Article published in:Argumentative Style
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:1] 2021
► pp. 73–96
Mediators’ reframing as a constitutive element of a reconciliatory argumentative style
This paper shows that reframing of conflict can be considered as a constitutive element of a “reconciliatory argumentative style” (van Eemeren, 2019), which is typical of dispute mediators, whose aim is to steer parties towards the resolution of their conflict. On the basis of a systematic empirical analysis of mediation cases, we first show that reframing encompasses a change of issue, which may or may not be justified by arguments. Then, we show how it is functional to the three aspects of mediators’ strategic manoeuvring, being used consistently by mediators in their effort to help parties solve their conflict on the basis of reasonable discussion.
Keywords: strategic manoeuvring, argumentative style, reconciliatory style, dispute mediation, reframing
- 2.Theoretical positioning: Reframing and argumentative style
- 2.1A pragma-dialectical view of argumentative style
- 2.2Dispute mediation as a genre
- 2.3Reframing in mediation
- 3.1Empirical dataset
- 4.1Mediators’ reframing as argumentation
- 4.2Reframing as a constitutive element of a reconciliatory style
Published online: 04 February 2021
Bijnen, Emma van
Bijnen, Emma. van, and Sara Greco
Bush, Robert A. B., and Joseph P. Folger
Chan, Cecilia L. W., and Chi K. Law
Donohue, William A., Mike Allen & Nancy Burrell
Drake, Laura. E., and William A. Donohue
Eemeren, Frans H. van
Eemeren, F. H. van, and Grootendorst, R.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Rob Grootendorst, Sally Jackson, and Scott Jacobs
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Peter Houtlosser, and Francisca A. Snoeck Henkemans
Fillmore, Charles J.
Fisher, Roger, William Ury and Bruce Patton
(2018) “Designing dialogue: Argumentation as conflict management in social interaction.” Tranel 681: 7–15. Available open access at: http://www.unine.ch/files/live/sites/tranel/files/Tranel/68/7-15_Greco.pdf (last visited: April 2020).
Haaften, Ton van, and Leeuwen, Maarten van
Hoffman, David A.
Hoffmann, Michael H. G.
Jacobs, Scott, and Mark Aakhus
Janier, Mathilde, and Chris Reed
Jermini-Martinez Soria, Chiara, and Sara Greco
(2019) “Dispute mediators’ reframing as an argumentation competence.” In Proceedings of the ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, Amsterdam, 3–6 July 2018, ed. by Bart Garssen et al., 594–603. Available at: http://cf.hum.uva.nl/issa/ISSA_2018_proceedings.pdf
Jermini-Martinez Soria, Chiara
In preparation). Reframing as an argumentative competence in dispute mediation. PhD dissertation, USI – Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
(2013) Polylogical fallacies: Are there any? OSSA Conference Archive. 1041. Available at: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA10/papersandcommentaries/104
Putnam, Linda. L.
Putnam, Linda. L., and Majia Holmer
Ran, Yongping, and Linsen Zhao
Ran, Yongping, Zhao, Linsen, and Dániel Kádár
Rigotti, Eddo, and Sara Greco
Rocci, Andrea and Margherita Luciani
(1979) “Varieties of dispute processing.” In The Pound Conference: Perspectives on justice in the future. Proceedings of the national conference on the causes of popular dissatisfaction with the administration of justice, ed. by A. L. Lewin and R. R. Wheeler, 65–87. St. Paul (Minnesota): West Publishing.
Shmueli, Deborah F.