1887
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2211-4742
  • E-ISSN: 2211-4750
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes
Preview this article:
Zoom in
Zoomout

Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen (Eds.) (2015). Scrutinizing Argumentation in Practice, Page 1 of 1

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/jaic.6.2.06pal-1.gif

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.6.2.06pal
2017-10-16
2019-10-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Brennan, N. M. , C. Daly , & C. Harrington
    (2010) Rhetoric, Argument and Impression Management in Hostile Takeover Defence Documents. British Accounting Review42(4), 253–268. doi: 10.1016/j.bar.2010.07.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2010.07.008 [Google Scholar]
  2. Eemeren, F. H. van
    (Ed.) (2009) Examining argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/aic.1
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.1 [Google Scholar]
  3. Eemeren, F. H. van & B. J. Garssen
    (Eds.) (2012) Exploring argumentative contexts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/aic.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.4 [Google Scholar]
  4. (Eds.) (2015) Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory. New York/Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑21103‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21103-9 [Google Scholar]
  5. Eemeren, F. H. van & R. Grootendorst
    (2004) A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical account. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Greco, S.
    (2016) Book review of “Eemeren, F. H. van & B. J. Garssen (Eds.) (2015), op. cit.”. Argumentation31, 213–220.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Green, S. E.
    (2004) A Rhetorical Theory of Diffusion. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 653–669.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Muller-Mirza & A. N. Perret-Clermont
    (Eds.) (2009) Argumentation and Education. New York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑98125‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98125-3 [Google Scholar]
  9. Rigotti, E. & S. Greco Morasso
    (2010) Comparing the Argumentum-Model of Topics with other contemporary approaches to argument schemes; the procedural and the material components. Argumentation24(4), 489–512. doi: 10.1007/s10503‑010‑9190‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-010-9190-7 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.6.2.06pal
Loading
  • Article Type: Book Review
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