The Direction of Argument: Direction of Fit as a Defining Perspective on Rhetorical Argumentation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v19i69.98Keywords:
argumentation, speech act theory, pragmadialecticsAbstract
Direction of fit – a concept from Searle’s language theory concerning utterances and their relationship to the surrounding reality – is investigated as a possible defining perspective on rhetorical argumentation. It is proposed that it is possible to recognise rhetorical features of a given argumentation by considering the overall direction of fit of the text. This is exemplified by a brief analysis of Putin’s Crimea speech given on March 18, 2014, which serves as an example of how the specific utterances of a speech may differ from its overall argumentative orientation. Furthermore, the study discusses direction of fit in relation to other defining perspectives on argumentation, taking Christian Kock’s domain-based view as a point of departure. The aim of the study is to propose a view of argumentation that reflects the dynamic nature of how it is used. It seeks to direct attention away from theoretically oriented definitions of rhetorical argumentation towards a more practical one.
References
Anscombe, G. E. M. Intention (2. udg.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000 [1957].
Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words (2. udg.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975.
Bitzer, Lloyd F. “The Rhetorical Situation”, Philosophy & Rhetoric 1 (1968), 1–14.
Blair, J. Anthony. “Rhetoric, Dialectic, and Logic as Related to Argument”, Philosophy & Rhetoric 45(2) (2012), 148–164.
Brockriede, Wayne og Douglas Ehninger. “Toulmin on Argument: An Interpretation and Application”, Quarterly Journal of Speech 46(1) (1960), 44–53.
Ducrot, Oswald. Slovenian Lectures: Introduction into Argumentative Semantics, red. Igor Z . Zagar. Ljubljana: Pedagos ki Ins titut, 2009.
van Eemeren, Frans H og Rob Grootendorst. “Argumentation as an Illocutionary Act Complex”, i Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed Towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion, 19–46. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter,1984.
van Eemeren, Frans H., og Peter Houtlosser. “Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse”, Discourse Studies 1(4) (1999), 479–497.
Goddu, G. C. “Is ‘argument’ subject to the product/process ambiguity?”, Informal Logic 31(2) (2011), 75–88.
Jørgensen, Charlotte. “Argumentation”, i Retorik. Teori og praksis, red. Charlotte Jørgensen og Lisa Villadsen, 129–158. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur, 2009.
Jørgensen, Charlotte. “Hvad er retorik?”, i Retorik. Teori og praksis, red. Charlotte Jørgensen og Lisa Villadsen, 11–35. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur, 2009.
Jørgensen, Charlotte og Merete Onsberg. Praktisk argumentation (3. udg.). København: Nyt Teknisk Forlag, 2008.
Kock, Christian. “Choice is Not True or False: The Domain of Rhetorical Argumentation”, Argumentation 23 (2009), 61–80.
Kock, Christian. “Defining Rhetorical Argumentation”, Philosophy & Rhetoric 46(4) (2013), 437– 464.
Perelman, Chaïm. “The New Rhetoric: A Theory of Practical Reasoning”, i The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications, 1–42. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1979.
Putin, Vladimir. Address by President of the Russian Federation. Official site of the President of Russia, 2014. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/20603 (besøgt 2015-06-17).
Searle, John R. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. London: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Toulmin, Stephen E. The Uses of Argument (opdateret udg.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003 [1958].
Vatz, Richard E. “The Myth of the Rhetorical Situation”, Philosophy & Rhetoric 6(3) (1973), 154–161.
Wenzel, Joseph W. “Three Perspectives on Argument”, i Perspectives on Argumentation: Essays in Honor of Wayne Brockriede, red. Robert Trapp og Janice Schuetz, 9–26. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press, 1990.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Rhetorica Scandinavica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Open Access; CC Erkännande-IckeKommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0
