Comparing the Argumentum Model of Topics to Other Contemporary Approaches to Argument Schemes: The Procedural and Material Components
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Bach, E. 1981. On time, tense and aspect: An essay in English metaphysics. In Radical pragmatics, ed. P. Cole, 63–81. NY: Academic Press.
Barth, E.M., and E.C.W. Krabbe. 1982. From axiom to dialogue. A philosophical study of logics and argumentation. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.
Bochenski, I.M. (ed.). 1947. Petri Hispani Summulae logicales. Torino: Marietti.
Braet, A.C. 2005. The common topic in Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Precursor of the argumentation scheme. Argumentation 19(1): 65–83.
Christopher Guerra, S. 2008. Themen, Thesen und Argumente zur Position des Italienischen in der viersprachigen Schweiz. Studies in Communication Sciences 8(1): 135–159.
De Pater, W.A. 1965. Les topiques d’Aristote et la dialectique platonicienne. Thomasstudien 19. Fribourg: Paulusverlag.
Epstein, R.L. 2001. Predicate logic. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
Filimon, I.A. 2009. Kyosei—an example of cultural keyword argumentatively exploited in corporate reporting discourse. Studies in Communication Sciences 9(2): 131–152.
Garssen, B. 2001. Argument schemes. In Crucial concepts in argumentation theory, ed. F.H. van Eemeren, 81–99. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
Garssen, B. 2009. Comparing the incomparable: Figurative analogies in a dialectical testing procedure. In Pondering on problems of argumentation, ed. F.H. van Eemeren, and B. Garssen, 133–140. Springer: New York.
Gatti, M.C. 2000. La negazione fra semantica e pragmatica. Milano: ISU.
Greco Morasso, S. 2009. Argumentative and other communicative strategies of the mediation practice, PhD dissertation, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, CH.
Green-Pedersen, N.J. 1984. The tradition of topics in the middle ages. The commentaries on Aristotle’s and Boethius’ topics. München, Wien: Philosophia Verlag.
Hamblin, C. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen.
Hastings, A.C. 1962. A reformulation of the modes of reasoning in argumentation. PhD dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
Hughes, G.E., and M.J. Cresswell. 1996. A new introduction to modal logic. London, New York: Routledge.
Jackendoff, R. 1983. Semantics and cognition. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jackendoff, R. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Kienpointner, M. 1992. Alltagslogik. Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern. Stuttgart, Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.
Kienpointner, M. 1997. On the art of finding arguments: What ancient and modern masters of invention have to tell us about the ‘Ars inveniendi’. Argumentation 11(2): 225–236.
Klima, G. 2002. English translation of I. Buridani Summulae de dialectica. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Layman, C.S. 2002. The power of logic, 2nd ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Palmieri, R. 2009. Regaining trust through argumentation in the context of the current financial-economic crisis. Studies in Communication Sciences 9(2): 59–78.
Perelman, C., and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1958. Traité de l’argumentation: La nouvelle rhétorique, 5th ed. Bruxelles: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles.
Reinhardt, T. 2003. Marcus Tullius Cicero, Topica. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rigotti, E. 2006. Relevance of context-bound loci to topical potential in the argumentation stage. Argumentation 20(4): 519–540.
Rigotti, E., and S. Greco Morasso. 2006. Topics: the argument generator. In Argumentation for financial communication, Argumentum eLearning module, www.argumentum.ch .
Rigotti, E., and A. Rocci. 2006. Towards a definition of communication context. Foundations of an interdisciplinary approach to communication. In The Communication sciences as a multidisciplinary enterprise, ed. M. Colombetti, 155–180. Studies in Communication Sciences 6 (2), Anniversary issue.
Rigotti, E. 2008. ‘Locus a causa finali’. In Proceedings of the IADA Workshop Word meaning in argumentative dialogue. Homage to Sorin Stati, ed. G. Gobber, S. Cantarini, S. Cigada, M. C. Gatti and S. Gilardoni. Special issue of L’analisi linguistica e letteraria XVI 2: 559–576.
Rigotti, E. 2009. Whether and how classical topics can be revived in the contemporary theory of argumentation. In Pondering on problems of argumentation, eds. F. H. van Eemeren, and B. Garssen, 157–178. Op. cit.
Rigotti, E., and S. Greco Morasso. 2009. Argumentation as object of interest and as social and cultural resource. In Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices, ed. A.N. Perret-Clermont, and N. Müller-Mirza, 9–66. New York: Springer.
Rigotti, E., and A. Rocci. 2001. Sens–non-sens–contresens. Tentative d’une définition explicative. Studies in Communication Sciences 1(2): 45–80.
Rocci, A. 2006. Pragmatic inference and argumentation in intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics 3(4): 409–442.
Rocci, A. 2008. Modality and its conversational backgrounds in the reconstruction of argumentation. Argumentation 22(2): 165–189.
Ross, W.D. (ed.). 1958. Aristotelis Topica et Sophistici Elenchi. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Searle, J. 1995. The construction of social reality. N.Y.: Free Press.
Tardini, S. 1997. L’entimema nella struttura logica del linguaggio. L’analisi linguistica e letteraria 2: 419–440.
Toulmin, S. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, S., R. Rieke, and A. Janik. 1984. An introduction to reasoning. New York: Macmillan.
Van Eemeren, F.H., and B. Garssen. 2009. Problems of argumentation: An introduction. In Pondering on problems of argumentation. Twenty essays on theoretical issues, ed. F.H. van Eemeren, and B. Garssen, xi–xxi. New York: Springer.
Van Eemeren, F.H., and R. Grootendorst. 1984. Speech acts in argumentative discussions. Dodrecht, NL, Cinnamon, USA: Foris.
Van Eemeren, F.H., and R. Grootendorst. 1992. Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale (NJ) etc.: Erlbaum.
Van Eemeren, F.H., and R. Grootendorst. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical account. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Eemeren, F.H., and P. Houtlosser. 2002. Strategic manoeuvring with the burden of proof. In Advances in Pragma-dialectics, ed. F.H. van Eemeren, 13–28. Amsterdam, Newport News, VA): Sic Sat/Vale Press.
Van Eemeren, F. H. van, and R. Grootendorst. 1999. The fallacies of composition and division. In J.F.A.K.: Essays dedicated to Johan van Benthem on the occasion of his 50th birthday [CD-ROM], ed. J. Gerbrandy, M. Marx, M. de Rijke, and Y. Venema. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. A recent revised version has been published in: van Eemeren, F. H., and B. Garssen. 2009. The fallacies of composition and division revisited. Cogency 1(1): 23–42.
Van Eemeren, F.H., R. Grootendorst, and A.F. Snoeck-Henkemans. 2002. Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Van Eemeren, F.H., R. Grootendorst, and A.F. Snoeck-Henkemans. 2007. Argumentative indicators in discourse: A pragma-dialectical study. New York: Springer.
Walton, D. 2005. How to evaluate argumentation using schemes, diagrams, critical questions and dialogues. In Argumentation in dialogic interaction, eds. M. Dascal, F. H. van Eemeren, E. Rigotti, S. Stati, and A. Rocci. Special issue of Studies in Communication Sciences: 51–74.
Walton, D., and F. Macagno. 2009. Argument from analogy in law, the classical tradition, and recent theories. Philosophy and Rhetoric 42(2): 154–182.
Walton, D., C. Reed, and F. Macagno. 2008. Argumentation schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Whately, R. 1946/1963. Elements of rhetoric, ed. D. Ehninger. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Whorf, C. (1997) [1956]. Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, ed. J. B. Carrol. Cambridge: Technology Press of MIT.