1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Argumentation in Context
  4. Volume 10, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 10, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2211-4742
  • E-ISSN: 2211-4750
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study responds to van Eemeren’s (20192021) call for research on the prototypical argumentative styles used in particular domains or communicative activity types by particular individuals or groups. It explores the argumentative style of Dutch politician Geert Wilders in presenting populist arguments, i.e., arguments claiming that if many people hold a certain standpoint, this standpoint should be accepted. A corpus study of 27 texts taken from the website of Wilders’s political party reveals four characteristics of this presentation that deviate significantly from the general descriptions of this type of argument given in the textbooks: (1) absence of indicators, (2) implicit standpoint, (3) wide range of verbs to indicate what “the people” think or believe, (4) use of a construction indicating that the speaker is acting as a mouthpiece (“on behalf of the people, I say”).

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.20020.jan
2021-02-04
2023-09-28

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jaic.20020.jan
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andone, C.
    (2015) Engagement et non-engagement dans les appels à la majorité par des hommes politiques. Argumentation et analyse du discours, 15, 13pp.Retrieved from: https://aad.revues.org/2021#tocto1n3
     [Google Scholar]
  2. (2016) Argumentative patterns in the political domain: The case of European parliamentary committees of inquiry. Argumentation, 30, 45–60. 10.1007/s10503‑015‑9372‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-015-9372-4 [Google Scholar]
  3. Blassnig, S. , Büchel, F. , Ernst, N. , & Engesser, S.
    (2018) Populism and informal fallacies: An analysis of right-wing populist rhetoric in election campaigns. Argumentation, 33(1), 107–136. 10.1007/s10503‑018‑9461‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-018-9461-2 [Google Scholar]
  4. Boogaart, R. , Jansen, H. , & van Leeuwen, M.
    (2021) The language of argumentation. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑52907‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52907-9 [Google Scholar]
  5. Freeman, J. B.
    (1995) The appeal to popularity and presumption by common knowledge. In H. V. Hansen & R. C. Pinto (Eds.), Fallacies: Classical and contemporary readings (pp.266–273). University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Godden, D.
    (2008) On common knowledge and ad populum: Acceptance as grounds for acceptability. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 41(2), 101–129. 10.1353/par.0.0000
     https://doi.org/10.1353/par.0.0000 [Google Scholar]
  7. Herman, T. & Oswald, S.
    (2020) Everybody knows that there is something odd about ad populum arguments. In R. Boogaart , H. Jansen , & M. van Leeuwen (eds.), The language of argumentation. Cham: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Jagers, J. , & Walgrave, S.
    (2007) Populism as political communication style: An empirical study of political parties’ discourse in Belgium. European Journal of Political Research, 46, 319–345. 10.1111/j.1475‑6765.2006.00690.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00690.x [Google Scholar]
  9. Jansen, H.
    (2017) The space for strategic manoeuvring in adjudicating a freedom of speech case in the Netherlands: The first trial of Geert Wilders. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 6(2), 105–135. 10.1075/jaic.6.2.01jan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.6.2.01jan [Google Scholar]
  10. (2018) Ad populum arguments in a political context. In S. Oswald & D. Maillat (eds.), Argumentation and Inference. Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg 2017, Volume II (pp.423–436). London: College Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. (2019) De invloed van het standpunt op de beoordeling van ad populum-argumentatie [The role of the standpoint in the assessment of ad populum argumentation]. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 41, 143–157. 10.5117/TVT2019.1.010.JANS
     https://doi.org/10.5117/TVT2019.1.010.JANS [Google Scholar]
  12. (2020) “The people want it.” Analysis and evaluation of the populist argument in the context of deliberation. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 9(3) 342–367. 10.1075/jaic.17028.jan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.17028.jan [Google Scholar]
  13. Jansen, H. , & van Leeuwen, M.
    (2018) Presentational choice in ad populum argumentation. In B. Garssen , D. Godden , G. R. Mitchell , & J. H. M. Wagemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp.573–582). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. (2020) “Ik spreek namens miljoenen Nederlanders.” Wilders’ populistische argumentatie in het politieke debat. [On behalf of millions of Dutch people. Wilders’s populist arguments in political debate.] Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 42(2).
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Jansen, H. , & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F.
    (2020) Argumentative use and strategic function of the expression ‘not for nothing’. Argumentation, 34, 143–162. 10.1007/s10503‑019‑09509‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-019-09509-8 [Google Scholar]
  16. Johnson, R. H. , & Blair, J. A.
    (2006) Logical Self-Defense. New York, etc.: Idea Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Kienpointner, M.
    (2003) Populistische Topik. Zu einigen rhetorischen Strategien Jörg Haiders. Rhetorik, 21(1), 119–140.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Moffitt, B.
    (2016) The Global Rise of Populism: Performance, Political Style, and Representation. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. 10.1080/02773948109390615
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02773948109390615 [Google Scholar]
  19. Moffitt, B. , & Tormey, S.
    (2014) Rethinking populism: Politics, mediatisation and political style. Political Studies, 62, 381–397. 10.1111/1467‑9248.12032
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.12032 [Google Scholar]
  20. Mudde, C. , & Kaltwasser, C. R.
    (2017) Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/actrade/9780190234874.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780190234874.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Müller, J.-W.
    (2016) What is populism. University Park: University of Pennsylvania Press. 10.9783/9780812293784
     https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812293784 [Google Scholar]
  22. Nolt, J. E.
    (1984) Informal logic. Possible worlds and imagination. New York, etc.: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 10.22329/il.v6i2.2728
     https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v6i2.2728 [Google Scholar]
  23. Oswald, S. , and Hart, C.
    (2013) Trust based on bias: Cognitive constraints on source-related fallacies. In D. Mohammed and M. Lewínski (Eds.), Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22–26 May 2013. Windsor, ON: OSSA, 13pp.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Pauwels, T.
