CHARACTERISTICS OF ARGUMENTATIVE DISCOURSE

ABSTRACT
The project Characteristics of Argumentative Discourse deals with the tools provided for the analysis of argumentative texts and discourse by

'pragmatic' characteristics. It focuses on those linguistic elements in a reconstruction that are relevant to making an adequate analytic overview of the

discourse. Starting from the assumption that all speech acts playing a part in argumentative discourse can be reconstructed as part of an attempt at

resolving a difference of opinion, the project concentrates on verbal moves which can play a constructive role in the consecutive stages of a critical

discussion. In this endeavour, insight from speech act theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis and other branches of pragma-linguistics are

explored which can be helpful in making a systematic inventory of the means used to indicate the communicative and interactional functions of

argumentative moves. In our broad conception of this notion, indicators of argumentative moves or, for short, argumentative indicators, are words,

expressions or other signs which can serve as indicators of moves and relations between moves that are relevant to resolving a difference of opinion

by means of a critical discussion. The aims of the project are to make a systematic inventory of potential verbal indicators, to classify them in terms

of argumentative moves, and to identify the conditions that have to be fulfilled so that a certain verbal expression can serve as an indicator of a

specific argumentative move. The scope of the project is not restricted to the well-known relational indicators of argumentation and standpoints in the

narrow sense, such as 'for' and 'therefore,' and argumentative indicators in the broad sense, such as 'my reasons for this are,' but extends to indicators

of other important elements of argumentative discourse, such as antagonism, concessions, rebuttals, counterarguments, and relations between

arguments. Since the model for critical discussion specifies the moves that can play a constructive role in the various stages of the resolution process,

it constitutes an appropriate theoretical framework for classifying the indicators of argumentative language use. For each stage, the investigation will

identify which expressions are available in ordinary language for indicating the moves pertinent to the resolution process in the stage concerned and

it will be specified which kind of information is conveyed by the use of a particular indicator. Also formulated are the conditions that need to be

fulfilled in order to justify the interpretation of the use of a certain verbal expression as an indicator of a specific discussion move. Important

categories of indicators consist of argumentative 'connectors' that provide some extra information about the structure of the argumentation, such as

'incidentally,' 'in addition' and 'since because,' or about the relative weight of arguments, such as 'even' and 'let alone,' or about their oppositional

character, such as 'nevertheless' and 'still.' Attention is also paid to the question of how a textual analysis based on the interpretation of the use of

certain indicators can be supported by contextual and other information. The problems arising from the absence of any specific indicator, which may

lead to an appeal to so-called 'maximal strategies' motivated by the theoretical background of the analysis, are also investigated. A special topic of

attention in this research project will be the use of the argumentative move known as the technique of dissociation. In this inquiry, dissociation is

given the broad interpretation of breaking up an existing conceptual unity for argumentative purposes by making a terminological differentiation. The

main questions asked are what the verbal indicators are by which dissociation can be recognized in the discourse, which forms dissociation may take

in practice, and which pragmatic functions it may serve.

https://books.google.tn/books?id=SaOfcsyWudAC&pg=PA4&lpg=PA4&dq=features+of+argumentative+discourse&
=bl&ots=XDrlYClwI7&sig=3T4g9VuXF_Uwe0TsRwEllN-
Anb4&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQ6ej9xLnPAhWFWRQKHekfA00Q6AEIYjAH#v=onepage&q
ures%20of%20argumentative%20discourse&f=false

https://books.google.tn/books?id=H6Wk9I5TsI0C&pg=PR8&lpg=PR8&dq=characteristics+of+argumentative+discou
ource=bl&ots=TOcYi8j4JO&sig=aBYhA-
iOl5tB2Jjbfqneh6E9Vjo&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwji1fLJybnPAhVBtBQKHVEpC6IQ6AEIWDA
nepage&q=characteristics%20of%20argumentative%20discourse&f=false