Article published In:
Journal of Argumentation in ContextVol. 3:3 (2014) ► pp.259–286
What’s in a name
Journal titles in the field of epistemic research
We survey the disciplinary status and the research trends of argumentation studies. Our investigation combines the methods of a literature review and environmental scan. The latter consists in analysis of the linguistic features of journal titles, which we approach as a type of metacommunication. The results of our environmental scan suggest that the authors contributing to argumentation research envision it as a well-integrated field with a complex system of relations among the communities, agendas, methods, and venues involved in it. Yet we also found that the field is often seen as divided along the lines of binary oppositions between theory and its applications, as well as between theoretical and empirical research. We found that the field is increasingly turning to empirical, applied, and professional research, while the status of scholarly research is declining. Our analysis suggests that argumentation studies is developing a more sophisticated and tractable theory and methodology
References
Aarts, B
2008 English Syntax and Argumentation (3rd ed.). London: Palgrave Macmillan. 
Adams Smith, D.E
1984 “Medical Discourse: Aspects of Author’s Comment.” The ESP Journal 31: 25–36.
Afros, E., and C.F. Schryer
2009 “Promotional (meta)Discourse in Research Articles in Language and Literary Studies.” English for Specific Purposes 281: 58–68.
Aristotle
1984 “Nicomachean Ethics.” In (W.D. Ross, Trans.), The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation Vol. 21, 1729–1867. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (accessed 26 March, 2010 on InteLex database).
Barton, E.L
1993 “Evidentials, Argumentation, and Epistemological Stance.” College English 55 (7): 745–769.
Bazerman, C
1983 “Scientific Writing as a Social Act.” In New Essays in Technical and Scientific Communication Research Theory Practice, ed. by P.V. Anderson, R.J. Brockman, and C.R. Miller, 156–18. Farmingdale, NY: Baywood Publishing.
1985 “Physicists Reading Physics, Schema-Laden Purposes and Purpose-Laden Schema.” Written Communication 2 (1): 3–23.
1989 “Introduction: Rhetoricians on the Rhetoric of Science.” Science, Technology, and Human Values 14 (1): 3–6.
Fahnestock, J
1989 “Arguing in Different Forums: The Bering Crossover Controversy.” Science, Technology, and Human Values 14 (1): 26–42.
Bazerman, C., and R.A. De los Santos
2005 “Measuring Incommensurability: Are Toxicology and Ecotoxicology Blind to What the Other Sees?” In Rhetoric and Incommensurability, (Ed. and Intr.) R.A. Harris, 424–463. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.
Berlin, S.B
1990 “Dichotomous and Complex Thinking.” The Social Service Review 64 (1): 46–59.
Biber, D., E. Csomay, J.K. Jones, and C. Keck
2004 “A Corpus Linguistics Investigation of Vocabulary-based Discourse Units in University Registers.” In Applied Corpus Linguistics: A Multidimensional Approach, ed. by U. Connor, and T.A. Upton, 53–72. Amsterdam, NY: Rodopi.
Brown, J.D
2004 “Research Methods for Applied Linguistics: Scope, Characteristics, and Standards.” In The Handbook of Applied Linguistics, (Eds. and Intr.) A. Davies, and C. Elder, 476–500. Oxford, UK & Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Burke, K
1966 Language as Symbolic Action. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Busch-Lauer, I.A
1995 “Abstracts in German Medical Journals: A Linguistic Analysis.” Information Processing and Management 31 (5): 769–776.
