Subject index

• acceptability 2, 10, 15, 32–33, 42, 46, 49, 51–52, 54, 82, 89, 110, 128, 179, 201, 230, 232, 252, 273, 299, 311, 318–320, 324, 326, 328, 330–331, 334

• activity type 12, 13, 151, 152, 173, 232, 233, 254, 315, 323, 324, 330, 334, 335
  • argumentative 15, 155, 229, 230, 231, 232, 255, 256, 257, 320, 334
  • context-dependent2
  • communicative 99, 109, 180, 337
  • conventionalized 238, 239, 254, 255
  • deliberative activity type233

• adjudication 11, 99, 109, 180

• affect 60, 132–133, 135–136, 138–139, 141–145, 204, 244, 299, 324, 334–335

• aggressive 6, 76–78, 83, 96, 110, 325–326, 328

• aggressiveness 77, 82, 326

• agonistic 21, 24–28, 31–33, 35–36

• answer 7, 10–11, 22, 25, 29, 31–33, 36, 44, 46, 59, 62, 73–74, 78–82, 84–85, 87, 89–90, 95, 99–100, 109, 122, 155, 158–159, 170, 244, 246, 254, 263, 278, 280, 295, 322

• antithetical symbolic attributes 306–307

• appreciation 64, 133–136, 138–139, 141–144

• appraisal 11, 15, 127, 132–140, 142–146

• attitude 11, 31–32, 34–36, 45, 51, 61–62, 65, 80, 99–100, 127, 133, 135–136, 139–145, 190, 192, 238, 270, 328

• appropriateness 11, 81, 90, 95, 324, 328, 330

• argument
  • communities 3, 16
  • field 2–6, 12, 16, 17
  • from alternatives 109–112
  • from figurative analogy 116–117
  • in public debate 90, 229, 232, 255
  • schemes 2, 11, 100–101, 107–109, 112–113, 118, 127–128, 131–132, 136, 140–142, 144, 157, 213, 286
  • ad hominem argument 137, 140–141, 143, 168–169, 174, 241, 331, 333
  • ad populum argument89
  • ad verecundiam argument88
  • ethotic argument137
  • rule-based argument 137, 139

• argumentation
  • uncontroversial argument 21–43
  • practice 1, 6–10, 12–14, 259, 282
  • process 5, 7, 8, 29, 81, 162, 249, 251
  • scheme defence 48–49, 53
  • structure 151, 248–249, 322
  • theory 1, 15, 17, 37, 69, 108, 124, 145, 179, 192–193, 197–199, 201–202, 223–224, 226, 231, 261, 284, 293, 298, 314, 317, 319
  • complex argumentation 38, 162, 249, 321–322
  • covert argumentation 73, 95
  • causal argumentation 120, 137, 168
  • diplomatic argumentation 11, 127–147
  • judicial argumentation 177–178, 191, 193
  • persuasive argumentation 1, 2
  • symptomatic argumentation 157, 321

• argumentative
  • activity type 15, 155, 229–232, 255–257, 320, 334
  • discussion 151–152, 157, 202, 209, 269, 272, 275, 279, 310, 319
  • means 13, 232, 248, 254–255
  • response51
  • rhetorical content 10, 57–58, 62, 65–69

• argumentum ad numerum 89, 94

• Argumentum Model of Topics 14, 259, 261, 286

• audience 1, 3–7, 11, 13, 22, 25, 29, 33–37, 40, 46, 64, 73–79, 82–84, 88, 94, 99–100, 107–108, 111, 120, 122–123, 125, 127–128, 142–144, 146, 174, 179, 182, 201, 213, 215, 223, 233, 253, 293, 310, 319–320, 322–323, 325

• Barack Obama case 326–328

• BBC HARDtalk programme83

• Berlusconi case 318, 321–322

• cartoon 15, 296, 317–335

• claim 5, 9, 21, 25–32, 40, 49, 61, 63, 65–68, 86, 89, 102, 111, 114, 136, 184–185, 204, 210, 215, 236–237, 241, 246–247, 253, 271–272, 291–292, 294, 297, 307–308, 327

• code of conduct331

• community/ies of practice 1, 8, 14, 25, 80, 82, 282

• conflict 7, 13, 24–25, 28, 32, 64, 86, 129–130, 139, 145, 174, 179, 194, 198, 201, 203, 205–206, 214, 223, 266, 284, 321–322

• connection 39–54

• connection criticism 45, 47

• connection premise 9–10, 39–42, 45–49, 54

• controversy 9, 22–24, 26–33, 35–36, 58, 95, 189, 198–199, 210–211, 216, 220, 224, 226, 234, 294, 313–314, 317