    (2014) Populism in Western Europe: Comparing Belgium, Germany and The Netherlands. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315764313
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315764313 [Google Scholar]
  25. Reisigl, M.
    (2006) The dynamics of right-wing populist argumentation in Austria. In: F. H. van Eemeren , J. A. Blair , C. A. Willard & B. Garssen (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA). Amsterdam: Rozenberg.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Tonnard, Y.
    (2011) Getting an issue on the table: A pragma-dialectical study of presentational choices in confrontational strategic maneuvering in Dutch parliamentary debate. Dissertation University of Amsterdam.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. van Eemeren, F. H.
    (2010) Strategic manoeuvring in argumentative discourse. Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.2 [Google Scholar]
  28. (2018) Argumentation theory: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑95381‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95381-6 [Google Scholar]
  29. (2019) Argumentative style: A complex notion. Argumentation, 33, 153–171. 10.1007/s10503‑019‑09478‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-019-09478-y [Google Scholar]
  30. (2021) Examining argumentative style: A new theoretical perspective. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 10(1) (this issue).
     [Google Scholar]
  31. van Eemeren, F. H. , Garssen, B. , & Meuffels, B.
    (2009) Conceptions of reasonableness. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. (2015) The disguised ad baculum fallacy empirically investigated: Strategic maneuvering with threats. In B. Garssen , D. Godden , G. Mitchell , & F. Snoeck Henkemans (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp.1396–1407). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. (2012) The disguised abusive ad hominem empirically investigated: Strategic manoeuvring with direct personal attacks. Thinking and Reasoning, 18(3), 344–364. 10.1080/13546783.2012.678666
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2012.678666 [Google Scholar]
  34. van Eemeren, F. H. , & Garssen, B.
    (2019) En dan zit je met de gebakken peren! Strategisch manoeuvreren met het argumentum ad consequentiam [And then you’ll have to face the consequences! Strategic manoeuvring with the argumentum ad consequentiam]. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 41(1), 47–60. 10.5117/TVT2019.1.004.EEME
     https://doi.org/10.5117/TVT2019.1.004.EEME [Google Scholar]
  35. van Eemeren, F. H. , & Grootendorst, R.
    (1992) Argumentation, communication and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. (2015) Making the best of argumentative discourse. In F. H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness an effectiveness in argumentative discourse. Fifty contributions to the development of pragma-dialectics (pp.543–554). Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑20955‑5_28
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20955-5_28 [Google Scholar]
  37. van Eemeren, F. H. , & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F.
    (2016) Argumentation: Analysis and evaluation (2nd rev. ed.). New York/London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315401140
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315401140 [Google Scholar]
  38. (2021) Argumentatie: Analyseren, beoordelen en houden van een betoog [Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, production] (6th rev. ed.). Groningen: Noordhoff.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. van Haaften, T.
    (2011) Parliamentary debate and political culture: The Dutch case. In T. van Haaften , H. Jansen , J. de Jong & W. Koetsenruijter (eds.), Bending opinion: Essays on persuasion in the public domain (pp.349–368). Leiden: Leiden University Press. 10.5117/9789087280994
     https://doi.org/10.5117/9789087280994 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2017) Strategic maneuvering with presentational choices in Dutch parliamentary debate. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Wu (eds.), Contextualizing pragma-dialectics (pp.177–192). Amsterdam [etc.]: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.12.11van
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.12.11van [Google Scholar]
  41. van Haaften, T. , & van Leeuwen, M.
    (2020) Suggesting outsider status by behaving improperly: The linguistic realisation of a populist rhetorical strategy in Dutch Parliament. In I. van der Geest , B. van Klink , & H. Jansen (eds.), Vox populi: Populism as a rhetorical and democratic challenge (pp.108–129). Edward Elgar. 10.4337/9781789901412.00014
     https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789901412.00014 [Google Scholar]
  42. van Leeuwen, M.
    (2014) Systematic stylistic analysis. The use of a checklist. In B. Kaal , I. Maks & A. van Elfrinkhof (eds.), From Text to Political Positions. Text analysis across disciplines (pp.225–244). Amsterdam, etc.: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.55.11lee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.55.11lee [Google Scholar]
  43. (2015) Stijl en politiek. Een taalkundig-stilistische benadering van Nederlandse parlementaire toespraken [Style and politics: A linguistic-stylistic approach to Dutch parliamentary speeches]. Utrecht: LOT.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. (2016) ‘Man van het volk’. Stijl en imago van Geert Wilders [‘Man of the people’: Style and image of Geert Wilders]. Tekstblad22(2), 6–11.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. (2019) Measuring people-centrism in populist political discourse: A linguistic approach. In J. Zienkowski & R. Breeze (eds.), Imagining the peoples of Europe: Populist discourse across the political spectrum (pp.315–339). Amsterdam, etc.: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.83.13lee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.83.13lee [Google Scholar]
  46. van Leeuwen, M. , & van Vliet, F.
    (2019) De ‘stem van het volk’. Populisme en perspectief [The ‘voice of the people’. Populism and perspective]. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing41(1), 173–187. 10.5117/TVT2019.1.012.LEEU
     https://doi.org/10.5117/TVT2019.1.012.LEEU [Google Scholar]
  47. Vossen, K.
    (2016) The Power of Populism. Geert Wilders and the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315645735
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315645735 [Google Scholar]
  48. Walton, D. N.
    (1999) Appeal to popular opinion. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Walton, D. N. , Reed, C. , & Macagno, F.
    (2008) Argumentation schemes. Cambridge, etc.: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511802034
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.20020.jan
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): ad populum; appeal to the majority; context of deliberation; political discourse; populism; populist argument; stylistic device

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error