2000 “Titles of English and German Research Papers in Medicine and Linguistics.” In Analysing Professional Genres, (Ed. and Intr.) A. Trosborg, 77–94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Butos, W.N., and R. Koppl
2003 “Science as a Spontaneous order: An Essay in the Economics of Science.” In The Evolution of Scientific Knowledge, ed. by H.S. Jensen, L.M. Richter, and M.T. Vendelø, 189–208. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Carter, R.A
1990 “When is a Report Not Report? Observations from Academic and Non-Academic Settings.” In The Writing Scholar: Studies in Academic Discourse, (Ed. and Intr.) W. Nash, 171–191. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Ceccarelli, L
2001 Shaping Science with Rhetoric: The Cases of Dobzhanski, Schrödinger, and Wilson. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Chan, C.S.C
2009 “Forging a Link Between Research and Pedagogy: A Holistic Framework for Evaluating Business English Materials.” English for Specific Purposes 28 (2): 125–136.
Crismore, A., and R. Farnsworth
1990 “Metadiscourse in Popular and Professional Science Discourse.” In The Writing Scholar: Studies in Academic Discourse, ed. by W. Nash, 118–136. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
De Haan, P., and K. van Esch
2004 “Towards an Instrument for the Assessment of the Development of Writing Skills.” In Applied Corpus Linguistics: A Multidimensional Approach, ed. by U. Connor, and T.A. Upton, 267–279. Amsterdam, NY: Rodopi.
Davies, A., and C. Elder
2004 “General Introduction: Applied Linguistics: Subject to Discipline?” In The Handbook of Applied Linguistics, 1–15. Oxford, UK & Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Fahnestock, J
1989 “Arguing in Different Forums: The Bering Crossover Controversy.” Science, Technology, and Human Values 14 (1): 26–42.
Fahnestock, J., and M. Secor
2002 “The Stasis in Scientific and Literary Argument.” In Teaching Argument in the Composition Course, ed. by T. Barnett, 58–73. Boston, NY: Bedford / St. Martin’s.
Forstater, M
2003 “Must Spontaneous Order be Unintended? Exploring the Possibilities for Consciously Enhancing Creative Discovery and Imaginative Problem-Solving.” In The Evolution of Scientific Knowledge, ed. by H.S. Jensen, L.M. Richter, and M.T. Vendelø, 189–208. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Fuller, S., and J.H Collier
2004 Philosophy, Rhetoric, and the End of Knowledge: A New Beginning for Science and Technology Studies. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gilbert, G.N
1976 “The Transformation of Research Findings into Scientific Knowledge.” Social Studies of Science 6 (3/4): 281–306.
Gilbert, M
1997 Coalescent Argumentation. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gieryn, T.F
1982 “Relativist/Constructivist Programmes in the Sociology of Science: Redundance and Retreat.” Social Studies of Science 121: 279–297.
Gladkova, O
2010 “The Identification of Epistemic Topoi in a Corpus of Biomedical Research Articles.” Unpublished dissertation, University of Waterloo.
Hacking, I
(ed) 1981 Scientific Revolutions. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
Harris, R.A
1991 “Rhetoric of Science.” College English 53 (3): 282–307.
1993 Linguistics Wars. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2002 “Knowing, Rhetoric, Science.” In Visions and Revisions: Continuity and Change in Rhetoric and Composition, ed. by J.D. Williams, 163 – 218. Carbondale, SI: Southern Illinois University Press.
2005 “Introduction.” In Rhetoric and Incommensurability, 3–149. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.
Hersh, W.R
2003 Information Retrieval: A Health and Biomedical Perspective. New York, NY: Springer Verlag.
Hill, S.S., B.F. Soppelsa, and G.K. West
1982 “Teaching ESL Students to Read and Write Experimental Research Papers.” TESOL Quarterly 161: 333–347.
Hyland, K
2005 Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London, UK: Continuum.
Ifantidu, E
2005 “The Semantics and Pragmatics of Metadiscourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 371: 1325–1353.
Isocrates
2000 “Antidosis.” In Isocrates I, (D. Mirhady, and Y.L. Too, Trans.), 201–264. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
King, L.S
1982 Medical Thinking: A Historical Preface. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kneale, W.C
1949 Probability and Induction. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Korobov, N
2001 “Reconciling Theory with Method: From Conversation Analysis and Critical Discourse Analysis to Positioning Analysis.” Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 2 (3). (accessed 4 April 2008 on [URL]).
