1.  43
    Rationale for a pragma-dialectical perspective.FransH Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1988 - Argumentation 2 (2):271-291.
    Starting from a concept of reasonableness as well-consideredness, it is discussed in what way science could serve as a model for reasonable argumentation. It turns out that in order to be reasonable two requirements have to be fulfilled. The argumentation should comply with rules which are both problem-valid and intersubjectively valid. Geometrical and anthropological perspectives don't meet these criteria, but a critical perspective does. It is explained that a pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation which agrees with this critical perspective is indeed (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   37 citations  
  2.  45
    Speech act conditions as tools for reconstructing argumentative discourse.FransH Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1989 - Argumentation 3 (4):367-383.
    According to the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation, for analysing argumentative discourse, a normative reconstruction is required which encompasses four kinds of transformations. It is explained in this paper how speech act conditions can play a part in carrying out such a reconstruction. It is argued that integrating Searlean insights concerning speech acts with Gricean insights concerning conversational maxims can provide us with the necessary tools. For this, the standard theory of speech acts has to be amended in several respects and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  3.  34
    Argumentation and speech act theory.FransH Eemeren & Rob Grootendorst - 1989 - Argumentation 3 (4):341-343.