Review of van Eemeren (2018): Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective

References

1. Blair, J. Anthony
   2010 “Logic in the Pragma-Dialectical theory.” InFrans H. van Eemeren (Eds.), ISSA Proceedings 2010. (rozenbergquarterly.com/issa-proceedings-2010-logic-in-the-pragma-dialectical-theory/; last seenNovember 28, 2018)
   [Google Scholar]
2. Dijk, Teun A. van and Kintsch, Walter
   1983 Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Eemeren, Frans H. van
   (ed.) 2002 Advances in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: SicSat.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Eemeren, Frans H. van
   2010 Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.2
   https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.2 [Google Scholar]
5. Eemeren, Frans H. van
   (ed.) 2015 Reasonableness and effectiveness in argumentative discourse. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑20955‑5
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20955-5 [Google Scholar]
6. Eemeren, Frans H. van
   (ed.) 2017 Prototypical argumentative patterns. Exploring the relationship between argumentative discourse and institutional context. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.11
   https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.11 [Google Scholar]
7. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst
   1984 Speech acts in argumentative discussions. Dordrecht: Foris. 10.1515/9783110846089
   https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110846089 [Google Scholar]
8. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst
   1992 Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst
   (eds.) 1994 Studies in Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: SicSat.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst
    2004 A systematic theory of argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Peter Houtlosser
    2002 “Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Maintaining a delicate balance.” InFrans H. van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and rhetoric. The warp and woof of argumentation analysis (pp.131–159). Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑015‑9948‑1_10
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9948-1_10 [Google Scholar]
12. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Rob Grootendorst and Tjark Kruiger
    1978 Argumentatietheorie. Utrecht: Het Spectrum.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Peter Houtlosser and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
    2007 Argumentative indicators in discourse. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑6244‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6244-5 [Google Scholar]
14. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels
    2009 Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑90‑481‑2614‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2614-9 [Google Scholar]
15. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij and Jean H. M. Wagemans
    2014 Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Feteris, Eveline, Bart Garssen and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
    (Eds.) (2011) Keeping in touch with Pragma-Dialectics. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/z.163
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.163 [Google Scholar]
17. Hamblin, Charles L.
    1970 Fallacies. London: Methuen.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Houtlosser, Peter and Agnès van Rees
    (Eds.) 2006 Considering Pragma-Dialectics. A Festschrift for Frans H. van Eemeren on the occasion of his 60th birthday. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Johnson-Laird, Philip
    2006 How we reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Kalinowski, Georges
    1972 Einführung in die Normenlogik. Frankfurt/M.: Athenäum.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Kienpointner, Manfred
    1998 “Speech Act Sequences in Latin prose: Questions and Answers.” In: Charles M. Ternes and Dominique Longrée (éd.), Oratio soluta – oratio numerosa. Les mécanismes linguistiques de cohésion et de rupture dans la prose latine (pp.65–86). Luxembourg: Centre Alexandre-Wiltheim.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Kienpointner, Manfred
    2008 “Impoliteness and emotional arguments.” Journal of Politeness Research, 4(2), 243–265. 10.1515/JPLR.2008.012
    https://doi.org/10.1515/JPLR.2008.012 [Google Scholar]
23. Kienpointner, Manfred
    2011 “Fiktive Argumente.” InCarl Friedrich Gethmann (ed.), Lebenswelt und Wissenschaft (pp.505–538). Hamburg: Meiner.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Lakoff, George
    1987 Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
25. Lakoff, George
    2006 Whose Freedom? The Battle over America‘s Most Important Idea. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Lewis, David K.
    1986 On the plurality of worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Lyons, John
    1977 Semantics. 2Vols.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Perelman, Chaim and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca
    1983 Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Bruxelles: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Plantin, Christian
    1998 “Les raisons des émotions.” InMarina Bondi (ed.), Forms of Argumentative Discourse (pp.3–50). Bologna: Clueb.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Plantin, Christian
    2005 L’argumentation. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Risselada, Rodie
    1993 Imperatives and other directive expressions in Latin. Amsterdam: Gieben. 10.1163/9789004408975
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004408975 [Google Scholar]
32. Schank, Roger C. and Robert P. Abelson
    1977 Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Schwarz, Monika and Jeannette Chur
    1996 Semantik. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Searle, John
    1969 Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173438
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438 [Google Scholar]
35. Searle, John
    1976 “A classification of illocutionary acts.” Language in Society5, 1–24. 10.1017/S0047404500006837
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500006837 [Google Scholar]
36. Visser, Jacky
    2016 A dialogue game for critical discussion. Groundwork in the formalisation and computerisation of the pragma-dialectical model of argumentation. Doctoral dissertation. University of Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Woods, John
    2004 The death of argument. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑2712‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2712-3 [Google Scholar]
38. Woods, John and Douglas N. Walton
    1989 Fallacies. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110816082
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110816082 [Google Scholar]
39. Walton, Douglas N.
    1982 Topical relevance in argumentation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/pb.iii.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pb.iii.8 [Google Scholar]
40. Walton, Douglas N.
    1992 The Place of emotion in argumentation. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Walton, Douglas N.
    1997 Appeal to Pity. New York: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Walton, Douglas N.
    2000 Scare Tactics. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑017‑2940‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2940-6 [Google Scholar]
43. Wunderlich, Dieter
    1976 Studien zur Sprechakttheorie. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
    [Google Scholar]