In this paper I investigate what role the stylistic device rhetorical question can play in arguers’ attempts to reconcile their rhetorical with their dialectical aims by manoeuvring strategically when carrying out particular discussion moves that form part of the dialectical procedure for resolving a dispute. The research I shall report on here, forms part of a larger project in which insights from classical rhetoric, pragmatics and modern stylistics are used to explore the possibilities for strategic manoeuvring with specific presentational means.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Blankenship, K. L., & Craig, T. Y. (2006). Rhetorical question use and resistance to persuasion: An attitudestrength analysis. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 25(2), 111–128.
Closs Traugott, E. (1997). The discourse connective after all. A historical pragmatic account. Paper prepared for ICL, Paris. Retrieved from http://www.stanford.edu/~traugott/papers/after_all.pdf.
Houtlosser, P. (1995). Standpunten in een kritische Discussie. Amsterdam: Ifott.
Ilie, C. (1994). What Else Can I Tell You? A Pragmatic Study of English Rhetorical Questions as Discursive and Argumentative Acts. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
Rohde, H. (2006). Rhetorical questions as redundant interrogatives. San Diego Linguistics Papers, 2, 134–168.
Sadock, J. M. (1971). Queclaratives. Papers from the Seventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 223–232). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Slot, P. (1993). How Can You Say That? Rhetorical Questions in Argumentative Texts. Amsterdam: Ifott.
Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2005). What’s in a name? The use of the stylistic device metonymy as a strategic manoeuvre in the confrontation and argumentation stages of a discussion. In D. Hitchcock (Ed.), The Uses of Argument: Proceedings of a Conference at McMaster University 18–21 May 2005 (pp. 433–441). Hamilton: Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H. & Houtlosser, P. (2002). Strategic maneuvering: Maintaining a delicate balance. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis (pp. 119–130). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
van Eemeren, F. H. Houtlosser, P. & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2005). Argumentatieve Indicatoren in Het Nederlands. Een Pragma-Dialectische Studie. Amsterdam: Rozenberg Publishers.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Snoeck Henkemans, A.F. (2009). Manoeuvring Strategically with Rhetorical Questions. In: van Eemeren, F.H., Garssen, B. (eds) Pondering on Problems of Argumentation. Argumentation Library, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9165-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9165-0_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-9164-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-9165-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)