches these appeals in the framework of argument schemes. The paper tries, in the context of recent trends both in the public understanding of science and in the study of argumentation, to contrast these approaches with each other, and with empirical considerations concerning appeals to authority based on Internet blog discussions of the H1N1 case.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.13fri
213
232
20
Article
19
01
Chapter 13. Critique and controversy in digital scientific communication
New formats and their affordances
1
A01
Gerd Fritz
Fritz, Gerd
Gerd
Fritz
2
A01
Thomas Gloning
Gloning, Thomas
Thomas
Gloning
01
In the last few years various formats of digital communication on the internet have created new opportunities for scientific critique and controversy. Based on detailed case studies conducted within the framework of a major project, the present article discusses the possible impact of such formats on the practice of scientific controversy. In addition to providing a space for factual scientific information, formats like mailing lists, blogs, and open peer review journals are used as platforms for critical reviews and polemical exchanges. These new media have the potential to change three important aspects of scientific communication, the spread of scientific information, the speed of publication, and the amount of interactivity between scholars. For example, some forms of open peer review not only organize an accelerated and publicly visible reviewing process, but also encourage authors to reply to criticism and permit a wider scientific public to join in the critical discussion. So this format potentially contributes to an increase in transparency and interactivity of the reviewing process, thereby offering opportunities for clarification and further development of ideas. In these new digital formats traditional rules and patterns of controversy are often retained, but there are also new communicative tasks which call for new or modified principles and strategies. The article aims to show characteristic structures, opportunities and problems of polemical interactions conducted in these formats.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec5
Section header
20
01
Part V. Medical context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.14goo
233
254
22
Article
21
01
Chapter 14. Drug advertising and clinical practice
Positing biopolitics in clinical communication
1
A01
G. Thomas Goodnight
Goodnight, G. Thomas
G. Thomas
Goodnight
2
A01
Kara Gilbert
Gilbert, Kara
Kara
Gilbert
01
The field of medical practice is influenced by biopolitics, an expanding domain of global controversies over health and medicine. The growth of direct-to-consumer advertising raises questions of influence upon doctor-patient communication. The study makes the case for critical inquiry to advance competent, clinical communicative practices.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.15moh
255
268
14
Article
22
01
Chapter 15. Argumentative insights for the analysis of direct-to-consumer advertising
1
A01
Dima Mohammed
Mohammed, Dima
Dima
Mohammed
2
A01
Peter J. Schulz
Schulz, Peter J.
Peter J.
Schulz
01
In spite of the increasing awareness of the central role that argumentation plays in direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising, argumentative considerations have not yet been adequately incorporated into the analysis of DTC ads. In this paper, we argue that taking argumentative considerations into account when designing codebooks for the content analysis of DTC ads is necessary in order for the analysis of DTC advertising to be insightful. We critically examine the codebooks used in influential studies in which the method of content analyses is applied to DTC ads in order to highlight the shortcomings of the existing codebooks. For example, because existing coding schemes do not incorporate argumentative insight into the coding schemes applied to DTC ads, these schemes can only identify the recurrence of particular messages but not identify the argumentative role these messages play in the text. We propose an alternative coding scheme that can capture argumentative features of DTC ads which are not captured in the existing coding schemes.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.16row
269
288
20
Article
23
01
Chapter 16. The battle for health care reform and the liberal public sphere
1
A01
Robert C. Rowland
Rowland, Robert C.
Robert C.