• corporate discourse218

• counter-argument 29, 30, 73, 88, 183, 187, 189

• counter-argumentation 2, 11, 73, 90, 95, 217

• counter-claim 86, 89

• counter-statement 87, 89, 93

• Crimea 74, 83, 85–95, 134, 137–138, 143–144
  • annexation of 74, 83, 85–95

• crisis 42–44, 46–47, 49–50, 65, 85, 90, 116, 121, 138, 197–198, 200, 202–203, 209–215, 224–225

• Critical Discourse Analysis 11, 99, 107–108, 174, 193, 202, 225, 227

• critical questions 11, 98, 101, 108–109, 120, 157, 169–170, 172–173, 201

• definition 1, 11, 22, 25–28, 30, 32, 37, 51, 58, 77, 88, 90, 92–93, 95, 97, 101, 123, 128, 130, 203–204, 227, 261, 268, 273, 280, 296, 298, 303

• delegitimize 73, 90, 95

• deliberation 2, 8, 11, 13, 16, 99, 109, 121, 180, 229, 233, 253, 255, 296
  • aimed at opinion-formation 13, 233, 253, 255

• dialectic 21–24, 26–32, 36, 38, 55, 70, 103, 156, 201, 208, 256–257, 287, 313, 331

• dialectics 9, 23, 37

• dialecticians 24, 26–27, 31, 36

• dialogism 182, 192

• dialogue 1–2, 5, 9–10, 14, 16–17, 23–24, 28–30, 32, 36–37, 39, 41, 43–46, 48, 50–55, 73–74, 76, 81, 83, 87, 90, 95, 97–98, 132, 136, 138, 151–152, 154, 174–175, 182, 194, 221, 231, 259, 268, 281–282, 286
  • genre 10, 73, 95
  • inquiry dialogue 10, 73, 76, 87, 95, 154

• diplomatic correspondence 129, 136, 142, 145

• diplomatic discourse 8, 136, 145

• directives 135, 140–144

• discourse genre 74, 152, 155

• discourse of rights 105–122

• dismissive response 50–51

• dispute 4, 13, 22–23, 25, 30, 35, 87, 157, 192, 200, 223–224, 253, 269, 284, 295, 301

• doubt 26–27, 29–33, 50, 87, 99–100, 109, 176, 230, 234–235, 246, 250, 265, 268–269, 294

• echo questions 80–81, 96, 98

• enthymeme 14, 66, 141, 296, 310
  • enthymemic argument 131, 139, 216

• eristic 2, 24

• ethos 11, 64, 99–101, 107, 109, 122

• ethotic argument137

• EU 75, 83, 94, 114, 138, 143, 174, 318

• European Union174

• evaluation 2–3, 6, 11–12, 15, 21, 28, 31, 80–82, 86, 94, 107–109, 120–121, 127, 130, 132–133, 137–139, 146, 151, 156, 174, 190–191, 197, 226–228, 231, 234, 242, 245, 252, 263, 275, 313, 317, 319–321, 330, 334–335

• explanation 33–35, 46, 50, 58, 130, 175, 208, 268, 275

• expository questions 79, 85

• face 6, 9, 22, 26, 36, 63, 65, 96, 129–130, 132, 136, 198, 213–214, 217, 224, 230

• fallacy 40–41, 110, 124–125, 169, 210, 333

• family 8–9, 13–14, 259–261, 264–271, 274, 276–278, 281–288, 322

• feedback 22, 36, 81

• field 1–6, 8, 12, 15, 21, 24, 33, 58, 76, 111, 178–179, 193, 200, 209, 217–218, 227, 231, 282, 319
  • boundaries4
  • categories4
  • dependence 2, 3, 5, 15, 231, 282

• focus 1, 3, 7–10, 12–13, 15, 22, 24, 42, 59, 67, 73–77, 79, 81, 85, 87, 100, 107–108, 128–129, 134–135, 139, 151, 160, 181, 184, 191, 201, 205, 210, 219, 223, 230, 259, 261, 272, 275, 279, 300–301, 312, 331, 335

• follow-up question81

• force 10, 75, 79, 81, 91, 93, 115, 134–135, 143, 155, 181, 231, 274, 303, 305

• freedom 66–67, 99–104, 110–112, 124, 131, 139, 186, 189–190, 237, 240–241, 260, 330–331, 333–335

• genre 10, 13, 15, 73–74, 76, 95, 97, 99, 109, 130, 146, 152–153, 155–156, 177–178, 180–181, 185, 191, 230, 233, 255, 292, 307, 310
  • dialogue genre 10, 73, 95
  • discourse genre 74, 152, 155
  • hybrid genre97

• graduation 11, 127, 133–136, 140–144

• grammar of visual design 293, 300, 314

• hortatory argument 128, 132–132, 135, 143

• hybrid dialogue 73, 87

• hybrid genre97

• Ideal Model of a Critical Discussion 62, 254, 269

• ignorance 32–33

• impartial 73, 77, 136–137, 233, 238

• impartiality 75, 84–85, 237–238, 240–241

• implicits 14, 259, 281–282

• incongruence 173, 302–303, 311

• initial situation 13, 232–233, 254–255

• inquiry dialogue 10, 73, 76, 87, 95, 154

• institutional constraints 161, 229, 231–232, 237–239

• institutional context 2, 151–152, 156, 173, 181, 230, 254, 320, 324

• institutional procedures5

• institutional relationships81

• interaction 3, 5–6, 8, 15, 21–24, 28, 34, 36, 73–74, 76, 79–81, 90–91, 97–98, 151–152, 154–155, 159, 176, 201, 233, 264, 283, 285–286

• interpersonal relationship 8, 143, 260

• interpersonal style 11, 127, 132–133, 143–144

• interpreter mediation 12, 151–152, 155

• interrogation 12, 153–156, 158, 160, 162, 169, 172–173, 176, 294

• interview 10–12, 73–78, 81–88, 90, 95–96, 98, 109, 151–162, 164, 166, 168, 170–175, 238, 256
  • accountability interview 10, 73–74, 76–78, 82, 87–88, 95, 98
  • interpreter-mediated police
  • interview 151, 157
  • media interview 74, 76, 96
  • political accountability
  • interview 10, 73, 78, 82, 95

• interviewee 10, 12, 73–82, 86–90, 95, 154–155, 159–160, 169, 172–173

• interviewer 10, 12, 73–79, 81–84, 86–90, 95, 98, 154–155, 159, 166, 169, 172

• journalistic discourse 135–136

• judgement/s 8, 12, 133, 136, 138, 141, 143-144, 177-178, 181-184, 186, 191-192, 194, 217, 301, 333 12, 133, 136, 138, 141, 143–144, 178, 181–184, 186, 191–192, 194, 217, 301, 333

• judicial argumentation 177–178, 191, 193

• keyword 10, 74, 82, 89, 91–95, 216

• leading questions 75, 78–79, 173

• legitimation 175, 197, 208, 217, 224, 227

• legitimize 73, 75, 90, 95, 222

• logos 11, 23, 64, 86, 99–101, 107, 122

• macro-context 151–152, 180–181, 183, 185, 188, 191, 335

• management of subjectivity 11, 132, 144–145

• manoeuvring 2, 15, 292, 312–313, 317, 320, 323, 327, 331, 333–336

• maximally argumentative analysis162

• maximally argumentative interpretation162

• mealtime 13, 259–261, 264, 266, 270, 283–285
  • conversations 260, 261, 266, 267

• media 5–9, 21, 35–38, 74–77, 96–98, 128, 146, 197, 221, 229, 240, 242, 257, 260, 284, 287, 292, 296, 313–314, 319, 324, 333, 336
  • interview 74, 76, 96

• megaphone diplomacy 136, 142

• meso-context 151–152, 180–181, 183, 186, 188

• metaphor 15, 100, 109, 118, 146, 226, 319–321, 323–330, 332, 335–336

• moderately-conventionalized 13, 229

• multimodal argumentative

• discourse 317, 319

• multi-participant TV debate 13, 229–230, 238, 255–256

• Neelie Peper-Kroes case 331–334

• non-argumentative rhetorical

• content 10, 57–58, 62, 65–66, 68

• objections 27–30, 34, 36, 217, 297

• participant 1, 5, 13, 15, 22, 91, 154, 159, 229–230, 235–238, 241–242, 246, 249–252, 255–256, 294, 300

• role 1, 5, 15, 159

• particularist defence 39, 41, 48

• pathos 11, 64, 87, 99–101, 107, 122, 296

• persuasion 1–2, 8, 10, 43, 53, 55, 58, 63–64, 73, 76, 87, 95, 98, 107, 127–128, 146, 208, 231, 287, 297–298, 309, 311
  • dialogue 2, 10, 43, 53, 73, 76, 87, 95

• Pim Fortuyn case 328–337

• Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984 152
  • PACE Codes of Practice 2002 152–153, 158, 171

• police interview 12, 151–159, 161, 173–175

• political accountability

• interview 10, 73, 78, 82, 95

• political cartoon 317–320, 323, 327–328, 334

• political communication 109, 323

• political crisis90

• political interview 87, 109, 256

• politician 15, 34, 77, 83, 88, 319–321, 323–324, 327–328, 330–331, 333, 335

• possible outcome 13, 172, 232, 253–255

• power 63, 77–82, 85, 92, 94, 103–104, 115–116, 130, 143–144, 146, 151–152, 154, 156, 173–175, 207, 217, 224, 226, 301, 329

• practical reasoning (based)
  • argument 11, 128, 132, 136, 137, 140, 141

• pragma-dialectical reconstruction319

• pragma-dialectics 11–12, 23, 27–28, 31, 34, 37, 62, 99, 101, 107–109, 122–123, 156, 184, 201, 227, 230–232, 249, 254, 310, 313, 336

• pragma-rhetorical approach 10, 13, 15, 75, 82, 97, 123, 227

• pragmatic argument 112–113, 115–116, 190

• pragmatics 21, 59, 69–70, 97, 147, 156, 256–257, 284, 286, 314, 336

• presentational device 109, 118, 328, 335

• press release 128, 130–131, 134, 136, 138–139, 146

• presuppositions 14, 36, 259, 262–264, 281–282

• prolepsis36

• public debate 90, 138, 183, 229, 317, 324

• question-answer 79, 80, 81, 85, 90
  • argumentation82
  • design 74, 79, 95
  • interplay 10, 11, 95
  • sequence 74, 78, 81, 85
  • turn-taking structure 74, 85

• questions
  • coercive questions155
  • critical questions 11, 98, 101, 108–109, 120, 157, 169–170, 172–173, 201
  • expository questions 79, 85
  • follow-up question81
  • leading questions 75, 78–79, 173
  • rhetorical questions 79–81, 97–98, 143, 254
  • standard questions79

• questioning 12, 73–82, 84–85, 87, 89, 96–98, 152–153, 155, 159, 172, 175, 208, 225
  • practices 74, 80–81, 84
  • strategies 77–79, 175
  • questioning techniques155

• (re)definition 206, 208

• resistance to metaphor 227, 235

• response 5, 29, 48, 50–51, 59–61, 78–80, 97–98, 131, 142, 169, 198, 215, 257, 283, 295, 297

• rhetoric
  • classical rhetoric107
  • new rhetoric 107–108, 124, 178, 192, 193, 222, 314
  • political rhetoric 99–125
  • revolutionary rhetoric 11, 99–125

• rhetorical analysis 60, 83

• rhetorical appeals86

• rhetorical approach

• rhetorical content 10, 57–69

• rhetorical device 58, 60, 64–66, 68, 206, 272

• rhetorical effect 10, 60, 64, 69

• rhetorical effectiveness 201, 224, 311

• rhetorical function 81, 133

• rhetorical goal 83, 232

• rhetorical dimension 2, 10, 58–60, 64, 69, 128

• rhetorical strategy88

• Russian Federation 74, 83, 85–88, 90–95, 138, 147

• same-sex marriage 10, 57–58, 67–68

• scheme based on analogy311

• scheme criticism 41, 50, 53

• socialization 2, 259, 261–263, 280–281, 283, 285–286

• solidarity 129, 143, 205–206, 208–209, 223–225, 302

• source-based argument 136, 140, 143

• speech-act of arguing 10, 62–63, 65, 69

• standard question79

• standpoint 2, 11, 14–15, 21, 26, 28–29, 31–35, 37, 88–89, 95, 128, 157–158, 160–162, 169, 171–172, 201, 205, 212–215, 222, 230, 232, 234–237, 242, 244–246, 248–252, 261, 268–270, 272, 275, 278–279, 291–293, 298, 302–311, 319–322, 326–332, 334–335
  • argumentative standpoint 11, 105
  • controversial standpoint 2, 122
  • irreconcilable standpoint95
  • justified standpoint34
  • motivated standpoint35
  • opposing standpoint 234, 238, 248–250

• starting points 13, 232, 238–239, 244, 246–247, 251, 254–255, 321

• strategic manoeuvring 2, 15, 292, 312–313, 317, 320, 323, 327, 331, 333–335
  • derailment of 122, 317, 320, 327, 331, 335
  • fallacious strategic manoeuvring 333–335

• subjectivity 11, 127, 129, 132, 135, 144–145

• symbolic attribute 301–303, 306

• symbolic suggestive process308

• symptomatic argumentation 157, 321

• symptomatic scheme304

• tag question 89, 272

• thematic role 91–92

• turn-taking 73, 78, 95, 175, 230, 257

• types of interviews 74–76

• Ukraine 73, 85–86, 90, 130, 134–135, 138–139, 143

• virtual objections27

• virtual opponent 21, 37

• visual argumentation 15, 291–292, 294, 296, 309, 314–315, 319–320

• visual arguments 14, 291–293, 296–300, 302, 304–305, 307–312, 314–315, 336

• visual metaphor 15, 319–321, 323–329, 332, 335

• voice 61, 64, 66, 91–92, 135–136, 159, 174, 191, 230, 233, 246, 253, 262

• warrant defence48