What’s in a Name? The Use of the Stylistic Device Metonymy as a Strategic Manoeuvre in the Confrontation and Argumentation Stages of a Discussion

Abstract

In this paper I investigate the role of the rhetorical trope metonymy in arguers’ attempts to reconcile their rhetorical with their dialectical aims in the confrontation stage and argumentation stage of a discussion. I show how different types of metonymies may help to present a party’s position advantageously and to make the strongest case.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,164

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Don’t say that!J. A. van Laar - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (4):495-510.
Strategic Maneuvering with Dissociation.M. A. van Rees - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (4):473-487.
Poisoning the Well.Douglas Walton - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (3):273-307.
On How to Get Beyond the Opening Stage.Erik C. W. Krabbe - 2007 - Argumentation 21 (3):233-242.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-04-02

Downloads
6 (#1,383,956)

6 months
1 (#1,444,594)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Metaphors we live by.George Lakoff & Mark Johnson - 1980 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Mark Johnson.
Metaphors We Live By.George Lakoff & Mark Johnson - 1980 - Ethics 93 (3):619-621.
Metaphors We Live by.Max Black - 1980 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 40 (2):208-210.
The New Rhetoric.Charles Perelman & L. Olbrechts-Tyteca - 1957 - Philosophy Today 1 (1):4-10.

View all 7 references / Add more references