UvA DARE | Search results

UvA-DARE

Digital Academic Repository

UvA-DARE

Full text
Document type

Organisation

Results: 518

Number of items: 518

van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2008). Kinship: the relationship between Johnstone's ideas about philosophical argument and the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. In G. Hauser (Ed.), Philosophy and rhetoric in dialogue: redrawing their intellectual landscape (pp. 51-70). Pennsylvania State University Press. http://books.google.nl/books?id=_AcYe44YCu4C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_navlinks_s
van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2008). Rhetoric in a dialectical framework: fallacies as derailments of strategic manoeuvring. In E. Weigand (Ed.), Dialogue and rhetoric (pp. 133-151). (Dialogue studies; No. 2). Benjamins. http://books.google.nl/books?hl=nl&lr=&id=G3cy1xoIIUIC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=rhetoric+in+a+dialectical+framework+weigand&ots=OqtR_a9Z2c&sig=gMdZEzLavm6VMM7Yq57HpU8xhG4
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2008). Una teoria sistematica dell'argomentazione: l'approccio pragma-dialettico. (Il quadrato delle opposizioni). Mimesis.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2008). The development of the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation. In A. J. Aguayo, & T. R. Steffensmeier (Eds.), Readings on argumentation (pp. 12-25). State College, PA.
van Eemeren, F. H., Williams, D. C., & Zagar, I. Z. (2008). Preface. In F. H. van Eemeren, D. C. Williams, & I. Z. Zagar (Eds.), Understanding argumentation: work in progress (pp. 9). Sic Sat-Rozenberg.
van Eemeren, F., Garssen, B., & Meuffels, B. (2008). Reasonableness in confrontation: empirical evidence concerning the assessment of ad hominem fallacies. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Controversy and confrontation: relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory (pp. 181-195). (Controversies; No. 6). John Benjamins. http://books.google.nl/books?hl=nl&lr=&id=Rg4NjDGF6PEC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=controversy+and+confrontation+eemeren&ots=xqUJremKTm&sig=DAe89qi5e6RHKcMkH80t7TKw_ck
van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2008). Más sobre falacias como descarrilamientos de maniobras estratégicas: el caso de 'tu quoque'. In C. Santibáñez Yáñez, & R. Marafioti (Eds.), De las falacias: argumentación y comunicación (pp. 37-51). (Ciencias del lenguaje). Biblos. http://books.google.nl/books?id=rD90Eoi6BYMC&lpg=PA54&ots=zfmLgMc7Ar&dq=santibanez%20De%20las%20falacias%3A%20argumentaci%C3%B3n%20y%20comunicaci%C3%B3n&pg=PA37
van Eemeren, F. H., Houtlosser, P., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2008). Dialectical profiles and indicators of argumentative moves. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(3), 475-493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.002
van Eemeren, F. H. (2008). The need for well-considered normativity in the study of argumentation. In T. Suzuki, T. Kato, & A. Kubuta (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Tokyo Conference on Argumentation: argumentation, the law and justice (pp. 57-65). Japan Debate Association.
van Eemeren, F. H. (2008). Valuing validity as reasonableness: rationale for a pragma-dialectical perspective. In P. Nerhot (Ed.), Truth and judgement (pp. 199-222). (Filosofia; No. 195). Franco Angeli.

Page 11 of 52