Goal-oriented communication has long been the trademark of human interaction in a wide range of private and public settings. During the past three decades a renewed awareness has emerged in both academic and extra-academic circles about the growing role and extensive effects of rhetorically powerful discourse in all areas of human activity. This is particularly noticeable in political discourse, which is driven by the challenge and wish to argue in order to influence people’s minds, to motivate people to act and even to manipulate people. That is why speakers do not only advance their own arguments in favour of their positions, but they also provide arguments discarding the other side’s arguments. In controversies, definitions are often used to legitimate and refute arguments. Refuting an argument presupposes understanding that argument at every level of its literal meaning and pragmatic implicatures. In political disputes the act of defining contributes to further polarisation between adversarial positions and can therefore become rhetorically persuasive or dissuasive.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aristotle, (1984). Sophistical refutations. In J. Barnes (Ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle (W. D. Ross, Trans.) (Vol. 1). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Bailey, A. (1990). Pyrrhonean scepticism and the self-refutation argument. The Philosophical Quarterly, 40(158), 27–44.
Fahnestock, J., & Secor, M. (1990). A Rhetoric of Argument. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Ibsch, E. (1997). The refutation of truth claims. In H. Bertens (Ed.), International Postmodernism: Theory and Literary Practice. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Ilie, C. (2003). Parenthetically speaking: Parliamentary parentheticals as rhetorical strategies. In M. Bondi & S. Stati (Eds.), Dialogue Analysis 2000: Selected Papers from the 10th IADA Anniversary Conference (pp. 253–264). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Kastely, J. L. (1997). Rethinking the Rhetorical Tradition: From Plato to Postmodernism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Moeschler, J. (1982). Dire et contredire: Pragmatique de la negation et acte de refutation dans la conversation. Berne: Peter Lang.
Pankhurst, E. (1999). Militant suffragists. In L. Copeland, L. W. Lamm, & S. J. McKenna (Eds.), The World’s Great Speeches (4th enlarged ed.). Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Perelman, Ch., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation (J. Wilkinson & P. Weaver, Trans.). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. (Original work published 1958)
Rieke, R. D., & Sillars, M. O. (1975). Argumentation and the Decision Making Process. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Roberts, M. (Ed.). (1995). The Suffragettes. London: Routledge.
Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Silva Rhetoricae (n.d.). Available from http://rhetoric.byu.edu/(1996–2003, Gideon O. Burton, Brigham Young University).
Smith, R. W. (1964). “Refutation” and “Rebuttal”. American Speech, 39(2), 124–130.
Tsohatzidis, S. L. (Ed.). (1994). Foundations of Speech Act Theory: Philosophical and Linguistic Perspectives. London: Routledge.
van Eemeren, F. H. Grootendorst, R., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (1996). Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Verlinden, J. (2005). Critical Thinking and Everyday Argument. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson.
Walton, D. N. (1985). Arguers Position: A Pragmatic Study of “Ad Hominem” Attack, Criticism, Refutation and Fallacy. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Walton, D. N. (2001). Persuasive definitions and public policy arguments. Argumentation and Advocacy, 37, 117–132.
Warner, M. (1998). No Go the Bogeyman: Scaring, Lulling and Making Mock. London: Chatto & Windus.
WordWebOnline (n.d.). Available from http://www.wordwebonline.com.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ilie, C. (2009). Strategies of Refutation by Definition: A Pragma-Rhetorical Approach to Refutations in a Public Speech. In: van Eemeren, F.H., Garssen, B. (eds) Pondering on Problems of Argumentation. Argumentation Library, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9165-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9165-0_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-9164-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-9165-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)