Article published in:
Environmental Argumentation
Edited by Marcin Lewiński and Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1] 2019
► pp. 112135
References

References

Aakhus, Mark
2017 “The Communicative Work of Organizations in Shaping Argumentative Realities”. Philosophy & Technology, 30(2): 191–208. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aakhus, Mark & Marcin Lewiński
2017Advancing polylogical analysis of large-scale argumentation: Disagreement management in the fracking controversy. Argumentation, 31(1), 179–207. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aakhus, Mark, Paul Ziek and Punit Dadlani
2013 “Argumentation in large, complex practices”. In Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argument 11 (pp. 1–15). Windsor, ON.Google Scholar
Cano-Basave, Amparo Elizabeth and Yulan He
2016 “A study of the impact of persuasive argumentation in political debates”. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 1405–1413.Google Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and James N. Druckman
2007 “Framing theory.” Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 10: 103–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cox, J. Robert
2010Beyond frames: Recovering the strategic in climate communication. Environmental Communication, 4(1): 122–133. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Das, Dipanjan, Nathan Schneider, Desai Chen, and Noah A. Smith
2010 “SEMAFOR 1.0: A probabilistic frame-semantic parser.” Language Technologies Institute, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
Entman, Robert M.
1993Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of communication, 43(4): 51–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Isabela
2019 “Deontic power and institutional contexts: The impact of institutional design on deliberation and decision-making in the UK fracking debate”. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8(1).Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J.
1976Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 280(1): 20–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gao, Huiji, Jalal Mahmud, Jilin Chen, Jeffrey Nichols, and Michelle X. Zhou
2014 “Modeling User Attitude toward Controversial Topics in Online Social Media.” In ICWSM.Google Scholar
Görlach, Manfred
2003English Words Abroad. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, John J.
1982Discourse strategies. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hedding, Kylah J.
2017Sources and Framing of Fracking: A Content Analysis of Newspaper Coverage in North Carolina, New York, and Pennsylvania, Environmental Communication 11(3): 370–385. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hymes, Dell
1964A perspective for linguistic anthropology. Voice of America. Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Jackson, Sally
2008 “Black box arguments.” Argumentation 22 (3): 437. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 “Design thinking in argumentation theory and practice.” Argumentation 29(3): 243–263. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, Scott, and Sally Jackson
1982 “Argument as a natural category: The routine grounds for arguing in conversation.” Western Journal of Communication (includes Communication Reports) 45(2): 118–132.Google Scholar
Kline, Susan L.
1979 “Toward a contemporary linguistic interpretation of the concept of stasis.” Argumentation and Advocacy 16 (2): 95–103. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George
2010Why it matters how we frame the environment. Environmental Communication, 4(1): 70–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lewiński, Marcin, and Mark Aakhus
2014Argumentative polylogues in a dialectical framework: A methodological inquiry. Argumentation, 28(2): 161–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moens, Marie-Francine
2017 “Argumentation mining: How can a machine acquire common sense and world knowledge?.” Argument & Computation: 1–14.Google Scholar
Musi, Elena
2016 “Strategies of objectification in opinion articles: the case of evidentials.” In Proceedings of the OSSA Conference ‘Argumentation, Objectivity and Bias’, Windsor 18th-21th May 2016.Google Scholar
Musi, Elena, and Mark Aakhus
2018 “Discovering Argumentative Patterns in Energy Polylogues: A Macroscope for Argument Mining.” Argumentation, 32(3): 397–430.Google Scholar
Olive, Andrea, Ashlie B. Delshad
2017Fracking and Framing: A Comparative Analysis of Media Coverage of Hydraulic Fracturing in Canadian and US Newspapers. Environmental Communication 11(6): 784–799. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pang, Bo and Lillian Lee
2008Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, 2(1–2): 1–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Plantin, Christian
2010 “Les instruments de structuration des séquences argumentatives.” Verbum 22(1): 31–51.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, James
1991 “The generative lexicon.” Computational linguistics 17 (4): 409–441.Google Scholar
Saint-Dizier, Patrick and Manfred Stede
2017 “Knowledge-driven argument mining based on the qualia structure.” Argument & Computation: 1–18.Google Scholar
Saint-Dizier, Patrick
2017 “Using Question-Answering Techniques to Implement a Knowledge-Driven Argument Mining Approach.” In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Argument Mining, 85–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Geoff, and Ye Yiyun
1991 “Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers.” Applied linguistics 12: 365–382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H., and Rob Grootendorst
2004A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Vol. 14. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H., R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson, and S. Jacobs
1993Reconstructing argumentative communication. University of Alabama Press: Tuscaloosa, AL.Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H., Peter Houtlosser, and A. F. Snoeck Henkemans
2007Argumentative indicators in discourse: A pragma-dialectical study. Vol. 12. Springer Science & Business Media. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Viet-An Nguyen, Jordan Boyd-Graber, and Philip Resnik
2013Lexical and hierarchical topic regression. In Proc. of NIPS.Google Scholar
Viet-An Nguyen, Jordan Boyd-Graber, Philip Resnik, and Kristina Miler
2015Tea party in the house: A hierarchical ideal point topic model and its application to Republican legislators in the 112th congress. In Proc. of ACL.Google Scholar
Walker, Marilyn A., Pranav Anand, Robert Abbott, and Ricky Grant
2012 “Stance classification using dialogic properties of persuasion”. In Proceedings of the 2012 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 592–596.Google Scholar
Xie, Boyi, Rebecca J. Passonneau, Leon Wu, and Germán G. Creamer
2013 “Semantic frames to predict stock price movement.” In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 873–883.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Budzynska, Katarzyna, Marcin Koszowy & Martín Pereira-Fariña
2021. Associating Ethos with Objects: Reasoning from Character of Public Figures to Actions in the World. Argumentation Crossref logo
Fairclough, Isabela
2019. Deontic power and institutional contexts. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 136 ff. Crossref logo
Goodwin, Jean
2019. Sophistical refutations in the climate change debates. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 40 ff. Crossref logo
Lewiński, Marcin & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
2019. Environmental argumentation. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Rodrigues, Soledade, Marcin Lewiński & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
2019. Environmental manifestoes. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 12 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 september 2021. 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.