Language and argument: a review of the field

Open access


This paper has a dual purpose: it both seeks to introduce the other works in this issue by illustrating how they are related to the field of argumentation as a whole, and to make clear the tremendous range of research currently being carried out by argumentation theorists which is concerned with the interaction and inter-reliance of language and argument. After a brief introduction to the development of the field of argumentation, as many as eight language-based approaches to the study of argument are identified, taking as their perspective: rhetoric, argument structure, argument as act, discourse analysis, corpus methods, emotive argument, and narrative argument. The conclusion makes it clear that these branches of study are all themselves interconnected and that it is the fusion of methodologies and theory from linguistics and the philosophical study of argument which lends this area of research its dynamism.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Aberdein Andrew. 2006. ‘Raising the Tone: Definition Bullshit and the Definition of Bullshit.’ In George Reisch and Gary Hardcastle (eds.) Bullshit and Philosophy 151-169. Chicago: Open Court.

  • Amossy Ruth. 2009. Argumentation in Discourse: A Socio-discursive Approach to Arguments. Informal Logic 29 (3). 252-267.

  • Austin John L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Blair J. Anthony and Ralph H. Johnson. 2000. Informal Logic: An Overview. Informal Logic 20 (2). 93-107.

  • Katarzyna Budzynska Araszkiewicz Michał Budzyńska-Daca Agnieszka Hinton Martin Lawrence John Modgil Sanjay Thimm Matthias Visser Jacky Żurek Tomasz Koszowy Marcin Atkinson Katie Dębowska-Kozłowska Kamila Kacprzak Magdalena Łupkowski Paweł Skowron Barłomiej Urbański Mariusz and Maria Załęska. 2018. Warsaw Argumentation Week (Waw 2018) Organised by the Polish School of Argumentation and Our Colleagues from Germany and the UK 6th-16th September 2018. Studies in Logic Grammar and Rhetoric 55 (1). 231-239.

  • Eemeren Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Hamblin Charles. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen.

  • Hample Dale and Amanda Irions. 2015. Arguing to Display Identity. Argumentation 29 (4) 389-416. DOI 10.1007/s10503-015-9351-9

  • Hinton Martin. 2016. ‘Identity as Argumentation: Argumentation as Identity.’ In Kamila Ciepiela (ed.) Identity in Communicative Contexts 175-186. Łódż Studies in Language Vol.48. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

  • Gilbert Michael. 2004. Emotion Argumentation and Informal Logic. Informal Logic 24 (3). 245-264.

  • Goodwin Jean and Viviana Cortes. 2010. Theorists’ and Practitioners’ Spatial Metaphors for Argumentation: A Corpus-based Approach. Verbum 23 (1). 163-78.

  • Goodwin Jean and Beth Innocenti. 2016. ‘The Pragmatic Force of Making Reasons Apparent.’ In Dima Mohammed and Marcin Lewiński (eds.) Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Argumentation Lisbon 2015 Vol. II 449-462. London: College Publications.

  • Macagno Fabrizio. 2014. Manipulating Emotions. Value-Based Reasoning and Emotive Language. Argumentation and Advocacy 51. 103-122.

  • Macagno Fabrizio and Douglas Walton. 2014. What We Hide in Words: Emotive Words and Persuasive Definitions. Journal of Pragmatics 42. 1997-2013.

  • Nelson Leonard. 2016. A Theory of Philosophical Fallacy. Cham: Springer.

  • Olmos Paula (ed.). 2017. Narration as Argument. Cham: Springer.

  • Oswald Steve Herman Thierry and Jérôme Jacquin (eds.). 2018. Argumentation and Language – Linguistic Cognitive and Discursive Explorations. Cham: Springer.

  • Perelman Chaim and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1969. La Nouvelle Rhétorique: Traité de l‘Argumentation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Trans by J. Wilkinson and P. Weaver as The New Rhetoric Notre Dame London: University of Notre Dame Press.

  • Saussure Louis de. 2018. ‘The Straw Man Fallacy as a Prestige-Gaining Device.’ In Steve Oswald Thierry Herman and Jérôme Jacquin (eds.) Argumentation and Language – Linguistic Cognitive and Discursive Explorations 171-190. Cham: Springer.

  • Stevens Katharina and Michael Baumtrog (eds.). 2018. Special Issue: Reason and Rhetoric in the Time of Alternative Facts. Informal Logic 38. 1.

  • Stevenson Charles. 1944. Ethics and Language. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.

  • Tindale Christopher. 2007. Fallacies and Argument Appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Tindale Christopher. 2017. ‘Narratives and the Concept of Argument.’ In Paula Olmos (ed.) Narration as Argument 11-30. Cham: Springer.

  • Visser Jacky Koszowy Marcin Konat Barbara Budzyńska Katarzyna and Chris Reed. 2018. ‘Straw Man as Misuse of Rephrase.’ In Steve Oswald and Didier Maillat (eds.) Argumentation and Inference: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation Fribourg 2017 Vol. 2. 941-962. London: College Publications.

  • Walton Douglas and Thomas F. Gordon. 2018. How Computational Tools Can Help Rhetoric and Informal Logic with Argument Invention. Argumentation. 1-27.

  • Walton Douglas Macagno Fabrizio and Chris Reed. 2008. Argument Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Wu Peng. 2019. Confrontational Maneuvering by Dissociation in Spokespersons’ Argumentative Replies at the Press Conferences of China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Argumentation 33 (1). 1-22.

  • Zhang Chuanrui and Cihau Xu. 2018. Argument by Multimodal Metaphor as Strategic Maneuvering in TV Commercials: A Case Study. Argumentation 32 (4). 501-517.

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.29

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.177
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.471

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 292 292 9
PDF Downloads 236 236 10