BORDERLINE INSTANCES OF ARGUMENTATION IN ERISTIC DIALOGUE
BORDERLINE INSTANCES OF ARGUMENTATION IN ERISTIC DIALOGUE

Summary/Abstract: A series of unavoidable conditions are meant to satisfy argumentation in eristic broadcast dialogues; the particular context in question necessarily implies:– personal involvement - direct addressing, turn-taking, anticipating the opponent’s future moves, etc. - as any dialogue presupposes; – real-world situations to favour, if not purely adversarial (as in argumentative quarrels), at least a combative sort of verbal exchange between antagonist parties, whose main purposes might be: to impress others, to seek victory (often in disregard of truth and evidence), to make critical assessments, to sustain an argument, to provide rebuttals, or to resolve differences of opinion; – techniques of argumentation highly based on dishonest tricks including: fallacies and ambiguities, emotions, irony and artistic devices (such as euphemism, metaphor, metonymy), all of them meant to influence the other’s perception, to facilitate persuasion, to manipulate the addressees, even to motivate or discourage relationships. Nevertheless, the fulfilment of some of the above-mentioned conditions is sometimes endangered to a greater or lesser extent.

• Details
• Contents