Ethos and Pragmatics

Ethos, the speaker’s image in speech is one of the three means of persuasion e stablished by Aristotle’s Rhetoric and is often studied in a loose way. Many scholars develop lists of self-images (ethos of a leader, modesty ethos, etc.), but few explain how one arrives at these types of ethos. This is precisely what the inferential approach described here intends to do. Considering, like many discourse analysts, that ethos is consubstantial with speech, this paper provides an overview of various types and subtypes of ethos and highlights how these can be inferred from the discourse. Mainly, we would like to point out that what the speaker says about him or herself is only a part of what has been called “said ethos”: inferential processes triggered by what the speaker says about collectivities, opponents, or the audience also help construct an ethos. This tool will be applied to analyze a corpus of Donald Trump’s tweets of 6 January 2021, the day of the assault on the Capitol. As the notion of inference is essential in creating ethos, the paper pleads for the integration of the study of this rhetorical notion in the field of pragmatics

Argumentation Theory for Mathematical Argument

To adequately model mathematical arguments the analyst must be able to represent the mathematical objects under discussion and the relationships between them, as well as inferences drawn about these objects and relationships as the discourse unfolds. We introduce a framework with these properties, which has been used to analyse mathematical dialogues and expository texts. The framework can recover salient elements of discourse at, and within, the sentence level, as well as the way mathematical content connects to form larger argumentative structures. We show how the framework might be used to support computational reasoning, and argue that it provides a more natural way to examine the process of proving theorems than do Lamport's structured proofs.Comment: 44 pages; to appear in Argumentatio