Rowland
01
The battle over health care reform in 2009 and 2010 was the most important domestic policy debate in decades and therefore provides a good case to test the performance of the public sphere in the United States. The most appropriate means of carrying out that test is with liberal public sphere theory based in foundational conceptions of liberal democracy, especially the writings of James Madison. Under this theory, four key actors – the public, representatives of the public, the media, and the expert community – each must carry out key responsibilities. In the essay, the course of the debate is described and the performance of each actor assessed. While there were flaws in the performance of each of the key actors, the media and the expert community largely carried out their responsibilities. While much of the debate was inauthentic, the representatives of the public eventually enacted a reform effort. The performance of the public was more troubling with sizable percentage either uninformed or misinformed about the legislation. Overall, the liberal public sphere worked, but only by the barest of margins.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.17big
289
304
16
Article
24
01
Chapter 17. Contextual constraints on argumentation
The case of the medical encounter
1
A01
Sarah Bigi
Bigi, Sarah
Sarah
Bigi
01
The paper presents partial results from an ongoing research on communication in the medical setting.<sup>1</sup> The aim of the paper is to show how the institutional context can affect argumentation by focusing on the activity type of medical consultations. In order to achieve this goal, the paper is structured in four sections. The first one offers a description of the institutional dimension of the medical consultation set within the cultural domain of the Italian National Health Service. In the second section, this description is completed by outlining also the interpersonal dimension of the context. The third section presents partial results obtained through the analysis of a collection of medical consultations. The analysis was conducted by selecting the argumentative extracts from the consultations and by describing the argument schemes used both by doctors and patients. The analysis shows that the persuasive strength of argument schemes varies depending on the way they are used in the different institutional contexts. In particular, the specific features of the institutional contexts constrain the effectiveness of the argument scheme by ‘commanding’ context-specific premises, or endoxa. Therefore, those who have a better knowledge of the context will be able to use the various argument schemes more successfully because they will be able to refer to the most ‘context-relevant’ premises. A development of the research should include more data in the analysis and also foresee the possibility for a comparison with data collected in different cultural contexts.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec6
Section header
25
01
Part VI. Media context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.18hor
305
320
16
Article
26
01
Chapter 18. The effects of hedges and pledges in advertisements for high and low reputation brands
1
A01
Jos Hornikx
Hornikx, Jos
Jos
Hornikx
01
Claims in advertising may vary in their use of probability markers that signal the degree to which the claim is true. Experimental research has compared hedges (which mark a claim as moderately probable) and pledges (which mark a claim as very probable). This research has generally neglected the proponent of the claims: the brand. There are reasons to believe that the brand behind the advertising affects to what extent people are persuaded by advertising claims. In two studies it was therefore investigated whether the reputation of the brand affects the persuasiveness of hedges and pledges. It was expected that hedges would be more persuasive for low-reputation brands, whereas pledges would be more persuasive for high-reputation brands. This expectation was tested in two experiments. In Study 1, hedges and pledges were compared in an ad that was provided after information about a brand’s reputation. In Study 2, hedges, plegdes and no markers were compared in an ad in which the brand’s reputation was incorporated. Both studies did not find empirical support for the hypothesis. In Study 1, hedges and pledges were found to be equally persuasive; in Study 2, pledges were found to be more persuasive than hedges.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.19hic
321
340
20
Article
27
01
Chapter 19. Higher-order strategic maneuvering by shifting standards of reasonableness in cold-war editorial argumentation
1
A01
Darrin Hicks
Hicks, Darrin
Darrin
Hicks
2
A01
Justin Eckstein
Eckstein, Justin
Justin
Eckstein
01
A content analysis of the New York Times editorial page shows that political reasonableness can be defined in several, sometimes competing, ways. These meanings can be summarized as prudence, soundness, equity and social cooperation. At the heart of many of the extended political controversies the Times editorial page has commented on disputes over which of these definitions of political reasonableness should prevail. One of these controversies concerned Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s 1959 proposal for complete nuclear disarmament; a proposal that presented several argumentative dilemmas for US President Dwight Eisenhower’s administration. The public debate over Khrushchev’s proposal occurred largely on the editorial page of the New York Times. The Times offered its own assessments of the proposal and served as a platform for publicizing the Eisenhower’s administrations’ concerns and counterarguments. A rhetorical analysis of these editorials reveals how the meaning of political reasonableness itself became the object of strategic maneuvering in the Cold War. In particular, the higher-order conditions of argumentation, namely the ethical and political commitments underwriting reasonableness, served as the locus of strategic maneuvering in the editorial argumentation of the New York Times.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec7
Section header
28
01
Part VII. Financial context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.20pal
341
376
36
Article
29
01
Chapter 20. The diversifying of contextual constraints and argumentative strategies in friendly and hostile takeover bids
1
A01
Rudi Palmieri
Palmieri, Rudi
Rudi
Palmieri
01
This paper investigates how the argumentative situation affects arguers’ strategic maneuvering in a financial context, devoting particular attention to the situational characteristics at the confrontational level. To this purpose, this study considers takeover bids, a class of financial activities in which one company (the bidder), in order to acquire the control of another company (the target), proposes to the shareholders of it to sell their shares. When seen from an argumentative perspective, takeover bids manifest an interesting and original aspect: beside a composite audience (corresponding to the shareholders and other stakeholders of the two corporations), a multiple arguer is always involved since the bidder and the target boards of directors are both requested to argumentatively justify their respective position. The important distinction made in financial economics between bids supported by the target board (friendly) and those that are opposed (hostile) is reinterpreted from the perspective of argumentation analysis. Hence, friendly and hostile bids are specified as two kindred activity types belonging to the class of takeover bids, i.e. two species of the same genus, differing mostly because they imply two different confrontational situations which evidently condition the strategies of the concerned arguers. In friendly offers, the bidder and target boards devise a coordinated argumentation in which each side moves within the boundaries set by the interaction field, i.e. the commitments implied by their institutional role and those imposed by takeover rules. Hostile offers show a higher complexity as bidder and target directors separately try to persuade the same audience of the acceptability of their respective standpoints, while reacting to the argumentation advanced by the other side.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.21zla
377
392
16
Article
30
01
Chapter 21. Reported argumentation in economic-financial news
1
A01
Gergana Zlatkova
Zlatkova, Gergana
Gergana
Zlatkova
01
The present article deals with the argumentative function of reported speech in a specific discourse genre: economic-financial newspaper articles. Economic-financial discourse results are very interesting for the present investigation, at least, for two reasons. Firstly, being oriented towards the decision making of investors it is, for the most part, overtly or covertly argumentative. Secondly, the argumentation is, for the most part, attributed to expert sources. Theoretically, the research is based on the pragmatic and text linguistic research on reported discourse as well as on argumentation theory. The proposed integrated approach to reported speech combining linguistic and argumentation theoretic insights revealed the relations between linguistic characteristics of reported speech with its different argumentative functions.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.22nam
393
396
4
Article
31
01
Name index
10
01
JB code
aic.4.23sub
397
398
2
Article
32
01
Subject index
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20120328
2012
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
13
15
9789027211217
01
JB
3
John Benjamins e-Platform
03
jbe-platform.com
09
WORLD
21
01
00
99.00
EUR
R
01
00
83.00
GBP
Z
01
gen
00
149.00
USD
S
810010327
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
AIC 4 Hb
15
9789027211217
13
2011050948
BB
01
AIC
02
1877-6884
Argumentation in Context
4
01
Exploring Argumentative Contexts
01
aic.4
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/aic.4
1
B01
Frans H. van Eemeren
Eemeren, Frans H. van
Frans H.
van
Eemeren
University of Amsterdam
2
B01
Bart Garssen
Garssen, Bart
Bart
Garssen
University of Amsterdam
01
eng
418
xx
398
LAN015000
v.2006
CFA
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
COMM.CGEN
Communication Studies
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.DISC
Discourse studies
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.PRAG
Pragmatics
24
JB Subject Scheme
PHIL.GEN
Philosophy
06
01
In <i>Exploring Argumentative Contexts</i> Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen bring together a broad variety of essays examining argumentation as it occurs in seven communicative domains: the political context, the historical context, the legal context, the academic context, the medical context, the media context, and the financial context. These essays are written by an international group of argumentation scholars, consisting of Corina Andone, Sarah Bigi, Robert T. Craig, Justin Eckstein, Frans H. van Eemeren, Norman Fairclough, Eveline Feteris, Gerd Fritz, Bart Garssen, Kara Gilbert, Thomas Gloning, G. Thomas Goodnight, Dale A. Herbeck, Darrin Hicks, Thomas Hollihan, Jos Hornikx, Isabela Ieţcu-Fairclough, Gábor Kutrovátz, Maurizio Manzin, Davide Mazzi, Dima Mohammed, Rudi Palmieri, Angela G. Ray, Patricia Riley, Robert C. Rowland, Peter Schulz, Karen Tracy, and Gergana Zlatkova.
05
<i>Exploring Argumentative Contexts</i> constitutes an evident proof of the growing attention of argumentation scholars to the context where arguments are applied.
Eddo Rigotti, Università della Svizzera italiana, in Journal of Argumentation in Context Vol. 3:2 (2014), pp. 199-218
05
I would highly recommend it to students or researchers interested in argumentation research in different fields.
Haipeng Hu, Ningbo Institute of Technology, Zhejiang University, in Discourse Studies Vol.16:5 (2014), pp. 699-701
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/aic.4.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027211217.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027211217.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/aic.4.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/aic.4.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/aic.4.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/aic.4.hb.png
10
01
JB code
aic.4.001loc
ix
xii
4
Article
1
01
List of contributors
10
01
JB code
aic.4.002int
xiii
xx
8
Article
2
01
Introduction
1
A01
Frans H. van Eemeren
Eemeren, Frans H. van
Frans H.
