Cover not available
Review published In:
Journal of Argumentation in Context
Vol. 10:2 (2021) ► pp.262–272
Book review

Frans H. van Eemeren. Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham: Springer, 2018. 199 pp.

Reviewed by
| University of Innsbruck
Published online: 5 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.00013.kie
References (43)
References
Blair, J. Anthony. 2010. “Logic in the Pragma-Dialectical theory.” In Frans H. van Eemeren et al. (Eds.), ISSA Proceedings 2010. ([URL]; last seen November 28, 2018)
Dijk, Teun A. van and Kintsch, Walter. 1983. Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van (ed.). 2002. Advances in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: SicSat.Google Scholar
2010. Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.). 2015. Reasonableness and effectiveness in argumentative discourse. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst. 1984. Speech acts in argumentative discussions. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992. Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(eds.). 1994. Studies in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: SicSat.Google Scholar
. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van and Peter Houtlosser. 2002. “Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Maintaining a delicate balance.” In Frans H. van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and rhetoric. The warp and woof of argumentation analysis (pp. 131–159). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Rob Grootendorst and Tjark Kruiger. 1978. Argumentatietheorie. Utrecht: Het Spectrum.Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Peter Houtlosser and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans. 2007. Argumentative indicators in discourse. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels. 2009. Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij and Jean H. M. Wagemans 2014. Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Feteris, Eveline, Bart Garssen and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.) (2011). Keeping in touch with Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamblin, Charles L. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Houtlosser, Peter and Agnès van Rees (Eds.). 2006. Considering Pragma-Dialectics. A Festschrift for Frans H. van Eemeren on the occasion of his 60th birthday. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, Philip. 2006. How we reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kalinowski, Georges. 1972. Einführung in die Normenlogik. Frankfurt/M.: Athenäum.Google Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred. 1998. “Speech Act Sequences in Latin prose: Questions and Answers.” In: Charles M. Ternes and Dominique Longrée (éd.), Oratio soluta – oratio numerosa. Les mécanismes linguistiques de cohésion et de rupture dans la prose latine (pp. 65–86). Luxembourg: Centre Alexandre-Wiltheim.Google Scholar
. 2008. “Impoliteness and emotional arguments.” Journal of Politeness Research, 4(2), 243–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “Fiktive Argumente.” In Carl Friedrich Gethmann (ed.), Lebenswelt und Wissenschaft (pp. 505–538). Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Whose Freedom? The Battle over America‘s Most Important Idea. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K. 1986. On the plurality of worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. 21 Vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Perelman, Chaim and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1983. Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Bruxelles: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Plantin, Christian. 1998. “Les raisons des émotions.” In Marina Bondi (ed.), Forms of Argumentative Discourse (pp. 3–50). Bologna: Clueb.Google Scholar
. 2005. L’argumentation. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Risselada, Rodie. 1993. Imperatives and other directive expressions in Latin. Amsterdam: Gieben. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schank, Roger C. and Robert P. Abelson. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Monika and Jeannette Chur. 1996. Semantik. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Searle, John. 1969. Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1976. “A classification of illocutionary acts.” Language in Society 51, 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Visser, Jacky. 2016. A dialogue game for critical discussion. Groundwork in the formalisation and computerisation of the pragma-dialectical model of argumentation. Doctoral dissertation. University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Woods, John. 2004. The death of argument. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woods, John and Douglas N. Walton. 1989. Fallacies. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas N. 1982. Topical relevance in argumentation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992. The Place of emotion in argumentation. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
1997. Appeal to Pity. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
2000. Scare Tactics. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wunderlich, Dieter. 1976. Studien zur Sprechakttheorie. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar