Cover not available
Article In:
Multimodal Argumentation: Special issue of the Journal of Argumentation in Context 13:2 (2024)
Edited by Assimakis Tseronis and Hartmut Stöckl
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 13:2] 2024
► pp. 260–291

Detecting generic patterns in multimodal argumentation

A corpus-based study of environmental protection print-ads

| University of Salzburg,
The present study devises and puts into practice an annotation scheme for interrogating the patterns of multimodal argumentation found in environmental protection print-advertisements collected between 2018 and 2022. 134 ads featuring the sub-topics climate change, deforestation, pollution, and preservation have been subjected to annotations for various features on four levels: genre/text, image, multimodal argument and multimodal coherence/rhetoric. By contrast with previous, predominantly case-based studies in argumentation, the approach presented here aims not to reconstruct single instances of multimodal argumentation but to identify recurrent patterns along with their typical features. The results show distinct regularities in the way arguments for environmental protection are constructed from large images and short text.
Keywords: discourse semantics, environmental protection ads, genre, multimodal argumentation, multimodal coherence, visual image
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Review of theory
    • 2.1Visual and multimodal argument(ation)
    • 2.2Propositionality and non-redundancy of images
    • 2.3Rhetorical functions of images in argumentation
    • 2.4Approaches to argument reconstruction
    • 2.5Multimodal argumentation in advertisements
  • 3.Material, methods and aims
    • 3.1Material
    • 3.2Method and aims
    • 3.3Sample analysis
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Text – structure and style
      • A.Generic stages
      • B.Directives
    • 4.2Image semantics
      • C.Visual grammar
      • D.Visual affect
    • 4.3Multimodal argumentation
      • E.Types of claims
      • F.Argumentation schemes
      • G.Discourse structure
    • 4.4Multimodal rhetoric
      • H.Multimodal rhetorical figures
      • I.Modes of visual meaning
  • 5.Summary and conclusions
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (52)
References
Bartlett, Tom. 2019. “Models of Discourse in Systemic Functional Linguistics.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, ed. by Geoff Thompson et al., 285–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bateman, John A. 2018a. “Peircean Semiotics and Multimodality: Towards a New Synthesis.” Multimodal Communication 7 (1):1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018b. “Position Paper on Argument and Multimodality.” International Review of Pragmatics 101:294–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bateman, John A., Janina Wildfeuer, and Tuomo Hiipppala. 2017. Multimodality: Foundations, Research and Analysis: A Problem-Oriented Introduction. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Birdsell, David S., and Leo Groarke. 2007. “Outlines of a Theory of Visual Argument.” Argumentation & Advocacy 43 (3–4):103–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blair, J. Anthony. 2015. “Probative Norms for Multimodal Visual Arguments.” Argumentation 291:217–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Champagne, Marc, and Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen. 2020. “Why Images Cannot be Arguments, but Moving Ones Might.” Argumentation 341:207–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Degano, Chiara. 2017. “Visual Arguments in Activists’ Campaigns.” In Argumentation Across Communities of Practice: Multi-disciplinary Perspectives, ed. by Cornelia Ilie and Giuliana Garzone, 291–315. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forceville, Charles. 2020. Visual and Multimodal Communication: Applying the Relevance Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freeley, Austin J., and David L. Steinberg. 2005. Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Grancea, Ioana. 2017. “Types of Visual Arguments.” Argumentum 15 (2):16–34.Google Scholar
Groarke, Leo. 2019. “Depicting Visual Arguments: An ‘ART’ Approach.” In Informal Logic: A “Canadian” Approach to Argument, ed. by Federico Puppo, 332–374. Windsor: Windsor Studies in Argumentation.Google Scholar
. 2009. “Five Theses on Toulmin and Visual Argument.” In Pondering on Problems of Argumentation, ed. by Frans H. van Eeemeren, and Bart Garssen, 229–239. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Groarke, Leo, and Gabrijela Kišiček. 2024. „Auditory arguments, advertising, and argumentation theory: Hitting sour notes or ringing true?“ Journal of Argumentation in Context 13 (2):177–201.Google Scholar
Hastings, Arthur C. 1962. A Reformulation of the Modes of Reasoning in Argumentation. Ph.D. dissertation. Northwestern University.
Jeong, Se-Hoon. 2008. “Visual Metaphor in Advertising: Is the Persuasive Effect Attributable to Visual Argumentation or Metaphorical Rhetoric?” Journal of Marketing Communications 14(1):59–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Ralph H. 2003. “Why ‘Visual Arguments’ Aren’t Arguments.” In Informal Logic @ 25 1. OSSA, ed. by Hans V. Hansen et al., 1–13. Windsor, ON: University of Windsor.Google Scholar