van
Eemeren
2
A01
Bart Garssen
Garssen, Bart
Bart
Garssen
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec1
Section header
3
01
Part I. Political context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.01and
1
22
22
Article
4
01
Chapter 1. The reasonableness of confrontational strategic maneuvering in political interviews
1
A01
Corina Andone
Andone, Corina
Corina
Andone
01
The goal of this paper is to evaluate a politician’s responses to an interviewer’s accusation that his current standpoint is inconsistent with an earlier expressed standpoint on the same issue. The author focuses on the case in which the politician responds to such criticism by retracting the earlier expressed standpoint and subsequently reformulating it. Taking a pragma-dialectical perspective on argumentation, the author assesses whether the politician’s sequence of moves contributes to a reasonable resolution of the difference of opinion that is at stake in a political interview. To this end, the author formulates a set of soundness conditions that should be fulfilled if a politician is to reasonably retract a standpoint that is afterwards reformulated. The author applies the soundness conditions to a number of concrete cases taken from BBC political interviews to judge whether the responses are reasonable or not.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.02fai
23
42
20
Article
5
01
Chapter 2. Values as premises in practical arguments
Conceptions of justice in the public debate over bankers’ bonuses
1
A01
Isabela Fairclough
Fairclough, Isabela
Isabela
Fairclough
2
A01
Norman Fairclough
Fairclough, Norman
Norman
Fairclough
01
The paper focuses on a fragment of the public debate (in the UK) on whether or not the inequality of high pay and bonuses for bankers should be tolerated or not in the wake of the financial crisis. Our discussion builds on the view of the structure of practical arguments we advance in our forthcoming book (Fairclough & Fairclough forthcoming), i.e. practical arguments take goal, value, circumstantial and means-goal premises. Drawing on Searle’s (2010) view of the construction of social reality, we advance the view that values enter practical arguments in two ways: as actual <i>concerns</i> (what people actually value, or ‘desire-dependent’ reasons) and as objective, socially recognized, institutional <i>facts</i> (‘desire-independent’ reasons). The former type of reason constitutes the value premise which underlies the goal premise. The latter is part of the circumstantial premise: it is a fact that can motivate action but does not always do so: agents may choose to disregard commitments (values) that they are otherwise bound by. The typical argument in favour of ‘tolerating inequality’ is a prudential argument based on people’s alleged actual interests and concerns: inequality allegedly serves the common good. The moral argument against inequality starts from a normative <i>concern</i> for justice but also from the state’s commitment to justice as an <i>institutional</i> <i>fact</i>. The UK government, for example, is publicly committed to justice and has a duty to act justly, whether it is actually concerned to act justly or not.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.03van
43
58
16
Article
6
01
Chapter 3. Exploiting the room for strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse
Dealing with audience demand in the European Parliament
1
A01
Frans H. van Eemeren
Eemeren, Frans H. van
Frans H.
van
Eemeren
2
A01
Bart Garssen
Garssen, Bart
Bart
Garssen
01
The room for strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse depends not only on the dialectical and rhetorical preconditions inherent in strategic maneuvering but also on various kinds of extrinsic preconditions imposed on strategic maneuvering by the institutional macro-context of the communicative activity type in which the maneuvering takes place. Van Eemeren and Garssen use the communicative activity type of plenary debate in the European Parliament as their case in point for illustrating the problems involved.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.04ril
59
78
20
Article
7
01
Chapter 4. Strategic communication
How governments frame arguments in the media
1
A01
Patricia Riley
Riley, Patricia
Patricia
Riley
2
A01
Thomas A. Hollihan
Hollihan, Thomas A.
Thomas A.
Hollihan
01
The rapidly changing global media environment has dramatically altered the flow of news and information and increased the complexity of foreign policy. National governments must now communicate simultaneously to domestic and international publics who have access to many of the same media sources. There is an emerging awareness that in this environment the media has become an instrument of policy and not merely a means to communicate policy and the result is an increased emphasis on the principles of strategic communication. This study examines the argument strategies of media diplomacy and analyzes media maneuvers following U.S. Vice President Joe Biden’s visit to Israel in March, 2010. A foreign policy controversy developed when the Israeli government announced the construction of 1,600 new housing units on land claimed by the Palestinians, despite U.S. opposition. The announcement and its provocative timing resulted in a complex system of diplomatic arguments and media maneuvers as both sides sought to communicate their strategic objectives to diverse audiences with multiple, conflicting goals.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.05cra
79
94
16
Article
8
01
Chapter 5. Arguments about ‘rhetoric’ in the 2008 US presidential election campaign
1
A01
Robert T. Craig
Craig, Robert T.
Robert T.
Craig
01
Barack Obama’s prowess in the art of rhetoric, for which he had gained a national reputation with a stirring keynote speech to the 2004 Democratic National Convention, was much commented upon during the 2008 US presidential election campaign and became a stimulus for public debate on the necessity, value, and danger of rhetoric as a political-communicative practice. Extending work by Craig (1996, 1999, 2008; Craig & Tracy 2005) on normative concepts and arguments in ordinary metadiscourse (practically-oriented discourse about discourse), this paper presents an initial survey of arguments about rhetoric that appeared in public metadiscourse of the 2008 campaign. Issues that emerged in this debate engaged classic lines of argument between rhetorical and critical traditions of thought concerning the legitimacy of rhetoric, thus showing the continuing relevance of those traditions and their capacity to illuminate essential tensions in democratic public discourse.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec2
Section header
9
01
Part II. Historical context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.06ray
95
114
20
Article
10
01
Chapter 6. Making history by analogy
Frederick Douglass remembers William the Silent
1
A01
Angela G. Ray
Ray, Angela G.
Angela G.
