Reconstructing argumentative discourse

416 Pages·1993·1.57 MB·English

by  F. H. van Eemeren

Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse
title:
Studies in Rhetoric and Communication
author: Eemeren, F. H. van.
publisher: University of Alabama Press
isbn10 | asin: 0817306978
print isbn13: 9780817306977
ebook isbn13: 9780585188720
language: English
Persuasion (Rhetoric) , Discourse analysis,
subject
Speech acts (Linguistics)
publication date: 1993
lcc: P301.5.P47R43 1993eb
ddc: 808
Persuasion (Rhetoric) , Discourse analysis,
subject:
Speech acts (Linguistics)
Page i
Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse
Page ii
STUDIES IN RHETORIC AND COMMUNICATION
General Editors:
E. Culpepper Clark
Raymie E. McKerrow
David Zarefsky
Page iii
Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse
Frans H. van Eemeren,
Rob Grootendorst
Sally Jackson,
and Scott Jacobs
The University of Alabama Press Tuscaloosa and London
Page iv
Copyright © 1993
The University of Alabama Press
Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487-0380
All rights reserved
Manufactured in the United States of America
The paper on which this book is printed meets the minimum
requirements of American National Standard for Information Science-
Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-
1984.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Reconstructing argumentative discourse / Frans H. van Eemeren ... [et
al.].
p. cm.(Studies in rhetoric and communication)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-8173-0697-8
1. Persuasion (Rhetoric) 2. Discourse analysis. 3. Speech acts
(Linguistics) I. Eemeren, F. H. van. II. Series.
P301.5.P47R43 1993
808dc20 93-18082
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data available
Page v
Contents
Preface vii
1. Reconciling Descriptive and Normative Insights 1
Speech Act Rules
Interactional Principles of Cooperation and Alignment
Four Core Commitments in the Study of Argumentation
Speech Acts and the Four Core Commitments
2. A Starting Point for Normative Description 20
Five Components of the Study of Argumentation
An Ideal Model of Argumentative Discourse
Higher-Order Conditions
Ideal Model and Actual Practice
3. Principles and Procedures for Normative Reconstruction 37
Normative Reconstruction
Interpretive Problems in Reconstruction
Approaches to Analysis and Reconstruction
4. Dialectical Reconstruction 60
Reconstruction Transformations
An Extended Example
The Analytic Overview
Page vi
5. The Pragmatic Organization of Conversational 91
Argument
Normative and Naive Reconstruction
Virtual Standpoints and Disagreement Space
Hierarchical Organization of Standpoints
Felicity Conditions and "Issue Structure" in
Argumentation
Case Study: Responses to an Editorial Opinion
Conclusions
6. Mediation as Critical Discussion 117
Third-Party Dispute Mediation
Engineering Solutions in Discourse
Conclusions
7. Failures in Higher-Order Conditions in the Organization142
of Witnessing and Heckling Episodes
Fields of Argumentation
Witnessing and Heckling
Standpoints and Perspectives
Reflexive Structuring of Confrontation
Conclusions
8. Directions for Elaboration of the Model 170
Implications for Philosophical Concepts of
Reasonableness
Implications for Normative Models
Implications for Analytic Methods
Implications for Empirical Description
Implications for Practical Research
References 185
Index 193
Page vii
Preface
In contemporary argumentation research, there is an unfortunate
division between descriptive and critical work. Those approaching
argumentation theory from a social scientific perspective tend to think
of their work as "descriptive," and those approaching argumentation
theory from humanistic perspectives such as logic and rhetoric tend to
think of their work as "normative" or ''critical." Social scientific
approaches generally claim to be value-free. They generally portray
themselves as avoiding questions of how individuals in principle
should and should not argue in favor of simply asking how individuals
in fact do and do not argue. In contrast, critical approaches are often
more concerned with the properties of models of ideal argumentation
than with features of actual argumentative practice. They tend to
emphasize questions of how, ideally, individuals should and should
not argue, seeming to be generally uninterested in questions of how
individuals in fact do and do not argue.
Those on each side of the divide seem to regard the other side as so
different in purpose and approach as to be irrelevant to their own
concerns. Standing between these two approaches, we see much to be
gained from a recognition of the relationship between descriptive and
normative theory and much to be gained from their reconciliation
within a program of detailed empirical analysis.
To get a sense of what we have in mind, consider an excerpt from
Senator Edward Kennedy's nationally televised "Address to the
Page viii
People of Massachusetts" on July 25, 1969. In the speech, the senator
gives an account of his involvement in the drowning death of Mary Jo
Kopechne.
What is noticed as important about this text would likely depend
heavily on whether a descriptive or a critical approach is taken. A
descriptive approach would likely focus on the pragmatic structur-
Example 0.1
01On Chappaquiddick Island, off Martha's Vineyard, I
attended
02on Friday evening, July 18, a cookout I had encouraged
and
03helped sponsor for a devoted group of Kennedy campaign
04secretaries. When I left the party, around 11:15 , I
P.M.
05was accompanied by one of these girls, Miss Mary Jo
06Kopechne. Mary Jo was one of the most devoted members
of
07the staff of Senator Robert Kennedy. She worked for him
for
08four years and was broken up over his death. For this
09reason, and because she was such a gentle, kind, and
10idealistic person, all of us tried to help her feel that she
11still had a home with the Kennedy family. There is no
12truth, no truth whatever, to the widely circulated
13suspicions of immoral conduct that have been leveled at