Modality in Argumentation: A Semantic Investigation of the Role of Modalities in the Structure of Arguments with an Application to Italian Modal Expressions

497 Pages·2017·5.78 MB·English

by  Andrea Rocci (auth.)

Argumentation Library
Andrea Rocci
Modality in
Argumentation
A Semantic Investigation of the Role
of Modalities in the Structure of
Arguments with an Application to
Italian Modal Expressions
Argumentation Library
Volume 29
Series Editor
Frans H. van Eemeren, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Editorial Board
Bart Garssen, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Scott Jacobs, University of Illinois at Urbana-Campaign, USA
Erik C.W. Krabbe, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
John Woods, University of British Columbia, Canada
Since 1986 Springer, formerly Kluwer Academic Publishers, publishes the interna-
tional interdisciplinary journal Argumentation. This journal is a medium for distrib-
uting contributions to the study of argumentation from all schools of thought. From
a journal that published guest-edited issues devoted to specific themes, Argumentation
has developed into a regular journal providing a platform for discussing all theoreti-
cal aspects of argumentative discourse. Since 1999 the journal has an accompanying
book series consisting of volumes containing substantial contributions to the study
of argumentation. The Argumentation Library aims to be a high quality book series
consisting of monographs and edited volumes. It publishes texts offering important
theoretical insights in certain major characteristics of argumentative discourse in
order to inform the international community of argumentation theorists of recent
developments in the field. The insights concerned may pertain to the process of
argumentation but also to aspects of argumentative texts resulting from this process.
This means that books will be published not only on various types of argumentative
procedures, but also on the features of enthymematic argumentation, argumentation
structures, argumentation schemes and fallacies. Contributions to the series can be
made by scholars from a broad variety of disciplines, ranging from law to history,
from linguistics to theology, and from science to sociology. In particular, contribu-
tions are invited from argumentation theorists with a background in informal or
formal logic, modern or classical rhetoric, and discourse analysis or speech com-
munication. A prerequisite in all cases is that the contribution involved is original
and provides the forum of argumentation theorists with an exemplary specimen of
advanced scholarship. The Argumentation Library should enrich the study of argu-
mentation with insights that enhance its quality and constitute a fruitful starting
point for further research and application. All proposals will be carefully taken into
consideration by the editors. They are to be submitted in fourfold. If the prospects
for including a certain project in the series are realistic, the author(s) will be invited
to send at least three representative chapters of their manuscript for review to the
editors. In case the manuscript is then judged eligible for publication, the complete
manuscript will be reviewed by outside expert referees. Only then a final decision
can be taken concerning publication.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/5642
Andrea Rocci
Modality in Argumentation
A Semantic Investigation of the Role of
Modalities in the Structure of Arguments with
an Application to Italian Modal Expressions
Andrea Rocci
Istituto di Argomentazione,
Linguistica e Semiotica
Università della Svizzera italiana University
of Lugano
Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland
ISSN 1566-7650 ISSN 2215-1907 (electronic)
Argumentation Library
ISBN 978-94-024-1061-7 ISBN 978-94-024-1063-1 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-94-024-1063-1
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016963798
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature
The registered company is Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
The registered company address is: Van Godewijckstraat 30, 3311 GX Dordrecht, The Netherlands
Acknowledgments
This book would not have been started without the instigation of Eddo Rigotti, my
teacher and then colleague and friend. He introduced me to linguistics, to semantics,
and to the treasures of ancient and medieval thinking about language, logic, argu-
ment and rhetoric. And he bluntly told me that this book had to be written. He
instigated so many good things in my life that it will be hard to thank him enough in
this life. I’m happy to be able to do that for this book.
This book would never have been finished without the encouragement, wisdom,
and friendship of Frans van Eemeren. Without Frans I would not be doing
argumentation theory in the first place – and the field itself would be very different
without his monumental contribution. It took a long time to write this book, and
there were times when I was close to giving up on the project. Frans’ belief in the
project was a key factor in bringing it to completion.
My Lugano colleague Johanna Miecznikowski, a true linguist and one of the nic-
est persons I have ever met, is also to thank. She was a driving force in the research
projects from which this book is born and coauthor of important papers. But I thank
her even more for the many pleasant conversations on abstruse issues of modality
through these years. Our former PhD student Elena Musi came to share these con-
versations and, after moving to the USA, she is bringing forward the research pro-
gram at the heart of this book in ways I had not foreseen. Besides being an energetic
researcher and coauthor, Elena took the time to help me with the task of bringing
this ponderous manuscript, evolved through many drafts, to publishable form. When
Elena moved to the USA, Chiara Pollaroli, another former PhD student and research
collaborator, took up this task and was at my side in the latest editing stages. I am
enormously grateful for that.
