The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Argumentation
Abstract
This book concentrates on argumentation as it emerges in ordinary discourse, whether the discourse is institutionalized or strictly informal. Crucial concepts from the theory of argumentation are systematically discussed and explained with the help of examples from real-life discourse and texts. The basic principles are explained that are instrumental in the analysis and evaluation of argumentative discourse. Methodical instruments are offered for identifying differences of opinion, analyzing and evaluating argumentation and presenting arguments in oral and written discourse. In addition, the book provides a great variety of exercises and assignments to improve the students' skill in presenting argumentation. The authors begin their treatment of argumentation theory at the same juncture where argumentation also starts in practice: The difference of opinion that occasions the evolvement of the argumentation. Each chapter begins with a short summary of the essentials and ends with a number of exercises that students can use to master the material. Argumentation is the first introductory textbook of this kind. It is intended as a general introduction for students who are interested in a proper conduct of argumentative discourse. Suggestions for further reading are made for each topic and several extra assignments are added to the exercises. Special features: * A concise and complete treatment of both the theoretical backgrounds and the practice of argumentation analysis and evaluation. * Crucial concepts from pragmatics (speech act theory, Grice's cooperative principle) presented in a non-technical way; introducing the theory of verbal communication. * Unique coverage of both oral and written presentation of arguments. * Exercises and assignments based on real-life texts from a variety of contexts.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20278 · Cited by 317
Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice
Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R. (2012) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.21037 · Cited by 275
Andriessen, J. (2005) · The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816833.027 · Cited by 258
Rapanta, C., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654313487606 · Cited by 228
Song, Y., & Ferretti, R. P. (2013) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-012-9381-8 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- van Eemeren, F. H., Henkemans, A. F. S., van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Henkemans, A. F. S.
- Venue
- Routledge eBooks
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2002-01-01
- OpenAlex
- W4242601385
- Cited by
- 354
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.70
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Argumentation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9781410602442
- The paper
- van Eemeren, F. H., Henkemans, A. F. S., van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Henkemans, A. F. S. (2002). Argumentation. Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410602442
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.