A Pragmatic Account of Rephrase in Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
In the spirit of pragmatic account quotation and reporting offered by Macagno Walton (2017), we outline a systematic rephrasing. For this purpose, combine two interrelated methods inquiry into variety uses rephrase as persuasive device: (i) annotation types to identify locutionary illocutionary aspects rephrase, (ii) crowd–sourced examination investigate their perlocutionary effects. As it draws on Waltonian insights empirical experimental research (mis)use our approach allows us ground novel theoretically–informed data–driven rephrase.
منابع مشابه
a comparison of linguistic and pragmatic knowledge: a case of iranian learners of english
در این تحقیق دانش زبانشناسی و کاربردشناسی زبان آموزان ایرانی در سطح بالای متوسط مقایسه شد. 50 دانش آموز با سابقه آموزشی مشابه از شش آموزشگاه زبان مختلف در دو آزمون دانش زبانشناسی و آزمون دانش گفتار شناسی زبان انگلیسی شرکت کردند که سوالات هر دو تست توسط محقق تهیه شده بود. همچنین در این تحقیق کارایی کتابهای آموزشی زبان در فراهم آوردن درون داد کافی برای زبان آموزان ایرانی به عنوان هدف جانبی تحقیق ...
15 صفحه اولA Logical Account of Formal Argumentation
In the current paper, we re-examine how abstract argumentation can be formulated in terms of labellings, and how the resulting theory can be applied in the field of modal logic. In particular, we are able to express the (complete) extensions of an argumentation framework as models of a set of modal logic formulas that represents the argumentation framework. Using this approach, it becomes possi...
متن کاملA Pragmatic Account of the Hindi Presumptive
Taking Hindi presumptive modality as a case study, this paper argues that modality is detrimental in an overall organization of the tense-aspect system in languages in which these categories are marked, although only tense and aspect categories have attracted much attention in linguistic research. The paper analyzes different usages of the future form of the Hindi verb honā ‘to be’ – both as a ...
متن کاملA formal account of Socratic-style argumentation
In traditional mathematical models of argumentation an argument often consists of a chain of rules or reasons, beginning with premisses and leading to a conclusion that is endorsed by the party that put forward the argument. In informal reasoning, however, one often encounters a specific class of counterarguments that until now has received little attention in argumentation formalisms. The idea...
متن کاملA general account of argumentation with preferences
This paper builds on the recent ASPIC formalism, to develop a general framework for argumentation with preferences. We motivate a revised definition of conflict free sets of arguments, adapt ASPIC to accommodate a broader range of instantiating logics, and show that under some assumptions, the resulting framework satisfies key properties and rationality postulates. We then show that the general...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Informal Logic
سال: 2022
ISSN: ['2293-734X', '0824-2577']
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v42i1.7212