Speech Act Pluralism in Argumentative Polylogues

I challenge two key assumptions of speech act theory, as applied to argumentation: illocutionary monism, grounded in the idea each utterance has only one (primary) force, and dyadic reduction, which models interaction a affair between agents (speaker-hearer, proponentopponent). show how major contributions inspired study argumentation adhere these even pluralism argumentative polylogues is significant empirical fact need theoretical attention. demonstrate this with examples where arguers interacting multiple persons convey plural, argumentatively relevant forces. Understanding also affords better account fallacious manipulative discourse.