This research would not have been possible without the generous support of the
Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) with the grants 100012-120740/1 and
141350.
The University of Lugano – also known by its official name of Università della
Svizzera italiana (USI) – is a lively interdisciplinary working environment where,
thanks to the initiative of Eddo Rigotti, it was possible to develop argumentation as
a field of research within the Faculty of Communication Sciences. I am grateful to
v
vi Acknowledgments
several Lugano colleagues and former colleagues, but particularly to Sara Greco
and Rudi Palmieri, with whom I have shared the development of the argumentative
adventure started by Eddo.
To my wife Alessandra and to my children Giovanni, Stefano, and Maria goes
my deepest gratitude and love, not because they endured the writing of this long
book with its troublesome impact on family life (which they did), but rather because
they are the warp and weft of a life where even such an endeavor can be
meaningful.
∗∗∗
Being the final report of about a decade of research, this book also incorporates
and updates results that have seen publication elsewhere. In particular, the initial
sections of Chap. 3 develop ideas initially presented in:
– Rocci, Andrea. 2008. Modality and its conversational backgrounds in the recon-
struction of argumentation. Argumentation 22: 165–189.
Similarly, the analyses of the Italian modal verbs proposed in Chap. 6 are
expanded and revised versions of those presented in previous publications. In par-
ticular, the chapter reproduces passages from:
– Rocci, Andrea. 2012. Modality and argumentative discourse relations: a study of
the Italian necessity modal dovere. Journal of Pragmatics 44(15): 2129–2149.
– Rocci, Andrea. 2013. Modal conversational backgrounds and evidential bases in
predictions: The view from the Italian modals. In Time: language, cognition &
Reality, eds. Kasia M. Jaszczolt, and Louis de Saussure, 128–153. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 1
1.1 Argumentation and Modality: Working Definitions .......................... 2
1.2 M odality and the Essential Structure of Arguments: A First
Reconnaissance .................................................................................. 4
1.3 Aims of the Study .............................................................................. 8
1.4 A Twofold Research Strategy ............................................................ 12
1.5 A Focus on Italian Linguistic Structures and 
on Contextualized Discourse Data ..................................................... 16
1.6 W hat This Book Is Not About ........................................................... 17
1.6.1 This Book Is Not About Modal Logic ................................... 18
1.6.2 This Book Is Not About Non-demonstrative
and Non- deductive Reasoning ............................................... 23
1.7 S tructure of the Volume and Reading Guide ..................................... 26
References ................................................................................................... 29
2 Meaning and Argumentation ................................................................... 33
2.1 The Viewpoint of Argumentation Theory .......................................... 33
2.1.1 Argumentation Theory Is Normative ..................................... 34
2.1.2 Dialectic and Normative Pragmatics ..................................... 36
2.1.3 The Inferential Dimension ..................................................... 42
2.2 Argumentative Analysis ..................................................................... 44
2.2.1 Analysis as a Precondition of Critical Evaluation ................. 44
2.2.2 What an Argumentative Analysis Needs to Capture .............. 45
2.2.3 Using AMT to Reconstruct the Inferential
Configuration of Enthymematic Arguments .......................... 48
2.3 T he Place of Pragmatic and Semantic Considerations
in the Analysis of Argumentative Discourse ..................................... 62
2.3.1 The Interplay of Meaning Analysis and Argument
Criticism: An Illustration ....................................................... 62
2.3.2 Pragmatics and Semantics in Argumentative
Reconstruction ....................................................................... 67
vii
viii Contents
2.3.3 Semantic Types of the Propositions Functioning
as Standpoints and as Premises .............................................. 73
2.3.4 Congruity Theory ................................................................... 82
2.4 T he Sociopragmatic Dimension: Argumentation in Context ............. 95
References ................................................................................................... 98
3 Three Views of Modality in Toulmin ....................................................... 105
3.1 T oulmin and Modality Beyond the Toulmin Model .......................... 105
3.1.1 The Place of Modality in Stephen Toulmin’s
The Uses of Argument ............................................................ 106
3.1.2 The Uses of Toulmin’s Views in This Book .......................... 107
3.2 T he First View: Modal Forces, Criteria and Fields
of Argument ....................................................................................... 108
3.2.1 Modal Forces and the Phases of an Argument ...................... 108
3.2.2 From Modal Criteria to Fields of Argument
