Page 66 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 66
What Do We Know about the World?
made their conclusions by themselves. But, as I have pointed out in rela-
tion to the example (16’’), this is another attitude we have to avoid if we
want to take the polyphonic analysis seriously (i.e. as a useful analytical
tool): utterers aren’t persons who can listen to each other and make their
own conclusions - utterers are really just different uttering positions, dif-
ferent points of view, distinguishable within a single argumentative string.
Utterers aren’t real beings that talk to each other; they are just theoretical
(and analytical) entities that help us reconstruct the course of argument
ation. From that perspective, if we want to account for all the viewpoints
within a single argumentative string, for all the (implicit) nuances, we do
need U2 and U4 as well.
References
Anscombre, J. C., and O. Ducrot (1983). L’Argumentation dans la
langue, Brussels: Mardaga.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, edited and
translated by C. Emerson, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Ducrot, O. (1972). Dire et ne pas dire, Paris: Herman.
Ducrot, O. (1973). Le preuve et le dire, Paris: Mame.
Ducrot, O. (1978). Structuralisme énonciation et sémantique. Poétique
33, 107–128.
Ducrot, O. (1984). Le dire et le dit, Paris: Minuit.
Ducrot, O. (1980). Les échelles argumentatives, Paris: Minuit.
Ducrot, O. (1982). Note sur l’argumentation et l’acte d’argumenter.
Cahiers de linguistique Française, 4, 143–163.
Ducrot, O. (1983). Opérateurs argumentatifs et visée argumentative.
Cahiers de linguistique Française, 5, 7–36.
Ducrot, O. (1996). Slovenian Lectures/Conférences slovènes, translat-
ed by S. McEvoy, edited by I. Ž. Žagar, Ljubljana: ISH, Inštitut za
humanistične študije.
Ducrot, O. (2009). Slovenian Lectures – Introduction into Argumenta-
tive Semantics, translated by S. McEvoy, edited by I. Ž. Žagar, Lju-
bljana: ERI Digital Library. http://www.pei.si/Sifranti/StaticPage.
aspx?id=70
Ducrot, O. et al. (1980). Les mots du discourse, Paris: Minuit.
Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, and T. Kruiger (1984). The Study
of Argumentation. New York: Irvington Publishers, Inc.
Moeschler, J. (1985). Argumentation et conversation. Element pour une
analyse pragmatique du discours. Paris: Hatier-Crédif.
made their conclusions by themselves. But, as I have pointed out in rela-
tion to the example (16’’), this is another attitude we have to avoid if we
want to take the polyphonic analysis seriously (i.e. as a useful analytical
tool): utterers aren’t persons who can listen to each other and make their
own conclusions - utterers are really just different uttering positions, dif-
ferent points of view, distinguishable within a single argumentative string.
Utterers aren’t real beings that talk to each other; they are just theoretical
(and analytical) entities that help us reconstruct the course of argument
ation. From that perspective, if we want to account for all the viewpoints
within a single argumentative string, for all the (implicit) nuances, we do
need U2 and U4 as well.
References
Anscombre, J. C., and O. Ducrot (1983). L’Argumentation dans la
langue, Brussels: Mardaga.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, edited and
translated by C. Emerson, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Ducrot, O. (1972). Dire et ne pas dire, Paris: Herman.
Ducrot, O. (1973). Le preuve et le dire, Paris: Mame.
Ducrot, O. (1978). Structuralisme énonciation et sémantique. Poétique
33, 107–128.
Ducrot, O. (1984). Le dire et le dit, Paris: Minuit.
Ducrot, O. (1980). Les échelles argumentatives, Paris: Minuit.
Ducrot, O. (1982). Note sur l’argumentation et l’acte d’argumenter.
Cahiers de linguistique Française, 4, 143–163.
Ducrot, O. (1983). Opérateurs argumentatifs et visée argumentative.
Cahiers de linguistique Française, 5, 7–36.
Ducrot, O. (1996). Slovenian Lectures/Conférences slovènes, translat-
ed by S. McEvoy, edited by I. Ž. Žagar, Ljubljana: ISH, Inštitut za
humanistične študije.
Ducrot, O. (2009). Slovenian Lectures – Introduction into Argumenta-
tive Semantics, translated by S. McEvoy, edited by I. Ž. Žagar, Lju-
bljana: ERI Digital Library. http://www.pei.si/Sifranti/StaticPage.
aspx?id=70
Ducrot, O. et al. (1980). Les mots du discourse, Paris: Minuit.
Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, and T. Kruiger (1984). The Study
of Argumentation. New York: Irvington Publishers, Inc.
Moeschler, J. (1985). Argumentation et conversation. Element pour une
analyse pragmatique du discours. Paris: Hatier-Crédif.
