A Pragma-Dialectical Study of Speech Acts in Chomsky's Interview “Trump Has Adopted a ‘Viva Death’ Approach to Presidency”
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study analyses the speech acts used in Noam Chomsky's interview, “Trump has adopted a ‘viva death’ approach to presidency”, about Corona pandemic in terms of van Eemeren’s Pragma-Dialectical Approach. The aim of the study is to identify the various stages of argumentation and classify the speech acts into different stages of argumentation. The study provides insight into the importance of speech acts in argumentation and how they vary depending on the context of the argumentation, structure of the argumentation, and the intention of the writer. The analysis of the interview reveals the various speech acts used in different stages of the argumentation and how they contribute to building a coherent argument.
Article Details
References
Bonevac, D. (2003). Pragma-dialectics and Beyond. Argumentation, 17, 1-10.
Drid, T. (2016). A Pragma- Dialectical Approach to Argumentative Discourse. Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 19(4), 20-35. Kasdi Merbah University.
Eemeren, F. H. van and Grootendorst, R. (1989). A transition stage in the theory of fallacies. Journal of Pragmatics, 13(1), 99-109.
Eemeren, F. H. van and Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum
Eemeren, F. H. van and Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Eemeren, F. H. van and Houtlosser, P. (2004). A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of the Burden of Proof [Unpublished seminar paper. University of Amsterdam: Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric].
Eemeren, F. H. van (2007). Pragma-Dialectical Theory of Argumentation. “In Whaley and Stamter (Eds.) .Explaining Communication: Contemporary Theories and Exemplars. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Eemeren, F. H. van, Garssen, B., Krabbe, E. C. W., Henkemans, A. F. S., Verheij, B. and Wagemans, J. H. M. (2014). Handbook of Argumentation Theory. New York: Springer.
Eemeren, F. H. van (2015). In Reasonableness .In van Eemeren (Ed.). Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse .Dordrecht: Springer.
Eemeren, F. H. van, Garssen, B., and Labrie, N. (2021). Argumentation between doctors and patients. Understanding clinical argumentative discourse. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Garssen, B. (2015). Pragma-dialectics. In The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction (Eds.) K. Tracy, T. Sandel and C. Ilie. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi104
Gerber, M. (2011). Pragmatism, Pragma-Dialectics, and Methodology: Toward a More Ethical Notion of Argument Criticism. Speaker & Gavel, 48(1), 21-30.
Ghailan, U. A. (2019). Argumentative Indicators in Some of Chomsky's Political Discourse: A Pragma-Dialectical Study. A PhD. Dissertation: University of Basrah.
Henkemans, S. A. F. (2000). State-of-the-Art: The Structure of Argumentation. Argumentation. 14, 447-473. Retrieved from https://doi: 10.1023/A: 1007800305762
Henkemans, A. F. S. (2014). Speech Acts Theory and the Study of Argumentation". Journal of Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric. DOI: 10. 2478/SIgr- 2014-0002
Johnson, R. (2000). Manifest rationality: A pragmatic theory of argument. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
Kauffeld, F. (2006). Pragma-dialectics Appropriation of Speech Act Theory. In Houtlosser and van Rees (Eds).Considering Pragma –dialectics. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Searle, J. (1975a). A Classification of Illocutionary Acts. Language in Society, 5(1), 1–23.
Van Rees, M. A. (2000). Comments on rhetoric and dialectic in the 21st century. Argumentation, 14 (3), 255-259.