Ray
01
Most scholarship on historical analogies emphasizes the dangers of misperception of current events through facile comparisons with the past. Instead, through a detailed rhetorical and historical analysis, this essay argues that an extended historical analogy that highlights difference as well as likeness has the potential to generate new and productive understandings of recent experience. The essay examines the public lecture “William the Silent,” written and delivered by African American civil rights advocate Frederick Douglass in the aftermath of the U.S. Civil War. This lecture analogizes the history of the Netherlands in the sixteenth century to recent U.S. history, suggesting explanations for political decisions and military strategies. Douglass’s careful comparison and contrast of William of Orange and Abraham Lincoln are key elements of the analogy. Through the analysis presented here, this neglected popular lecture emerges as a significant part of Douglass’s own rhetorical trajectory as he sought to make sense of the recent war and the turbulent peace, as he made history by analogy. The dynamics of this case call attention to the importance of contextualizing analogies by form and function, in order to enrich our understanding of specific analogical uses and to deepen our comprehension of the power of analogy generally.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.07maz
115
134
20
Article
11
01
Chapter 7. Analogy in history
A corpus-based study
1
A01
Davide Mazzi
Mazzi, Davide
Davide
Mazzi
01
Over the last few decades, there has been a remarkable spate of interest for history. Thus, this academic discipline has been tackled for the captivating copresence of narrative and argumentative components in professional historians’ scientific prose. Additionally, a few attempts have been made to classify the most widely spread forms of argument. However, in spite of the inspiring nature of available studies, only tangentially have scholars examined the inherently textual dimension of historical argumentation. The aim of this paper is thus to bring insights into the linguistic construction of argumentation in historical text, by choosing argument by analogy as a case in point. The study is based on a corpus of authentic research articles taken from specialised journals. By combining quantitative with qualitative methods, findings show that the reiterated expression of analogy serves as a clue to understand some crucial features of the organisation of historical text, e.g. the formulation of the writer’s own evaluation and the overall fleshing out of the meta-discursive substance characterising the interactive plane of historical text. The thesis argued here is that analogy is a chiefly interactive device, which combines with a set of discursive tools securing a fruitful relationship between writers and readers in the development of historical narrative and argument.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec3
Section header
12
01
Part III. Legal context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.08man
135
148
14
Article
13
01
Chapter 8. A rhetorical approach to legal reasoning
The Italian experience of CERMEG
1
A01
Maurizio Manzin
Manzin, Maurizio
Maurizio
Manzin
01
My article provides a short summary of the main tendencies in legal argumentation in Italy and a brief introduction to the rhetorical perspective adopted by CERMEG. The years after the end of the WW 2 saw the advent in Italy of a legal-theoretical account developed by N. Bobbio exclusively focusing on the normative nature of law and on a ‘syllogistic’ paradigm of legal reasoning. Nevertheless, Bobbio himself, when editing Perelman’s studies on argumentation during the 1960s, implicitly revealed a certain difficulty in the relationship between the (normative) <i>authority</i> and the (logical) <i>rationality</i> of a judgment. In the s.c. ‘post-positivistic’ period, among Bobbio’s scholars, there have arisen some quite various approaches to legal reasoning. In constant debate with these ones, but from different starting points, a research center on legal methodology (basically inspired by the thinking of F. Cavalla and strictly tied to the legal practice) has taken place in the University of Trento. It proposes an argumentative model based on classical rhetoric. This theory emphasises the metaphysical foundations of the rational operations performed at trial and derives from those some important consequences in the field of legal ethics and practice.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.09fet
149
164
16
Article
14
01
Chapter 9. Strategic manoeuvring in the case of the ‘Unworthy spouse’
1
A01
Eveline T. Feteris
Feteris, Eveline T.
Eveline T.
Feteris
01
In this contribution I give an analysis of strategic manoeuvring in a legal context. I give an analysis of the argumentation in the justification of the decision by the Dutch Supreme Court in the famous case of the ‘Unworthy Spouse’ and I describe how the Supreme Court operates strategically within the space it has within the rules for the discussion in cassation to steer the outcome of the discussion in a particular direction. In my analysis of the discussion strategy I use the concept of strategic manoeuvring developed by van Eemeren (2010) and van Eemeren and Houtlosser (2006, 2007). Starting from this conception I show that the discussion strategy of the Supreme Court can be described as a consistent effort in the different stages of a critical discussion to steer the discussion in the desired direction within the boundaries of the rules for the discussion in cassation.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.10tra
165
178
14
Article
15
01
Chapter 10. Everyday argument strategies in Appellate Court argument about same-sex marriage
1
A01
Karen Tracy
Tracy, Karen
Karen
Tracy
01
Arguments that occur in the legal sphere are often held up as exemplars of good argument conduct, distinctively different from how most ordinary argument proceeds. In this chapter I analyze oral arguments in two cases of the California Supreme Court (<i>In Re Marriage</i>, <i>Strauss v. Horton</i>) as the court considered the legality of its laws regarding same-sex marriage. In both cases, the focal issue concerned whether denying same-sex couples the name “marriage” for their unions constituted a violation of the California law. The first case declared that it did; the second case, following a change to the state constitution defining marriage as one man-one woman, said it did not. After describing three argument strategies that are pervasive in everyday discourse – defining key terms to advantage one’s position, using a vivid analogy to drive home the (un)reasonableness of an action, and using lexical choices that cue a stance on a contentious issues – I illustrate that in the technical sphere of appellate argument these everyday strategies were commonly used. The chapter concludes by considering the significance of this interpenetration of everyday argument practices and technical legal argument.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.11her
179
194
16
Article
16
01
Chapter 11. Student speech in public schools
A case study in definitional argument
1
A01
Dale A. Herbeck
Herbeck, Dale A.
