Document Type

Paper

Start Date

15-5-1999 9:00 AM

End Date

17-5-1999 5:00 PM

Abstract

Analyzing argumentative discourse is not a an activity exclusively reserved for scholars in argumentation theory, rhetoric, and philosophy of language. This paper proposes that the faculty of analyzing argument structure is a basic precondition of und erstanding one another in argumentational interactions. Based on an examination of televised debates, it is demonstrated how participants employ quasi-logical schemata to reconstruct implicit elements in other participants's argument structures for purpo ses of clarification and criticism. This very descriptive approach entrusts, as it were, the actual argument analysis to the language users themselves.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Response to Submission

James Wong, Commentary on N M Nielsen

Reader's Reactions

Jill LeBlanc, Commentary on Novak (May 1999)

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 
May 15th, 9:00 AM May 17th, 5:00 PM

Mutual reconstruction of arguments in dialogue

Analyzing argumentative discourse is not a an activity exclusively reserved for scholars in argumentation theory, rhetoric, and philosophy of language. This paper proposes that the faculty of analyzing argument structure is a basic precondition of und erstanding one another in argumentational interactions. Based on an examination of televised debates, it is demonstrated how participants employ quasi-logical schemata to reconstruct implicit elements in other participants's argument structures for purpo ses of clarification and criticism. This very descriptive approach entrusts, as it were, the actual argument analysis to the language users themselves.