108 research outputs found
A Normative Pragmatic Theory of Exhorting
The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10503-018-9465-y.We submit a normative pragmatic theory of exhorting—an account of conceptually necessary and potentially efficacious components of a coherent strategy for securing a sympathetic hearing for efforts to urge and inspire addressees to act on high-minded principles. Based on a Gricean analysis of utterance-meaning, we argue that the concept of exhorting comprises making statements openly urging addressees to perform some high-minded, principled course of action; openly intending to inspire addressees to act on the principles; and intending that addressees’ recognition of the intentions to urge and inspire creates reasons for addressees to grant a sympathetic hearing to what the speaker has to say. We show that the theory accounts for the design of Abraham Lincoln’s Cooper Union address. By doing so we add to the inventory of reasons why social actors make arguments, continue a line of research showing the relationship of arguing to master speech acts, and show that making arguments can be an effective strategy for inspiring principled action
Diel density variation of amphipods associated with Sargassum beds from two shores of Ubatuba, Southeastern, Brazil
Co-opting Science: A preliminary study of how students invoke science in value-laden discussions
Communicative Competence and Local Theories of Argumentation: The Case of Academic Citational Practices
When people argue in a specific context, they usually know exactly how to do that. The social knowledge participants have to form their expectations regarding the interaction is what we consider as their theory of argumentation. Elucidating the theories of the participants in argumentative exchanges is to formulate a local theory of argumentation. In this regard, we consider the ethnography of communication (EoC) as a framework to supplement our studies on argumentation. We believe there are three forms of social knowledge that affect how argumentation is conducted in context. First, participants know what is persuasive within their interactional context. Second, they know how this interaction is appropriately conducted. Third, they attempt to enact and recreate their understanding of the context through their talk
Cognitive Editing of Arguments and Reasons for Requests: Evidence from Think-Aloud Protocols
The Role of Family Verbal Aggression and Taking Conflict Personally in Romantic Relationship Complaint Avoidance
- …