This book addresses two related questions that have first arisen in Toulmin’s seminal book on the uses of argument. The first question is the one of the relationship between the semantic analysis of modality and the structure of arguments. The second question is the one of the distinctive place, or role, of modality in the fundamental structure of arguments. These two questions concern how modality, as a semantic category, relates to the fundamental structure of arguments. The book addresses modality and argumentation also according to another perspective by looking at how different linguistic modal expressions may be taken as argumentative indicators. It explores the role of modal expressions as argumentative indicators by using the Italian modal system as a case study. At the same time, it uses predictions/forecasts in the business-financial daily press to investigate the relation between modality and the context of argumentation.

The philosophy of modality investigates necessity and possibility, and related notions—are they objective features of mind-independent reality? If so, are they irreducible, or can modal facts be explained in other terms? This volume presents new work on modality by established leaders in the field and by up-and-coming philosophers. Between them, the papers address fundamental questions concerning realism and anti-realism about modality, the nature and basis of facts about what is possible and what is necessary, the nature of modal knowledge, modal logic and its relations to necessary existence and to counterfactual reasoning. The general introduction locates the individual contributions in the wider context of the contemporary discussion of the metaphysics and epistemology of modality.

This book provides a broad overview of the issues relevant for the study of syntax of modals and their interaction with the verbal system. A large number of novel observations are offered from a variety of languages, including Dutch, (Modern and Middle) English, German, Lele, Macedonian, Middle Dutch and Slovene. The wealth of data, the critical evaluation of existing syntactic analyses of modality and the alternative analyses proposed make the book interesting for both for descriptively and for theoretically oriented syntacticians. Major concerns addressed are: the distinction between epistemic and root modality (where the arguments pro and contra the assumption of a corresponding difference in syntactic structure are evaluated, refined, and supplemented by arguments for syntactic distinction between necessity and possibility modals and by consideration of the influence of the modal’s complement on the interpretation), the interaction between modality and clausal phenomena (in particular negation, but also imperatives, aspect and Aktionsart), and the acquisition of modality (addressing cross-linguistic differences in the possibility for root infinitives to express modal interpretations and the late acquisition of epistemic interpretations as compared with non-epistemic interpretations).

Using data from a new corpus of contemporary American medical texts, Vihl analyzes model expressions such as may, must, and possibly as they are used in medical English. She thinks that knowing how modal expressions are distributed and their pragmatic functions in the texts can help when teaching professional writing to non-native speakers, and clarify how language is institutionally situated. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

"Multi-modal argumentation with its logical, emotional, visceral and kisceral arguments is an important addition to logical argumentation, especially when real-life situations are considered. It does not discard logic but adds other modes of argumentation to complement it, to emphasize the realistic environments of communication.. In this sense, the multi-modal theory is important for the area of legal argumentation, where even in the reasoning of judicial decisions traces of a flesh-and-blood personality, who decided the case and wrote the reasons, can be found. This book presents a comprehensive analysis of this informal logic in legal argumentation and its practicality within the law. It argues that by building on the dialectical and rhetorical models of legal argument, the former being important for clear cases while the latter for unclear ones, the multi-modal theory of legal argumentation brings together logic and psychology in a holistic or integral perspective. The approach is not only descriptive, identifying the traces of alternate arguments in judicial decisions, but is also normative, presenting the criteria for evaluation that multi-modal arguments need to face to attain validity in the legal context. The work will be of interest to academics and researchers in the areas of Legal Theory, Legal Linguistics, Philosophy of Law, and Communication Studies"--

This book provides a new, linguistic approach to Argumentation Theory. Its main goal is to integrate the logical, dialectical and rhetorical dimensions of argumentation in a model providing a unitary treatment of its justificatory and persuasive powers. This model takes as its basis Speech Acts Theory in order to characterize argumentation as a second-order speech act complex. The result is a systematic and comprehensive theory of the interpretation, analysis and evaluation of arguments. This theory sheds light on the many faces of argumentative communication: verbal and non-verbal, monological and dialogical, literal and non-literal, ordinary and specialized. The book takes into consideration the major current comprehensive accounts of good argumentation (Perelman’s New Rhetoric, Pragma-dialectics, the ARG model, the Epistemic Approach) and shows that these accounts have fundamental weaknesses rooted in their instrumentalist conception of argumentation as an activity oriented to a goal external to itself. Furthermore, the author addresses some challenging meta-theoretical questions such as the justification problem for Argumentation Theory models and the relationship between reasoning and arguing.

