Documents found
-
105.More information
L’objectif central de ce travail est d’identifier et d’expliciter la conception de l’argumentation de Peirce dans sa période de maturité (1895–1914), ainsi que ses relations concrètes avec le concept d’argument et la méthode scientifique de la recherche. La thèse commence par une description de l’état actuel des connaissances dans les études contemporaines de l’argumentation et des questions–clés de ce champ d’études, afin de formuler le problème général suivant : quelle est la conception d’argument et du concept d’argumentation dans le pragmatisme élaboré par Peirce dans sa période de maturité ? Afin d’atteindre notre but, la philosophie sémiotique de l’esprit de Peirce est résumée et le champ sémiotique est décrit, y compris la doctrine mûre des interprétants, en mettant en évidence leur conception générale du raisonnement …
-
106.More information
AbstractThis paper proposes an argumentative analysis focusing on the 1981 French parliamentary debate concerning the abolition of the death penalty. It provides an analysis of a recurrent argumentative sequence in the abolitionists'discourse. This sequence is complex because members of Parliament initially claim they “understand” the family of the victim's desire for vengeance, but finally decree justice “cannot be vengeance”. The analysis attempts to detail how – on an argumentative level – members of Parliament move from an initial acknowledgment of an impulse for death to an assertion of “a justice of death is impossible”. The conclusion proposes to gauge the “historicity” of the argumentative sequence described by briefly comparing it to similar sequences that can be found in previous parliamentary debates.
Keywords: argumentation, peine de mort, discours parlementaire, justice, victimes, argumentation, death penalty, parliamentary discourse, justice, victims
-
107.More information
The “extreme consequence” is a very common pattern in advertising messages that presents an odd, even negative, situation resulting from the use of the advertised product as a good reason to buy it. By analyzing selected advertisements employing this pattern using the conceptual integration theory and the Argumentum Model of Topics, we aim to understand how “extreme consequence” works at the rhetorical and argumentative levels. The analyses allow us to detect the typical, generic, cognitive, and argumentative structure underlying the pattern and to identify the rhetorical and argumentative role played by its main components, namely exaggeration and cause-effect relation.
-
108.More information
AbstractAdvertising language strategy for all markets and for all kinds of public is unusual. There are few products which do not need alteration in text or in image. Due to the persuasive nature of the advertising discourse, the duty of translators is to follow the rules of language code and rhetoric. The aim of this article is to analyze the translation strategies borrowed by translators according to the kind of product advertised, to the argumentative aim and to the addressee.
Keywords: adaptation, argumentation, eikôs, pathos, psychopublicité, adaptation, argumentation, eikôs, pathos, psycho-advertising
-
109.More information
La thèse porte sur la théorie de l'argumentation telle que conçue par Chaim Ferelrran. Celui-ci la présente comme une nouvelle rhétorique, dont l'objet est l'étude des techniques argumentatives utilisées dans les sciences humaines. Cette étude renoue avec l'ancienne rhétorique, tout en la développant selon une perspective contemporaine. En plus de faire revivre la dimension rhétorique de la philosophie, dimension oubliée par la philosophie elle-même, la théorie de l'argumentation joue un rôle important dans un monde où prédominent les moyens de communication, qui soumettent les esprits à des tentatives de persuasion. Cette thèse s'est donc proposé de voir, le plus objectivement possible, en quoi consistait cette nouvelle rhétorique, ainsi que de chercher à la situer par rapport à la philosophie, puisque la vision perelmanienne de la …
-
110.More information
In this paper, I spell out and argue for a new epistemic theory of argumentation. Contrary to extant views, this theory is compatible with a pluralistic framework on argumentation, where the norms governing argumentation depend on the aim with which we engage in the practice. A domain of specifically epistemic argumentation is singled out, and I argue based on recent findings in modal epistemology that this domain is governed by the modal norm of safety; where a belief is safe just in case it is produced by a method that would not easily produce a false belief. While this criterion is well-known and uncontroversial in epistemology, it has hitherto not been applied to epistemic theories of argumentation. I show that the norm allows for a novel and superior perspective of the relevance of the persistent interlocutor in argumentation theory, and on the relation between dialectical and epistemic norms more generally.
Keywords: epistemic argumentation, safety, persistent interlocutor