Dale A.
Herbeck
01
In <i>Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District</i> (1969), the United States Supreme Court famously held that public school students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gates.” Recognizing that these rights are necessarily limited, the Court added that school officials retained the authority to punish expression that “would materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.” In that decades that followed, judges applying <i>Tinker</i> have used the case to dramatically limit student speech rights. This result was achieved through two distinct argumentative moves. These decisions subtly broadened a legal standard that originally required <i>actual</i> disruption to include student speech that had the <i>potential</i> to disrupt. At the same time, these decisions delegated the authority to characterize expression to school officials. Using this power to define, it was easy for administrators to repress student speech by asserting that the possibility for disruption was sufficient to satisfy the “material” and “substantial” criteria set out in <i>Tinker</i>. Taken together, these simple definitional moves allowed judges to transform a landmark decision originally intended to protect student speech rights into a powerful precedent that can be offered to restrict student speech.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec4
Section header
17
01
Part IV. Academic context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.12kut
195
212
18
Article
18
01
Chapter 12. Expert authority and ad verecundiam arguments
1
A01
Gábor Kutrovátz
Kutrovátz, Gábor
Gábor
Kutrovátz
01
Discussions of <i>ad verecundiam</i> arguments have always engaged with an essential tension between two kinds of possible approaches. On the one hand, <i>ad verecundiams</i> are typically classed under the heading of ‘fallacies’ as potentially abusive and non-rational argument forms, especially in the field of ‘informal logic’ (Copi, Walton). Similarly, the pragma-dialecticians focus on ‘fallacious’ uses by treating fallacies as violations of the rules of rational discussion. On the other hand, frequent appeals to authority are part and parcel of human cognitive enterprises ranging from lay knowledge to highly specialized scientific research, as recognised by fileds such as social epistemology (Coady, Goldman), the history of science (the problem of testimony – Kusch, Shapiro), or recent trends in the social studies of science and technology (‘studies of expertise and experience’, Collins, Evans). Recently Walton approaches these appeals in the framework of argument schemes. The paper tries, in the context of recent trends both in the public understanding of science and in the study of argumentation, to contrast these approaches with each other, and with empirical considerations concerning appeals to authority based on Internet blog discussions of the H1N1 case.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.13fri
213
232
20
Article
19
01
Chapter 13. Critique and controversy in digital scientific communication
New formats and their affordances
1
A01
Gerd Fritz
Fritz, Gerd
Gerd
Fritz
2
A01
Thomas Gloning
Gloning, Thomas
Thomas
Gloning
01
In the last few years various formats of digital communication on the internet have created new opportunities for scientific critique and controversy. Based on detailed case studies conducted within the framework of a major project, the present article discusses the possible impact of such formats on the practice of scientific controversy. In addition to providing a space for factual scientific information, formats like mailing lists, blogs, and open peer review journals are used as platforms for critical reviews and polemical exchanges. These new media have the potential to change three important aspects of scientific communication, the spread of scientific information, the speed of publication, and the amount of interactivity between scholars. For example, some forms of open peer review not only organize an accelerated and publicly visible reviewing process, but also encourage authors to reply to criticism and permit a wider scientific public to join in the critical discussion. So this format potentially contributes to an increase in transparency and interactivity of the reviewing process, thereby offering opportunities for clarification and further development of ideas. In these new digital formats traditional rules and patterns of controversy are often retained, but there are also new communicative tasks which call for new or modified principles and strategies. The article aims to show characteristic structures, opportunities and problems of polemical interactions conducted in these formats.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec5
Section header
20
01
Part V. Medical context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.14goo
233
254
22
Article
21
01
Chapter 14. Drug advertising and clinical practice
Positing biopolitics in clinical communication
1
A01
G. Thomas Goodnight
Goodnight, G. Thomas
G. Thomas
Goodnight
2
A01
Kara Gilbert
Gilbert, Kara
Kara
Gilbert
01
The field of medical practice is influenced by biopolitics, an expanding domain of global controversies over health and medicine. The growth of direct-to-consumer advertising raises questions of influence upon doctor-patient communication. The study makes the case for critical inquiry to advance competent, clinical communicative practices.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.15moh
255
268
14
Article
22
01
Chapter 15. Argumentative insights for the analysis of direct-to-consumer advertising
1
A01
Dima Mohammed
Mohammed, Dima
Dima
Mohammed
2
A01
Peter J. Schulz
Schulz, Peter J.