Coalescent Argumentation is based on the concept that arguments can function from agreement, rather than disagreement. To prove this idea, Gilbert first discusses how several components--emotional, visceral (physical) and kisceral (intuitive) are utilized in an argumentative setting by people everyday. These components, also characterized as "modes," are vital to argumentative communication because they affect both the argument and the resulting outcome. In addition to the components/modes, this book also stresses the goals in argumentation as a means for understanding one's own and one's opposer's positions. Gilbert argues that by viewing positions as complex human events involving a variety of communicative modes, we are better able to find commonalities across positions, and, therefore, move from conflict to resolution. By focusing on agreement and shared goals in all modes, arguers can coalesce diverse positions and more easily distinguish between minor or unrelated differences and core disagreements. This permits much greater latitude for locating shared beliefs, values, and attitudes that will lead to conflict resolution.

This is the first book on the provocative and innovative contributions to philosophy of language, metaphysics, the philosophy of mathematics, and logic made by Kit Fine, one of the world's foremost philosophers. Topics covered include meaning and representation, arbitrary objects, essence, ontological realism, and the metaphysics of modality.

This volume focuses on the role language plays at all levels of the argumentation process. It explores the effects that specific linguistic choices may have in the production and the reception of arguments and in doing so, it moves beyond the first, necessary, descriptive stance provided by current literature on the topic. Each chapter provides an original take illuminating one or more of the following three issues: the range of linguistic resources language users draw on as they argue; how cognitive processes of meaning construction may influence argumentative practices; and which discursive devices can be used to fulfil a number of argumentative goals. The volume includes theoretical and empirical or applied stances, providing the reader both with state-of-the-art reflections on the relationship between argumentation and language, and with concrete examples of how this relationship plays out in naturally occurring argumentative practices, such as classroom interaction, and political, parliamentary or journalistic discourse. This is a very original, timely and welcome contribution to the study of argumentation conducted with the tools of the language sciences. The collection of papers relevantly tackles key linguistic, discursive and cognitive aspects of argumentative practices whose treatment is underrepresented in mainstream argumentation studies by offering new and exciting linguistically-grounded theoretical accounts. As such, the volume testifies both to the vigour of the linguistic current within the discipline and to the high standards of scholarly commitment and quality that the younger generation is pushing forward. Without question, this book marks an important milestone in the relationships between linguistics and argumentation theory. Christian Plantin, Professor Emeritus

The primary focus of the updated, second edition has not changedit embraces the narrative or storytelling approach to the study of argumentation. The first section introduces readers to rhetorical theorists and their principles. These significant contributions to the field of argumentation and debate include Aristotles views on audiences and the ethical character of an advocate, Burkes dramatistic theory of communication, Brockriedes metaphorical image of arguers, Fishers narrative paradigm, Mills guidelines for testing the causal correlation, Perelman and Obrechts-Tytecas conception of a universal audience, Rokeachs definition of values, and Toulmins model for developing and analyzing argument claims and his conception of arguments as field dependent. Hollihan and Baaskes discussions of these ideas and their applications are easy to follow, unencumbered by technical jargon, and illustrated with engaging examples drawn from current and well-known historical events. The key to the success of this text is the authors ability to show readers how foundational principles of argumentation are used in a variety of real-world situations. The second section covers specialized contexts such as academic debates, courts of law, politics, business and organizations, and interpersonal relationships. Activities that stimulate critical thinking and the implementation of the ideas discussed are provided at the end of each chapter.