Kuhn, T.S
1962 The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B., and S Woolgar
1986 Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Litman, D.J
1996 “Cue Phrase Classification Using Machine Learning.” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 51: 53–94.
Lunsford, A.A., K.H. Wilson, and R.A. Eberly
2009 The SAGE Handbook of Rhetorical Studies. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
MacMillan, K., and T. Koenig
2004 “The Wow Factor: Preconceptions and Expectations for Data Analysis Software in Qualitative Research.” Social Science Computer Review 22 (2): 179–186.
Malcolm, L
1987 “What Rules Govern Tense Usage in Scientific Articles?” English for Specific Purposes 61: 31–43.
Manning, C., and H. Schütze
2000 Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Myers, G
1990 Writing Biology. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Paul, D., D. Charney, and A. Kendall
2001 “Moving Beyond the Moment: Reception Studies in the Rhetoric of Science.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 15 (3): 372–399.
Perelman, C., and L. Olbrechts-Tyteka
1969 The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
Plato
1953 The Dialogues of Plato (B. Jowett, Trans. and Ed.) (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. (accessed 28 April 2010 on InteLex database).
1914 “The Republic.” In The Dialogues of Plato (B. Jowett, Trans. and Intr.), Vol. 21 [Online version]. New York, NY: Heart’s International Library. Hathi Trust.
Prelli, L.J
1989 The Rhetoric of Science: Inventing Scientific Discourse. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
Putnam, H
1981 “The ‘Corroboration’ of Theories.” In Scientific Revolution, ed. by I. Hacking, 60–79. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
Read, B., and B. Francis
2001 “Playing Safe: Undergraduate Essay Writing and the Presentation of Student ‘Voice’.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 22 (3): 387–399.
Salager-Meyer, F
1992 “A Text-type and Move Analysis Study of Verb Tense and Modality Distributions in Medical English Abstracts.” English for Specific Purposes 111: 93–113.
1994 “Hedges and Textual Communicative Function in Medical English Written Discourse.” English for Specific Purposes 13 (2): 149–170.
Salmon, W.C
1985 “Conflicting Conceptions of Scientific Explanation.” The Journal of Philosophy 82 (11): 651–654.
Schegloff, E.A
1997 “Whose Text? Whose Context?” Discourse and Society 81: 165–187.
Schryer, C.F
2000 “Walking a Fine Line: Writing Negative News Letters in an Insurance Company.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 141: 445–497.
Scriven, M
1975 “Causation as Explanation.” Noûs 9 (1): 3–16.
1987 “Probative Logic.” In Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline: Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986, Vol. 31 ed. by F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair, and C.W. Willard, 201–215. Dordrecht-Holland/Providence-USA: Foris.
Swales, J
1986 “Citation Analysis and Discourse Analysis.” Applied Linguistics 7 (1): 39–56.
1990 Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
2004 Research Genres: Exploration and Applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tindale, C.W
1999 Acts of Arguing: A Rhetorical Model of Argument. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Toulmin, S
1969 The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Van Eemeren, F.H., R. Grootendorst, F. Snoeck Henkemans, J.A. Blair, R.H. Johnson, E.C.W. Krabbe, C. Plantin, D.N. Walton, C.A. Willard, J. Woods, and D. Zarefsky
1996 Fundamentals of Argumentation theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Willard, C
1989 A Theory of Argumentation. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
Wilson, G., and C.G. Herndl
2007 “Boundary Objects as Rhetorical Exigence: Knowledge Mapping and Interdisciplinary Cooperation at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 21 (2): 129–154.
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Mehlenbacher, Ashley Rose, Randy Allen Harris & Chrysanne Di Marco
2017. Rhetorical figures as argument schemes – The proleptic suite. Argument & Computation 8:3 ► pp. 233 ff. 
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 may 2023. 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.