Argumentation 35 (3):435-455 (2021)

Authors
Abstract
As more and more sophisticated software is created to allow the mining of arguments from natural language texts, this paper sets out to examine the suitability of the well-established and readily available methods of corpus linguistics to the study of argumentation. After brief introductions to corpus linguistics and the concept of meta-argument, I describe three pilot-studies into the use of the terms Straw man, Ad hominem, and Slippery slope, made using the open access News on the Web corpus. The presence of each of these phrases on internet news sites was investigated and assessed for correspondence to the norms of use by argumentation theorists. All three pilot-studies revealed interesting facts about the usage of the terms by non-specialists, and led to numerous examples of the types of arguments mentioned. This suggests such corpora may be of use in two different ways: firstly, the wider project of improving public debate and educating the populace in the skills of critical thinking can only be helped by a better understanding of the current state of knowledge of the technical terms and concepts of argumentation. Secondly, theorists could obtain a more accurate picture of how arguments are used, by whom, and to what reception, allowing claims on such matters to be evidence, rather than intuition, based.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10503-020-09533-z
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,261
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Philosophy 34 (130):244-245.
Fallacies.C. L. Hamblin - 1970 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 160:492-492.
Fallacies and Argument Appraisal.Christopher W. Tindale - 2007 - Cambridge University Press.
Argument Structure: Representation and Theory.James B. Freeman - 2011 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.

View all 27 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Corpus Linguistics and Argumentation.Chiara Degano - 2016 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 5 (2):113-138.
Automatic Argumentation Mining and the Role of Stance and Sentiment.Manfred Stede - 2020 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 9 (1):19-41.
La Traduction de la Terminologie Philosophique.Siobhan Brownlie - 2002 - Meta: Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy 47 (3):296-310.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-07-11

Total views
10 ( #878,303 of 2,455,894 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #143,500 of 2,455,894 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes