Argumentation as an interactional process in conversation
Argument is a structured phenomenon, the structuring of which is evident in conversational activity. This study begins with speech act analyses of argumentation and examines the was in which idealized models of argumentation relate to the linguistic behaviour of participants in argument as talk. While a speech act understanding of arguments reveals some of the basic principles of the ways in which arguments are constructed as talk, sequencing patterns of arguments are interactionally accomplished. Speakers produce turns which are related to their purpose in talking and which include speech act complexes appropriate for the perlocutionary act of convincing. This limits the range of choices for a speaker in the sequence of interaction. Turns which do not count as appropriate for the task of arguing are accountable.
References (26)
Coulter, J. (1990) Elementary properties of argument sequences. In G. Psathas (ed.) Interaction competence. Lanham, University of America Press.
Gardner, R. (ed) (1995) Spoken interaction studies in Australia. (ARAL Series N° 12) Canberra, ALAA.
Goffman, E. (1971) Relations in public. Microstudies of the public order. New York, Harper and Rowe.
Goodwin, C. and M. Goodwin (1990) Interstitial argument. In A.D. Grimshaw (ed.) Conflict talk: Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Grootendorst, R. (1990) Everyday argumentation from a speech act perspective. Communication and Cognition 24,1: 111–134.
Jackson, S. and S. Jacobs (1980) Structure of conversational argumentation: Pragmatic bases for the enthymeme. Quarterly Journal of Speech 661: 251–165.
Jackson, S. and S. Jacobs (1982) Conversational argumentation: A discourse analytic approach. In J.R. Cox and C.A. Willard (eds) Advances in Argumentation Research. Carbondale, Ill, Southern Illinois University Press.
Jacobs, S. (1987) The management of disagreement in conversation. In F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C.A. Willard (eds).
Jacobs, S. (1989) Speech acts and arguments. Argumentation 31: 345–365.
Jefferson, G. (1984) Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens ‘yeah’ and ‘mm hm’. Papers in Linguistics 17, 2, 197–216.
Legge, N.J. (1988) The management of interpersonal disputes within friendships: An analysis of discursive practices. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Pennsylvania State University.
Liddicoat, A.J., S. Döpke, K. Love and A. Brown (1994) Presenting a point of view: Callers’ contributions to talkback radio in Australia. Journal of Pragmatics. 221: 139–156.
Piaget, J. (1966) La langue et la pensée chez l’ enfant: Etudes sur la logique de l’ enfant. Neuchatel, Delachaux and Niestle.
Pomerantz, A. (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of social action: Studies in conversational analysis. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, H. (1987) On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In G. Button and J.R.E. Lee (eds) Talk and social organization. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters
Sacks, H. (1992) Lectures on Conversation. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
Schiffrin, D. (1984) Jewish argument as sociability. Language in Society 131: 311–335.
Schiffrin, D. (1985) Everyday argument: The organization of diversity in talk. In T.A. van Dijk (ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis vol. 31. London, Academic.
Stubbs, M. (1983) Discourse analysis: The sociolinguistic analysis of natural language. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
Tannen, D. (1981) New York Jewish conversational style. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 301: 133–149.
Toulmin, S.E. (1958) The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
van Eemeren, F.H. and R. Grootendorst (1984) Speech acts in argumentative discussions: A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. Dordrecht, Foris.
van Eemeren, F.H. and R. Grootendorst (1992) Argumentation, communication and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.
van Eemeren, F.H. and T. Kruiger (1987) Identifying argumentation schemes. In F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C.A. Willard (eds).
van Eemeren, F.H., R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair and C.A. Willard (eds) (1987) Argumentation: Perspectives and Approaches. Dordrecht, Foris.
van Eemeren, F.H., R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson and S. Jacobs (1993) Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa, University of Alabama Press.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Guerin, Bernard
2003.
Language use as Social Strategy: A Review and an Analytic Framework for the Social Sciences.
Review of General Psychology 7:3
► pp. 251 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.