and Logical Types .................................................................. 112
3.2.3 Cannot: An Early Analysis of Modal
Context-Dependency ............................................................. 117
3.2.4 First Interlude: Salvaging the Pragmatic Account
of the Modals Through the Polyphony
and Delocutivity Route .......................................................... 124
3.2.5 On the Irrelevance of Logical Modalities .............................. 125
3.3 T he Second View: Probability and Speech Acts ................................ 131
3.3.1 Probably and Guarded Commitment ..................................... 131
3.3.2 Ennis vs. Freeman on Toulmin’s Probably ............................ 138
3.3.3 Second Interlude: Modality as Detached
from the Propositional Content .............................................. 146
3.4 T he Third View: Modal Qualifiers and the Layout
of Arguments ..................................................................................... 157
3.4.1 The Toulmin Model ............................................................... 157
3.4.2 Third Interlude: The Modal Qualifier and the Place
of Modality in the Logical Tradition ..................................... 161
3.4.3 Modal Qualifiers and Warrants .............................................. 171
3.4.4 Modal Qualifiers and Rebuttals ............................................. 173
3.5 T oulmin’s Three Takes on Modality and Their Legacy
in Contemporary Argumentation Theory ........................................... 181
3.5.1 Addressing the Toulminian Research Questions ................... 181
3.5.2 The Narrow View: Argumentatively Relevant
Modals Are Epistemic Qualifiers ........................................... 182
3.5.3 The Epistemic Qualification of Standpoints
in Pragma-Dialectics .............................................................. 185
3.5.4 Epistemic Qualifiers as Presentational Devices ..................... 187
3.5.5 Beyond Epistemic Scales ....................................................... 191
References ................................................................................................... 192
Contents ix
4 Relative Modality and Argumentation ................................................... 197
4.1 M odal Semantics and Its Argumentative Implications ...................... 197
4.2 T he Theory of Relative Modality: From Possible
Worlds to Discourse Structure ........................................................... 199
4.2.1 Alternatives and Domains of Quantification.......................... 199
4.2.2 Modals Are Relational ........................................................... 202
4.2.3 Modals Are Context-Dependent Expressions
Whose Valence Is Saturated in Context ................................. 203
4.2.4 Modal Restrictors Are ad hoc and Vague .............................. 205
4.2.5 Interlude: Context Dependency in Language ........................ 208
4.2.6 The Analysis of Restrictors: From Frame
Semantics to Premise Semantics ........................................... 211
4.2.7 Possibility and Necessity as Relative
to a Conversational Background ............................................ 215
4.2.8 Relative Modality and Conditionals ...................................... 222
4.2.9 Relative Modality, Anaphora and Discourse Relations ......... 229
4.3 A rgumentative Implications of Relative Modality ............................ 233
4.3.1 Reconstructing Modalities as Part of the Propositional
Content of Standpoints .......................................................... 233
4.3.2 Quantifiers as Argumentative Indicators:
Revisiting Snoeck Henkemans’ Analysis .............................. 234
4.3.3 Propositional Modals as Argumentative Indicators
of Argumentation Structure and Beyond ............................... 240
4.3.4 Putting Order into the Conversational Background ............... 249
4.3.5 Divergence, Vagueness and Shifts in Conversational
Backgrounds .......................................................................... 254
4.3.6 Modals as Indicators of Argumentative
Discourse Relations ............................................................... 258
References ................................................................................................... 271
5 Types of Conversational Backgrounds and Arguments ........................ 275
5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................ 275
5.2 T owards a Typology of Conversational Backgrounds ....................... 277
5.2.1 Types of Linguistic Manifestations
of the Conversational Background ......................................... 277
5.2.2 Criteria for a Typology of Conversational Backgrounds ....... 280
5.2.3 Linguistic-Semantic Classifications of Modal Flavors .......... 284
5.2.4 A classification Balancing Linguistic
and Logical Criteria ............................................................... 291
5.3 T ypes of Conversational Backgrounds and Arguments ..................... 308
5.3.1 Alethic Conversational Backgrounds and Arguments ........... 308
5.3.2 Deontic Conversational Backgrounds and Arguments .......... 320
5.3.3 The Anankastic Modalities: Necessary Conditions
and Telos ................................................................................ 346
5.3.4 Epistemic Conversational Backgrounds in Arguments ......... 351
References ................................................................................................... 365