The present paper is mainly addressed to interpreting scholars who wish to focus
their studies on the argumentative specificities of source texts (STs). Even though
the argumentation analysis of STs for interpreting purposes is a barely charted sea,
the practice is likely to become increasingly popular, in the light of its hermeneutical
and contrastive functions providing invaluable insights into ST pragmatics
(Marzocchi, 1998: 8), with significant implications for interpreter training (Marzocchi,
1994: 64; Marzocchi, 1998: 5). The application of argumentation concepts
and methods to interpreting research, however, raises serious relevance issues.
In this respect, the present paper proposes a sifting of the main argumentation
theories so as to prevent researchers concentrating on irrelevant and potentially
dispersive methodologies. It is therefore conceived as a theoretical overview, a
preliminary non-exhaustive map of the most influential argumentation theories
spreading across Europe and the world, aiming at guiding the interpreting scholar
into the intricate but fascinating “wood” of argumentation studies
