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: 05 July 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.00013.kie
References
Blair, J. Anthony
2010 “Logic in the Pragma-Dialectical theory.” In Frans H. van Eemeren et al. (Eds.), ISSA Proceedings 2010. (http://​rozenbergquarterly​.com​/issa​-proceedings​-2010​-logic​-in​-the​-pragma​-dialectical​-theory/; 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2015 Reasonableness and effectiveness in argumentative discourse. Cham: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2017 Prototypical argumentative patterns. Exploring the relationship between argumentative discourse and institutional context. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst
1984 Speech acts in argumentative discussions. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels
2009 Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1976 “A classification of illocutionary acts.” Language in Society 51, 1–24. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Woods, John and Douglas N. Walton
1989 Fallacies. Berlin: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas N.
1982 Topical relevance in argumentation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle 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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wunderlich, Dieter
1976 Studien zur Sprechakttheorie. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar