In this theoretical expose, it is argued that the notion of argumentative style is more encompassing and at the same time
more specific than the more familiar notion of linguistic style. According to van Eemeren, argumentative styles always have three
dimensions: the selection of standpoints, starting-points, arguments or other argumentative moves (topical choice dimension), the adjustment
of argumentative moves to the frame of reference and preferences of the listeners or readers (audience demand dimension), and the choice of
verbal or non-verbal means for advancing argumentative moves (presentational dimension). In argumentative discourse, the three dimensions of
argumentative style manifest themselves in the argumentative moves made in trying to resolve a difference of opinion (analytic overview),
the dialectical routes chosen in making these argumentative moves (argumentative pattern) and the strategic considerations brought to bear
in this endeavour (strategic design). Van Eemeren explains what this means in practice by discussing the distinctive features of the three
dimensions of two general categories of argumentative styles that can be regularly encountered, in one variant or other, in argumentative
discourse: detached argumentative styles and engaged argumentative styles.
Claes, P., & Hulsens, E. (2015). Groot retorisch woordenboek. Lexicon van stijlfiguren [Grand rhetorical dictionary. Lexicon of figures of style]. Nijmegen: van Tilt.
Eemeren, F. H. van. (2017). Argumentative patterns viewed from a pragma-dialectical perspective. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Prototypical argumentative patterns. Exploring the relationship between argumentative discourse and institutional context (pp. 7–29). Amsterdam-Philadelphia. John Benjamins. Argumentation in Context 11.
Eemeren, F. H. van. (2018). Argumentation theory. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Cham (Switzerland): Springer. Argumentation Library 33.
Eemeren, F. H. van. (2019). Argumentative style: A complex notion. Argumentation 33(2), 153–171.
Eemeren, F. H. van, & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum.
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetoric. Treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame-London: University of Notre Dame Press. [English transl. of Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1958). La nouvelle rhétorique. Traité de l’argumentation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.]
Wales, K. (1991). A dictionary of stylistics. London-New York: Longman. (1st ed. 1989.)
Cited by (12)
Cited by 12 other publications
AL Harrasi, Kothar Talib Sulaiman
2023. Reexamining feedback in the context of different rhetorical patterns of writing. Language Testing in Asia 13:1
van Eemeren, Frans & Bart Garssen
2023. A functional diversity of argumentative styles. Discourse Studies 25:4 ► pp. 510 ff.
Wu, Peng & Tian-bao Zhou
2023. Argumentative patterns based on pragmatic argumentation at China’s diplomatic press conferences. Discourse Studies 25:4 ► pp. 549 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 october 2024. 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.