Abstract
The paper reacts against the strict separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches to argumentation and argues that argumentative discourse can be analyzed and evaluated more adequately if the two are systematically combined. Such an integrated approach makes it possible to show how the opportunities available in each of the dialectical stages of a critical discussion have been used strategically to further the rhetorical aims of the speaker or writer. The approach is illustrated with the help of an analysis of an `advertorial' published by R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Barth, E. M. and E. C. W. Krabbe: 1982, From Axiom to Dialogue.A Philosophical Study of Logics and Argumentation, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions.A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed Towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion, Foris/Mouton de Gruyter, Dordrecht/Berlin.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies.A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson and S. Jacobs: 1993, Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse, The University of Alabama Press, London/Tuscaloosa.
Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson and S. Jacobs: 1997,'Argumentation’, in T. A. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Structure and Process.Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Volume I, Ch. 8, Sage, London, pp. 208-229.
Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, B. Meuffels and M. Verburg: 1997, ‘Hoe redelijk vindt men ad hominem-drogredenen? [The (Un)reasonableness of ad hominemFallacies]’, in H. van den Bergh, D. Janssen, N. Bertens and M. Damen (eds.), Taalgebruik ontrafeld, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 41-53. [Publication in English in preparation.]
Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, A. F. Snoeck Henkemans, J. A. Blair, R. H. Johnson, E. C. W. Krabbe, Ch. Plantin, D. N. Walton, Ch. A. Willard, J. Woods and D. Zarefsky: 1996, Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory.A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Eemeren, F. H. van and P. Houtlosser: 1997, ‘Rhetorical Rationales for Dialectical Moves’, in J. Klumpp (ed.), Proceedings of the Tenth NCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation, Speech Communication Association, Annandale, VA, pp. 51-56.
Eemeren, F. H. van and P. Houtlosser: 1999, ‘Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse’, Discourse Studies 1, 4.
Gaonkar, D. P.: 1990, ‘Rhetoric and its Double: Reflections on the Rhetorical Turn in the Human Sciences’, in H. W. Simons (ed.), The Rhetorical Turn.Invention and Persuasion in the Conduct of Inquiry, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 341-366.
Hamblin, Ch. L.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen, London.
Kennedy, G. A.: 1994, A New History of Classical Rhetoric, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Kienpointner, M.: 1995, ‘Rhetoric’, in J. Verschueren, J.-O. Östman and J. Blommaert (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics.Manual, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philidelphia, pp. 453-461.
Leff, M.: 1999, ‘Rhetorical Prolepsisand the Dialectical Tier of Argumentation’, in F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C. A. Willard (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth ISSA Conference on Argumentation, Foris, Dordrecht.
Mack, P.: 1993, Renaissance Argument.Valla and Agricola in the Traditions of Rhetoric and Dialectic, Brill, Leiden.
Meerhoff: C. G.: 1988, ‘Agricola et Ramus: Dialectique et Rhétorique’, in F. Akkerman and A. J. Vanderjagt (eds.), Rodolphus Agricola Phrisius 1444-1485, Brill, Leiden, pp. 270-280.
Perelman, Ch. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca: 1969, The New Rhetoric.A Treatise on Argumentation, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame/London (translation of La nouvelle rhétorique.Traité de l'argumentation, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1958
Toulmin, S.: 1997, A Dissenter's Life. Thomas Jefferson Lecture, Washington, March 24.
Wenzel, J.W: 1990, ‘Three Perspectives on Argument: Rhetoric, Dialectic, Logic’, in R. Trapp and J. Schuetz (eds.), Perspectives on Argumentation.Essays in the Honor of Wayne Brockriede, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, Ill., pp. 9-26.
Woods, J. and D. N. Walton: 1989, Fallacies: Selected Papers, 1972-1982, Foris/Mouton de Gruyter, Dordrecht/Berlin.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Van Eemeren, F.H., Houtlosser, P. Rhetorical Analysis Within a Pragma-Dialectical Framework. Argumentation 14, 293–305 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007857114100
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007857114100