Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Evaluating Argumentative Discourse Processes Cover
By: Martin Hinton  
Open Access
|Nov 2025

References

  1. Aristotle (2009). Prior Analytics Book I. Translated with an Introduction and Commentary by Gisela Striker. Clarendon Aristotle Series. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  2. Austin, J. (1962). How to do Things with Words. London: Oxford University Press.
  3. Bermejo Luque, L. (2011a). Giving reasons: A linguistic-pragmatic approach to argumentation theory Argumentation Library (Vol. 20). Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media.
  4. Bermejo Luque, L. (2011b). Exchanging Reasons: responses to critics. Theoria. Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia, vol. 26, 72: 329–343.
  5. Bermejo Luque, L. (2019). The Appraisal of Conductions. Informal Logic 39 (2): 123–145.
  6. Biro, J. & Siegel, H. (2011). Argumentation, Arguing, and Arguments: Comments on Giving Reasons. Theoria, vol. 26, 72: 279–287.
  7. Blair, J.A. & Johnson, R. (2000). Informal Logic: An Overview. Informal Logic, 20 (2): 93–107.
  8. Blum-Kulka, S. (1987). Indirectness and politeness: same or different? Journal of Pragmatics, 11 (2): 131–146.
  9. Boethius, A. (1978). De Topicis Differentiis. Translated, with notes and essays on the text, by Eleonore Stump. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
  10. Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,.
  11. Dufour, M. (2017). Argument or Explanation: Who Is to Decide? Informal Logic, 37(1), 23–41.
  12. Govier, T. (2010). A Practical Study of Argument. 7th edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  13. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
  14. Hinton, M. (2020). Towards a Theory of Informal Argument Semantics. In: Dutilh Novaes, C., Jansen, H., van Laar, J.A., & Verheij, B. (eds.). Reason to Dissent – Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Argumentation, Volume II, 279–392. London: College Publications.
  15. Hinton M. (2021). Evaluating the Language of Argument. Argumentation Library Vol. 37. Cham: Springer.
  16. Hinton, M., Kobierski, M, Olkowska, W. & A. Sroka. (forthcoming). Functions of Argument: Changing minds about what? Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA).
  17. Hitchcock, D. (2011). Arguing as Trying to Show That a Target-claim is Correct. Theoria, vol. 26, 72: 301–309.
  18. Johnson, R.H., & Blair, J.A. (2006). Logical Self-defense. New York: Idebate Press. Locke, J. ([1690] 1975). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  19. Lumer, C. (2010). Pragma-dialectics and the function of argumentation. Argumentation, 24(1), 41–69.
  20. Mercier, H. & Sperber, D. (2017). The Enigma of Reason. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.
  21. Popa, E. (2021). Farewell to Fallacies (and Welcome Back!). Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 54, No. 4, 397–420.
  22. Siegel, H., & Biro, J. (2008). Rationality, reasonableness, and critical rationalism: Problems with the pragma-dialectical view. Argumentation, 22(2), 191–203.
  23. Terkourafi, M. (2015). Conventionalization: A new agenda for im/politeness research. Journal of Pragmatics, 86: 11–18.
  24. van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1995). The pragma-dialectical approach to fallacies. In Hansen, H.V., and Pinto, R.C. (Eds.) Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings, 130–144. University Park: Penn State University Press.
  25. van Eemeren, F.H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  26. Wagemans, J.H.M. (2016). Constructing a Periodic Table of Arguments. OSSA conference archive. 106 https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/106/
  27. Wagemans, J.H.M. (2021). Argument Type Identification Procedure (ATIP) – Version 4. Published online December 30, 2021. www.periodic-table-of-arguments.org/argument-type-identification-procedure
  28. Wagemans, J.H.M. (2023). On the hermeneutics of persuasive discourse: How to identify an argument type? Journal of Pragmatics, 203, 117–129.
  29. Wakley, T. (1855). “Editorial.” Lancet 65: 634–37.
  30. Walton, D. (1988). Burden of Proof. Argumentation, 2, 233–254.
  31. Walton, D. (2004). Classification of Fallacies of Relevance. Informal Logic, 24(1), 71–103.
  32. Walton, D. (2015). The Basic Slippery Slope Argument. Informal Logic, 35(3), 273–311.
  33. Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  34. Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (1986). Inference and Implicature in Utterance Interpretation. In T. Myers, K. Brown, & B. McGonigle (Eds.), Reasoning and Discourse Processes (pp. 241–263). London: Academic Press.
  35. Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (2004). Relevance theory. In L. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.). Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 607–632). Oxford: Blackwell.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2025-0014 | Journal eISSN: 2199-6059 | Journal ISSN: 0860-150X
Language: English
Page range: 259 - 281
Published on: Nov 24, 2025
Published by: University of Białystok
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Related subjects:

© 2025 Martin Hinton, published by University of Białystok
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.