Kjeldsen, Jens E. 2012. “Pictorial Argumentation in Advertising: Visual Tropes and Figures as a Way of Creating Visual Argumentation.” In Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory, ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen, 239–255. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015a. “The Study of Visual and Multimodal Argumentation.” Argumentation 291:115–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015b. “The Rhetoric of Thick Representation: How Pictures Render the Importance and Strength of an Argument Salient.” Argumentation 291:197–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018. “Visual Rhetorical Argumentation.” Semiotica 2201:69–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kress, Gunther, and Theo van Leeuwen. 1996. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lürzer’s Archive. Volumes 1–61 (2018–2021) and Volumes 1–21 (2022). London: Lürzer International Limited.Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio, and Rosalice B. W. Souza Pinto. 2021. “Reconstructing Multimodal Arguments in Advertisements: Combining Pragmatics and Argumentation Theory.” Argumentation 351:141–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Donnell, Mick. 2019. “Continuing Issues in SFL.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, ed. by Geoff Thompson et al., 204–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pflaeging, Jana and Stöckl, Hartmut. 2021. “The Rhetoric of Multimodal Communication: Editorial.” Visual Communication 20 (3):319–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Phillips, Barbara J., and Edward F. McQuarrie. 2004. “Beyond Visual Metaphor: A New Typology of Visual Rhetoric in Advertising.” Marketing Theory 4 (1/2):113–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pollaroli, Chiara. 2013. “T(r)opical Patterns in Advertising.” OSSA Conference Archive 10 (141):1–12.Google Scholar
Popa, Eugen O. 2016. “We Have Yet to See the ‘Visual Argument’.” Multimodal Communication 5 (2):79–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ripley, M. Louise. 2008. “Argumentation Theorists Argue that an Ad is an Argument.” Argumentation 221:507–519. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rath Foley, Anna, and Monica Karlsson. 2021. “The Language of Non-Commercial Advertising: A Pragmatic Approach.” International Journal of Language Studies 15 (1):99–122.Google Scholar
Rigotti, Eddo, and Sara Greco. 2019. Inference in Argumentation: A Topics-Based Approach to Argument Schemes. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rocci, Andrea, Sabrina Mazzali-Lurati, and Chiara Pollaroli. 2018. “The Argumentative and Rhetorical Function of Multimodal Metonymy.” Semiotica 2201:123–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roque, Georges. 2012. “Visual Argumentation: A Further Reappraisal.” In Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory. ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen, 273–288. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roque, George. 2017. “Rhetoric, Argumentation, and Persuasion in a Multimodal Perspective.” In Multimodal Rhetoric and Argumentation in Media Genres, ed. by Assimakis Tseronis and Charles Forceville, 25–49. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rose, David. 2012. “Genre in the Sydney School.” In The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. by James P. Gee and Michael Handford, 209–225. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smith, Valerie J. 2007. “Aristotle’s Classical Enthymeme and the Visual Argumentation of the Twenty-First Century.” Argumentation and Advocacy 431:114–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stöckl, Hartmut. 2024. “Fresh Perspectives on Multimodal Argument Reconstruction.” Frontiers in Communication 91:1–6. ( DOI logo)Google Scholar
. 2023. “Rhetorik der sozialen Werbung. In Handbuch Werberhetorik, ed. by Nina Janich, Steffen Pappert, and Kersten S. Roth, 561–582. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. ( DOI logo)Google Scholar
. 2021. “Pixel Surgery and the Doctored Image: The Rhetorical Potential of Visual Compositing in Print Advertising.” In Empirical Multimodality Research: Methods, Evaluations, Implications, ed. by Jana Pflaeging, Janina Wildfeuer, and John A. Bateman, 187–209. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. ( DOI logo)Google Scholar
Stöckl, Hartmut and Pflaeging, Jana. 2022. “Multimodal Coherence Revisited: Notes on the Move from Theory to Data in Annotating Print Advertisements.” Frontiers in Communication 71:1–17 ( DOI logo).Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen E. 2008/1958. The Uses of Argument (updated ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tseronis, Assimakis. 2021. “From Visual Rhetoric to Multimodal Argumentation: Exploring the Rhetorical and Argumentative Relevance of Multimodal Figures on the Covers of the Economist.” Visual Communication 20 (3):374–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tseronis, Assimakis, and Charles Forceville (eds). 2017. Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in Media Genres. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tseronis, Assimakis, Ramy Younis, and Mehmet Ali Üzelgün. 2024. “A proposal for the evaluation of multimodal argumentation: Assessing reasonableness and effectiveness in environmental campaign posters.” Journal of Argumentation in Context 13 (2):289–314.Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H. 2018. Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016. “Identifying Argumentative Patterns: A Vital Step in the Development of Pragma-Dialectics.” Argumentation 301:1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Leeuwen, Theo. 2005. Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Van Rees, M. Agnès. 2001. “Argument Interpretation and Reconstruction.” In Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory, ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren, 165–199. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Wagemans, Jean H. M. 2023. “How to Identify an Argument Type? On the Hermeneutics of Persuasive Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 2031:117–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas, Christopher Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2008. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westberg, Gustav. 2021. “Affect as a Multimodal Practice.” Multimodality and Society 1 (1):20–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar