http://hdl.handle.net/11089/32214 Mon, 06 Apr 2026 00:38:41 GMT 2026-04-06T00:38:41Z https://dspace.uni.lodz.pl:443/xmlui/bitstream/id/c167f6c6-8186-4982-93da-efac7455a1ca/ http://hdl.handle.net/11089/32214 http://hdl.handle.net/11089/33793 Language and Argument: a Review of the Field Hinton, Martin This paper has a dual purpose: it both seeks to introduce the other works in this issue by illustrating how they are related to the field of argumentation as a whole, and to make clear the tremendous range of research currently being carried out by argumentation theorists which is concerned with the interaction and inter-reliance of language and argument. After a brief introduction to the development of the field of argumentation, as many as eight language-based approaches to the study of argument are identified, taking as their perspective: rhetoric, argument structure, argument as act, discourse analysis, corpus methods, emotive argument, and narrative argument. The conclusion makes it clear that these branches of study are all themselves interconnected and that it is the fusion of methodologies and theory from linguistics and the philosophical study of argument which lends this area of research its dynamism. Sat, 30 Mar 2019 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11089/33793 2019-03-30T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11089/33792 Marriage, Liberty and Constitution: a Corpusassisted Study of Value-Laden Words in Legal Argumentation Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław This paper investigates the interplay between judicial argumentation and evaluative or emotive language identified in two US Supreme Court landmark cases on the right of same-sex couples to marry. The analysis of both majority and dissenting opinions leads to two main observations. First, marriage and liberty are indeed emotive words and they represent two major sites of contention between the concurring and dissenting judges. Second, there are important differences within the argumentative strategies employed by the judges. While (re)defining the concepts remains the major argumentative goal for both types of opinion, the majority opinions tacitly integrate the redefined concept of marriage into their argumentation. It is the dissenting opinions that explicitly raise the issue of (re)definition in order to defend and retain the original sense of marriage. Sat, 30 Mar 2019 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11089/33792 2019-03-30T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11089/33791 Four Basic Argument Forms Wagemans, Jean H. M. This paper provides a theoretical rationale for distinguishing four basic argument forms. On the basis of a survey of classical and contemporary definitions of argument, a set of assumptions is formulated regarding the linguistic and pragmatic aspects of arguments. It is demonstrated how these assumptions yield four different argument forms: (1) first-order predicate arguments, (2) first-order subject arguments, (3) second-order subject arguments, and (4) second-order predicate arguments. These argument forms are then further described and illustrated by means of concrete examples, and it is explained how they are visually represented in the Periodic Table of Arguments. Sat, 30 Mar 2019 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11089/33791 2019-03-30T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11089/33790 Confrontational Argumentative Strategies in the Discourse of Foreign Policy Experts Allani, Samira The aim of this study is to explore the discursive practices of foreign policy experts. While policy decisions involving war and peace keep people alarmed all over the globe, most of these decisions are shaped by policy experts who work on influencing public opinion through the media (Manheim, 2011). This study adopts a critical discursive stance and uses argumentation analysis to examine the ideological backdrop to the discourse of thirty opinion articles authored by American foreign policy experts in print media. Drawing on the Pragma-dialectical method of augmentation analysis (van Eemeren and Grootendorst, 2004), and more particularly on its notion of strategic maneuvering, the analysis examines the confrontational strategies used by this group of experts and attempts to determine the rhetorical goals pursued by these strategic maneuvers. Sat, 30 Mar 2019 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11089/33790 2019-03-30T00:00:00Z