Peter J.
Schulz
01
In spite of the increasing awareness of the central role that argumentation plays in direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising, argumentative considerations have not yet been adequately incorporated into the analysis of DTC ads. In this paper, we argue that taking argumentative considerations into account when designing codebooks for the content analysis of DTC ads is necessary in order for the analysis of DTC advertising to be insightful. We critically examine the codebooks used in influential studies in which the method of content analyses is applied to DTC ads in order to highlight the shortcomings of the existing codebooks. For example, because existing coding schemes do not incorporate argumentative insight into the coding schemes applied to DTC ads, these schemes can only identify the recurrence of particular messages but not identify the argumentative role these messages play in the text. We propose an alternative coding scheme that can capture argumentative features of DTC ads which are not captured in the existing coding schemes.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.16row
269
288
20
Article
23
01
Chapter 16. The battle for health care reform and the liberal public sphere
1
A01
Robert C. Rowland
Rowland, Robert C.
Robert C.
Rowland
01
The battle over health care reform in 2009 and 2010 was the most important domestic policy debate in decades and therefore provides a good case to test the performance of the public sphere in the United States. The most appropriate means of carrying out that test is with liberal public sphere theory based in foundational conceptions of liberal democracy, especially the writings of James Madison. Under this theory, four key actors – the public, representatives of the public, the media, and the expert community – each must carry out key responsibilities. In the essay, the course of the debate is described and the performance of each actor assessed. While there were flaws in the performance of each of the key actors, the media and the expert community largely carried out their responsibilities. While much of the debate was inauthentic, the representatives of the public eventually enacted a reform effort. The performance of the public was more troubling with sizable percentage either uninformed or misinformed about the legislation. Overall, the liberal public sphere worked, but only by the barest of margins.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.17big
289
304
16
Article
24
01
Chapter 17. Contextual constraints on argumentation
The case of the medical encounter
1
A01
Sarah Bigi
Bigi, Sarah
Sarah
Bigi
01
The paper presents partial results from an ongoing research on communication in the medical setting.<sup>1</sup> The aim of the paper is to show how the institutional context can affect argumentation by focusing on the activity type of medical consultations. In order to achieve this goal, the paper is structured in four sections. The first one offers a description of the institutional dimension of the medical consultation set within the cultural domain of the Italian National Health Service. In the second section, this description is completed by outlining also the interpersonal dimension of the context. The third section presents partial results obtained through the analysis of a collection of medical consultations. The analysis was conducted by selecting the argumentative extracts from the consultations and by describing the argument schemes used both by doctors and patients. The analysis shows that the persuasive strength of argument schemes varies depending on the way they are used in the different institutional contexts. In particular, the specific features of the institutional contexts constrain the effectiveness of the argument scheme by ‘commanding’ context-specific premises, or endoxa. Therefore, those who have a better knowledge of the context will be able to use the various argument schemes more successfully because they will be able to refer to the most ‘context-relevant’ premises. A development of the research should include more data in the analysis and also foresee the possibility for a comparison with data collected in different cultural contexts.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec6
Section header
25
01
Part VI. Media context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.18hor
305
320
16
Article
26
01
Chapter 18. The effects of hedges and pledges in advertisements for high and low reputation brands
1
A01
Jos Hornikx
Hornikx, Jos
Jos
Hornikx
01
Claims in advertising may vary in their use of probability markers that signal the degree to which the claim is true. Experimental research has compared hedges (which mark a claim as moderately probable) and pledges (which mark a claim as very probable). This research has generally neglected the proponent of the claims: the brand. There are reasons to believe that the brand behind the advertising affects to what extent people are persuaded by advertising claims. In two studies it was therefore investigated whether the reputation of the brand affects the persuasiveness of hedges and pledges. It was expected that hedges would be more persuasive for low-reputation brands, whereas pledges would be more persuasive for high-reputation brands. This expectation was tested in two experiments. In Study 1, hedges and pledges were compared in an ad that was provided after information about a brand’s reputation. In Study 2, hedges, plegdes and no markers were compared in an ad in which the brand’s reputation was incorporated. Both studies did not find empirical support for the hypothesis. In Study 1, hedges and pledges were found to be equally persuasive; in Study 2, pledges were found to be more persuasive than hedges.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.19hic
