Argumentation as a Speech Act: A (Provisional) Balance

This paper investigates whether, and if so, in what way, argumentation can be profitably described speech-act theoretical terms. I suggest that the two theories of are supposed to provide most elaborate analysis it terms (namely van Eemeren Rob Grootendorst’s Pragma-Dialectics Lilian Bermejo-Luque’s linguistic normative model argumentation) both suffer from same flaws: firstly, their “illocutionary act pluralism” assumption secondly, a lack interest where arguing belongs classification illocutionary acts. argue these flaws derive authors’ reliance on an intention-based speech-theoretical framework. Finally, adopt deontic framework for speech acts order propose alternative way accounting which seems overcome limitations outlined above. According this framework, may conceived as sequence, characterized by conventional effects brought about communicative moves (as acts) is composed.