Conversation, relevance, and argumentation

Argumentation 3 (4):385-393 (1989)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper deals with the explanation the maxim of relevance provides for the way utterances in argumentative discourse follow each other in an orderly and coherent fashion. Several senses are distinguished in which utterances can be considered relevant. It is argued that an utterance can be considered relevant as an interactional act, as an illocutionary act, as a propositional act, and as an elocutionary act. These four kinds of relevance manifest the rational organization of discourse, which is aimed at bringing about mutual alignment between the participants, enabling them jointly to work out certain interactional outcomes that are acceptable to both of them.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,705

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Conversation, relevance, and argumentation.M. Agnes Rees - 1989 - Argumentation 3 (4):385-393.
Relevance.David Hitchcock - 1992 - Argumentation 6 (2):251-270.
Apocalyptic relevance.John Woods - 1992 - Argumentation 6 (2):189-202.
Trust, relevance, and arguments.Fabio Paglieri & Cristiano Castelfranchi - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):216-236.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-17

Downloads
1 (#1,908,715)

6 months
1 (#1,501,909)

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references