Abstract
Abstract
This study is a contribution to the recently introduced notion of argumentative style (van Eemeren 2019) in the framework of the pragma-dialectical approach. It aims at characterizing a detached argumentative style,
by focusing on a speech event pertaining to the communicative activity type organizational discourse, a report on EU environment and climate
change policies. The analysis concerns the executive summary and the key findings of the report, reconstructed in the analysis as the
concluding stage of the critical discussion corresponding to the pragma-dialectical model. The notion of text type (Adam 1992) used in the analysis has allowed a more fine-grained characterization of the detached argumentative style,
especially since the communicative practice under analysis displays a specific discourse format and structure for reasons of
conventionalization and institutionalization. In such circumstances, determined by the type of conventionalization imposed by the context,
the adoption of a detached argumentative style appears to be a pre-requisite. In the concluding stage of a critical discussion the
difference of opinion is not restated, while the most significant standpoints are synthetically (re)presented by an adequate balance of
narrative, descriptive and metadiscursive text strategies meant to support the objectivity, the conciseness of the presentation and also
ensuring the necessary density of information required in a report summary or the presentation of key findings, respectively. While explicit
negative evaluations or formulations of standpoints are avoided, the recommendations are presented as open to adoption or reconsideration by
policymakers.
© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Article metrics loading...
/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.20023.gat
2021-02-04
2024-03-28
-
/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.20023.gat
dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
10
5
Full text loading...
References
-
Adam, Jean-Michel
1992 Les textes: types et prototypes. Récit, description, argumentation, explication et dialogue. Paris: Nathan Université.
[Google Scholar]
-
Atayan, Vahram
2004 Structures macroscopiques de l’argumentation dans l’analyse du discours – dialogicité, polyphonie et modificateurs réalisants. In
Javier Suso López
,
Rodrigo López Carillo
(éds.), Le français face aux défis actuels. Histoire, langue et culture, vol.I: 531–543. Granada: Editorial Universidad de Granada.
[Google Scholar]
-
Atayan, Vahram
2006 Makrostrukturen der Argumentation im Deutschen, Französischen und Italienischen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
[Google Scholar]
-
Atayan, Vahram
2009 Fonctions argumentatives secondaires dans l’argumentation textuelle, ou pourquoi une ‘équipe surprise’ gagne (presque) toujours. Quelques considérations sur le renforcement et l’atténuation de l’argumentation en allemand, espagnol, français et italien. In
Vahram Atayan
,
Daniela Pirazzini
(éds.),
Argumentation: théorie – langue – discours: 93–111. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang (Rhethos).
10.3726/978‑3‑653‑02292‑6
https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-02292-6
[Google Scholar]
-
Bal, Mieke
(1985) 1997 Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of the Narrative, second edition. Toronto / Buffalo / London: University of Toronto Press.
[Google Scholar]
-
Eemeren, Frans H. van
2010 Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse. Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
10.1075/aic.2
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.2
[Google Scholar]
-
Eemeren, Frans H. van
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95381-6
[Google Scholar]
-
Eemeren, Frans H. van
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-019-09478-y
[Google Scholar]
-
Eemeren, Frans H. van
2020 Characterizing argumentative style: The case of KLM and the destructed squirrels. In
R. Boogaart
,
H. Jansen
, &
M. van Leeuwen
(Eds.), @Title. Argumentation Library.
[Google Scholar]
-
Eemeren, Frans H. van
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.20022.eem
[Google Scholar]
-
Eemeren, Frans H. van
&
Rob Grootendorst
1992 Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. A Pragma-dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[Google Scholar]
-
Eemeren, Frans H. van
&
Rob Grootendorst
2004 A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[Google Scholar]
-
Gâță, Anca
2020a Argumentative Style in a Study on Climate Change Policies. Oral communication, International Conference on Argumentation and Public Policy „Reasons, Citizens and Institutions”, COST CA 17132, European Network for Argumentation and Public Policy analysis(APPLY), University of Wrocław, March4–6.
[Google Scholar]
-
Gâță, Anca
2020b Le « triangle » acte de langage – (proto)type textuel – (proto)type d’activité communicative dans l’analyse du discours argumentatif. Oral communication, 8th Scientific Conference of Doctoral Schools “Perspectives and challenges in doctoral research”, “Dunărea de Jos” University of Galați, June18–19.
[Google Scholar]
-
Hyland, Ken
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.03.007
[Google Scholar]
-
Lewiński, Marcin
&
Dima Mohammed
2019 The 2015 Paris Climate Conference: Arguing for the fragile consensus in global multilateral diplomacy.
Journal of Argumentation in Context8(1): 65–90.
10.1075/jaic.18017.lew
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18017.lew
[Google Scholar]
-
Lewiński, Marcin
&
Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.00004.int
[Google Scholar]
-
Miller, Ryan T.
&
Silvia Pessoa
2018 Corpus-driven study of information systems project reports, in
Vaclav Brezina
,
Lynne Flowerdew
(eds.), Learner Corpus Research: New Perspectives and Applications: 112–133. London / New York: Bloomsbury Academic Publishing.
[Google Scholar]
-
Oswald, Steve
,
Thierry Herman
,
Jérôme Jacquin
2018 Introduction. In
S. Oswald
,
T. Herman
&
J. Jacquin
(eds.),
Argumentation and Language – Linguistic, Cognitive and Discursive Explorations: 1–21. Amsterdam: Springer.
10.1007/978‑3‑319‑73972‑4_1
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73972-4_1
[Google Scholar]
-
Richards, I. A.
1936 [1965] The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.
[Google Scholar]
-
Rodrigues, Soledade
,
Marcin Lewinski
&
Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
2019 Environmental manifestoes. Argumentative strategies in the ‘Ecomodernist Manifesto’.
Journal of Argumentation in Context8(1): 12–39.
10.1075/jaic.18036.rod
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18036.rod
[Google Scholar]
-
Sales, Hazel E.
2006 Executive Summaries, in
Professional Communication in Engineering: 214–240. Hampshire / New York: Mac Millan Palgrave.
10.1057/9780230625143_9
https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230625143_9
[Google Scholar]
-
Spronck, Stef
&
Tatiana Nikitina
https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2019-0005
[Google Scholar]
-
Herold
2019 EU Environment and Climate Change Policies – State of play, current and future challenges, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg. [Requested by the
European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety. Co-authored by specialists of the (research and consultancy body) Öko Institute for Applied Ecology, Germany,
www.oeko.de]
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2019/638428/IPOL_STU(2019)638428_EN.pdf
[Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.20023.gat