Cover not available
Review published In:
Pragmatics & Cognition
Vol. 17:2 (2009) ► pp.464–471
Book review

Douglas Walton. Dialog Theory for Critical Argumentation
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2007. xviii + 307 pp. ISBN 978 90 272 1885 8Hardcover 978 90 272 9200 1e-Book

Reviewed by
| University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland
Published online: 18 August 2009
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.17.2.14sau
References
Bach, K.
1994 “Converzational impliciture”. Mind and Language 91: 124–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bench-Capon, T.
2002 “Agreeing to differ: Modelling persuasive dialogue between parties with different values”. Informal logic 221: 231–245.Google Scholar
Brown, P. and Levinson, S.
1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H. and Grootendorst, R.
1996 Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, F. H.
(ed) 2002 Advances in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P.
1975 “Logic and converzation”. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41–58.Google Scholar
Hamblin, C. L.
1970 Fallacies. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
1971 “Mathematical models of dialogue”. Theoria 371: 130–155. DOI logo DOI logoGoogle Scholar
James, W.
1979 [1907] Pragmatism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lascarides, A. and Asher, N.
1993 “Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and commonsense entailment”. Linguistics and Philosophy 161: 437–493. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, G.
1983 Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Popper, K.
1963 Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shannon, C. and Weaver, W.
1972 The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.
1995 [1986] Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar