Article published in:
Argumentation in Political Deliberation
Edited by Marcin Lewiński and Dima Mohammed
[Benjamins Current Topics 76] 2015
► pp. 151176
Aakhus, Mark, and Marcin Lewiński
2011 “Argument analysis in large-scale deliberation.” In Keeping in touch with pragma-dialectics, ed. by Eveline Feteris, Bart Garssen, and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, 165–183. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Applebaum, Anne
1984 “Rhetoric.” (William Rhys Roberts, trans.).” In The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation, vol. 2, ed. by Jonathan Barnes, 2152–2269. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Baym, Nancy K.
1996 “Agreements and disagreements in a computer mediated discussion.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 29 (4): 315–345. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blair, J. Anthony
1998 “The limits of the dialogue model of argument.” Argumentation 12 (3): 325–339. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bohman, James
1996Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bonevac, Daniel
2003 “Pragma-dialectics and beyond.” Argumentation 17 (4): 451–459. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brashers, Dale E., and Renee A. Meyers
1989 “Tag-team argument and group decision-making: A preliminary investigation.” In Spheres of argument: Proceedings of the Sixth SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation, ed. by Bruce E. Gronbeck, 542–550. Annandale: Speech Communication Association.Google Scholar
Bruxelles, Sylvie, and Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni
2004 “Coalitions in polylogues.” Journal of Pragmatics 36 (1): 75–113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Canary, Daniel J., Brent G. Brossmann, and David R. Seibold
1987 “Argument structures in decision-making groups.” Southern Speech Communication Journal 53 (1): 18–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Thomas B. Carlson
1982 “Hearers and speech acts.” Language 58 (2): 332–373. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Joshua
2009Philosophy, politics, democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dascal, Marcelo
2008 “Dichotomies and types of debate.” In Controversy and confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory, ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren, and Bart Garssen, 27–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Todd, and Seeta P. Gangadharan
(eds) 2009Online deliberation: Design, research and practice. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Davis, Richard
1999The Web of politics: The Internet’s impact on the American political system. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2005Politics online: Blogs, chatrooms, and discussion groups in American democracy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H.
2010Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., and Rob Grootendorst
1984Speech acts in argumentative discussions. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., Rob Grootendorst, Sally Jackson, and Scott Jacobs
1993Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1981Forms of talk. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles, and Marjorie H. Goodwin
1990 “Interstitial argument.” In Conflict talk: Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations, ed. by Allen D. Grimshaw, 85–117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, Paul H.
1975 “Logic and conversation.” In Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts, ed. by Peter Cole, and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen
1989The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society (Thomas Burger, trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hamblin, Charles L.
1970Fallacies. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Hauben, Michael, and Ronda Hauben
1997Netizens: On the history and impact of Usenet and the Internet. Los Alamitos, CA.: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
Haviland, John B.
1986 “ ‘Con Buenos Chiles’: Talk, targets and teasing in Zincantán.” Text 6 (3): 249–282.Google Scholar
Hill, Kevin A., and John E. Hughes
1998Cyberpolitics: Citizen activism in the age of the Internet. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell
1972 “Models of the interaction of language and social life.” In Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication, ed. by John. J. Gumperz, and Dell Hymes, 35–71. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Jackson, Sally
1992 “ ‘Virtual standpoints’ and the pragmatics of conversational argument.” In Argumentation illuminated, ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair, and Charles A. Willard, 260–269. Amsterdam: SicSat.Google Scholar
Jackson, Sally, and Scott Jacobs
1980 “Structure of conversational argument: Pragmatic bases for the enthymeme.” The Quarterly Journal of Speech 66 (3): 251–265. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jacquette, Dale
2007 “Two sides of any issue.” Argumentation 21 (2): 115–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine
2004 “Introducing polylogue.” Journal of Pragmatics 36 (1): 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krabbe, Erik C.W.
2006 “Logic and games.” In Considering pragma-dialectics, ed. by Peter Houtlosser, and M. Agnès van Rees, 185–198. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
1988 “Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman’s concepts of participation.” In Erving Goffman: Exploring the interaction order, ed. by Paul Drew, and Anthony J. Wootton, 161–227. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Lewiński, Marcin
2010aInternet political discussion forums as an argumentative activity type. A pragma-dialectical analysis of online forms of strategic manoeuvring in reacting critically. Amsterdam: SicSat.Google Scholar
2010b “Collective argumentative criticism in informal online discussion forums.” Argumentation and Advocacy 47 (2): 86–105.Google Scholar
2011 “Monologue, dilogue or polylogue: Which model for public deliberation?” In Argumentation: Cognition and community. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, ed. by Frank Zenker, 1–15. CD ROM. Windsor, ON: OSSA.Google Scholar
Lewis, Diana M.
2005 “Arguing in English and French asynchronous online discussion.” Journal of Pragmatics 37 (11): 1801–1818. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marcoccia, Michel
2004 “On-line polylogues: Conversation structure and participation framework in internet newsgroups.” Journal of Pragmatics 36 (1): 115–145. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W.
1986 “Offering and soliciting collaboration in multi-party disputes among children (and other humans).” Human Studies 9: 261–285. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mendelson, Michael
2002Many sides: A protagorean approach to the theory, practice, and pedagogy of argument. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Andrew
Rheingold, Howard
1993The virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier. Reading, MA.: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Richardson, John E., and James Stanyer
2011 “Reader opinion in the digital age: Tabloid and broadsheet newspaper websites and the exercise of political voice.” Journalism 12 (8): 983–1003. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R.
1969Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1975 “A taxonomy of illocutionary acts.” In Language, mind, and knowledge, vol. 7, ed. by Keith Günderson, 344–369. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
1992 “Conversation.” In (On) Searle on conversation, ed. by John R. Searle, et al., 7–29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas N.
1998The new dialectic: Conversational contexts of argument. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas N., and Erik C.W. Krabbe
1995Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Wenzel, Joseph W.
1979 “Jürgen Habermas and the dialectical perspective on argumentation.” Journal of the American Forensic Association 16: 83–94.Google Scholar
Wilhelm, Anthony G.
2000Democracy in the digital age: Challenges to political life in cyberspace. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wright, Scott
2012 “Politics as usual? Revolution, normalization and a new agenda for online deliberation.” New Media and Society 14 (2): 244–261. CrossrefGoogle Scholar