321
340
20
Article
27
01
Chapter 19. Higher-order strategic maneuvering by shifting standards of reasonableness in cold-war editorial argumentation
1
A01
Darrin Hicks
Hicks, Darrin
Darrin
Hicks
2
A01
Justin Eckstein
Eckstein, Justin
Justin
Eckstein
01
A content analysis of the New York Times editorial page shows that political reasonableness can be defined in several, sometimes competing, ways. These meanings can be summarized as prudence, soundness, equity and social cooperation. At the heart of many of the extended political controversies the Times editorial page has commented on disputes over which of these definitions of political reasonableness should prevail. One of these controversies concerned Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s 1959 proposal for complete nuclear disarmament; a proposal that presented several argumentative dilemmas for US President Dwight Eisenhower’s administration. The public debate over Khrushchev’s proposal occurred largely on the editorial page of the New York Times. The Times offered its own assessments of the proposal and served as a platform for publicizing the Eisenhower’s administrations’ concerns and counterarguments. A rhetorical analysis of these editorials reveals how the meaning of political reasonableness itself became the object of strategic maneuvering in the Cold War. In particular, the higher-order conditions of argumentation, namely the ethical and political commitments underwriting reasonableness, served as the locus of strategic maneuvering in the editorial argumentation of the New York Times.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.00sec7
Section header
28
01
Part VII. Financial context
10
01
JB code
aic.4.20pal
341
376
36
Article
29
01
Chapter 20. The diversifying of contextual constraints and argumentative strategies in friendly and hostile takeover bids
1
A01
Rudi Palmieri
Palmieri, Rudi
Rudi
Palmieri
01
This paper investigates how the argumentative situation affects arguers’ strategic maneuvering in a financial context, devoting particular attention to the situational characteristics at the confrontational level. To this purpose, this study considers takeover bids, a class of financial activities in which one company (the bidder), in order to acquire the control of another company (the target), proposes to the shareholders of it to sell their shares. When seen from an argumentative perspective, takeover bids manifest an interesting and original aspect: beside a composite audience (corresponding to the shareholders and other stakeholders of the two corporations), a multiple arguer is always involved since the bidder and the target boards of directors are both requested to argumentatively justify their respective position. The important distinction made in financial economics between bids supported by the target board (friendly) and those that are opposed (hostile) is reinterpreted from the perspective of argumentation analysis. Hence, friendly and hostile bids are specified as two kindred activity types belonging to the class of takeover bids, i.e. two species of the same genus, differing mostly because they imply two different confrontational situations which evidently condition the strategies of the concerned arguers. In friendly offers, the bidder and target boards devise a coordinated argumentation in which each side moves within the boundaries set by the interaction field, i.e. the commitments implied by their institutional role and those imposed by takeover rules. Hostile offers show a higher complexity as bidder and target directors separately try to persuade the same audience of the acceptability of their respective standpoints, while reacting to the argumentation advanced by the other side.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.21zla
377
392
16
Article
30
01
Chapter 21. Reported argumentation in economic-financial news
1
A01
Gergana Zlatkova
Zlatkova, Gergana
Gergana
Zlatkova
01
The present article deals with the argumentative function of reported speech in a specific discourse genre: economic-financial newspaper articles. Economic-financial discourse results are very interesting for the present investigation, at least, for two reasons. Firstly, being oriented towards the decision making of investors it is, for the most part, overtly or covertly argumentative. Secondly, the argumentation is, for the most part, attributed to expert sources. Theoretically, the research is based on the pragmatic and text linguistic research on reported discourse as well as on argumentation theory. The proposed integrated approach to reported speech combining linguistic and argumentation theoretic insights revealed the relations between linguistic characteristics of reported speech with its different argumentative functions.
10
01
JB code
aic.4.22nam
393
396
4
Article
31
01
Name index
10
01
JB code
aic.4.23sub
397
398
2
Article
32
01
Subject index
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20120328
2012
John Benjamins
02
WORLD
01
245
mm
02
164
mm
08
885
gr
01
JB
1
John Benjamins Publishing Company
+31 20 6304747
+31 20 6739773
bookorder@benjamins.nl
01
https://benjamins.com
01
WORLD
US CA MX
21
82
14
01
02
JB
1
00
99.00
EUR
R
02
02
JB
1
00
104.94
EUR
R
01
JB
10
bebc
+44 1202 712 934
+44 1202 712 913
sales@bebc.co.uk
03
GB
21
14
02
02
JB
1
00
83.00
GBP
Z
01
JB
2
John Benjamins North America
+1 800 562-5666
+1 703 661-1501
benjamins@presswarehouse.com
01
https://benjamins.com
01
US CA MX
21
14
01
gen
02
JB
1
00
149.00
USD