Emotive language in argumentation

Emotive Language in Argumentation

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 1-292

  Walton, Douglas ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDADE NOVA DE LISBOA   (Portugal)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84923629150     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139565776     Document Type: Book

References (348)

1. Aakhus, Mark (2005). The Act and Activity of Proposing in Deliberation. In P. Ridley (ed.), Engaging Argument: Selected Papers from the 2005 National Communication Association/American Forensic Association Summer Conference on Argumentation (pp. 402–408). Washington, DC: National Communication Association.
2. Aarnio, Aulis (1977). On Legal Reasoning. Turku: Turun Yliopisto.
3. Aarnio, Aulis (1987). The Rational as Reasonable. Dordrecht: Reidel.
4. Abaelardus, Petrus (1970). Dialectica. L. M. De Rijk (ed.). Assen: Van Gorcum.
5. Aberdein, Andrew (2000). Persuasive Dei nition. In C. W. Tindale, H. V. Hansen, & E. Sveda (eds.), Argumentation at the Century’s Turn, OSSA (Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation) Proceedings, Windsor 2000.
6. Anscombe, G. E. M. (1998). Practical Inference. In R. Hursthouse, G. Lawrence, & W. Quinn (eds.), Virtues and Reasons: Philippa Foot and Moral Theory: Essays in Honour of Philippa Foot (pp. 1–34), Oxford: Clarendon Press.
7. Anscombre, Jean-Claude & Ducrot, Oswald (1978). Lois logiques et lois argumentatives. Le Fran ç ais Moderne 46 (4): 347–357.
8. Anscombre, Jean-Claude & Ducrot, Oswald (1983). L’Argumentation dans la langue. Bruxelles: Mardaga.
9. Anscombre, Jean-Claude & Ducrot, Oswald (1986). Argumentativit é et informativit é. In M. Meyer (ed.), De la m é taphysique à la rh é torique (pp. 79-94), Bruxelles: Universit é de Bruxelles.
10. Antley, Kenneth (1974). McCawley’s Theory of Selectional Restriction. Foundations of Language 11 (2): 257 –272.
11. Aqvist, Lennart (1974). A New Approach to the Logical Theory of Actions and Causality. In S. Stenlund (ed.), Logical Theory and Semantics (pp. 73–91), Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
12. Aristotle (1969). Topica. In W. D. Ross (ed.), The Works of Aristotle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Aristotle (2007). On Rhetoric. A Theory of Civic Discourse. Translated by G. Kennedy. Oxford University Press.
14. Aristotle (1995). Nicomachean Ethics. In J. Barnes (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle, vol. II, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15. Artsybashev, Michael (1915). Sanine. New York: Huebsch.
16. Asher, Nichoals & Lascarides, Alex (1998). The Semantics and Pragmatics of Presupposition. Journal of Semantics 15 (3): 239–300.
17. Asher, Nichoals & Lascarides, Alex (2003). Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Atkinson, Katie, Bench-Capon, Trevor, & McBurney, Peter (2005): Generating Intentions through Argumentation. In F. Dignum, V. Dignum, S. Koenig, S. Kraus, M. Singh, & M. Wooldridge (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2005) (pp. 1261–1262), Utrecht, The Netherlands: ACM Press.
19. Atkinson, Katie, Bench-Capon, Trevor, & McBurney, Peter (2006). PARMENIDES: Facilitating Deliberation in Democracies. Artii cial Intelligence and Law 14 (4): 261–275.
20. Atlas, Jay (2004). Presupposition. In L. R. Horn & G. Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 29–52), Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
21. Bach, Kent (1999). The Myth of Conventional Implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy 22 (4): 237–366.
22. Bach, Kent (2006). Speech acts and pragmatics. In M. Devitt & R. Hanley (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Language (pp. 147–167). Oxford: Blackwell.
23. Baker, Michael. (2003). Computer-Mediated Argumentative Interactions for the Co-Elaboration of Scientii c Notions. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (eds.), Arguing to Learn: Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments (pp. 47–78), Dordrecht: Kluwer.
24. Ballard Lee, Conrad, Robert. & Longacre, Robert (1971). The Deep and Surface Grammar of Interclausal Relations. Foundations of Language 7 (1): 70 –118.
25. Barth, Else & Krabbe, Erik (1982). From Axiom to Dialogue. Berlin: de Gruyter.
26. Barwick, Karl (1965). Zur Rekonstruktion der Rhetorik des Hermagoras von Temnos. Philologus 109 (3/4): 186–218.
27. Basler, Roy (1946). Abraham Lincoln. His Speeches and Writings. Cleveland: World Publishing Company.
28. Bayles, Michael (1991). Dei nitions in Law. In J. Fetzer, D. Shatz, & G. Schlesinger (eds.), Dei nitions and Dei nability: Philosophical Perspectives (pp. 253–267), Dordrecht: Kluwer.
29. Bellavita, Christopher (2008). Changing Homeland Security: What is Homeland Security? Homeland Security Affairs 4(2).
30. Bench-Capon, Trevor (1998). Specii cation and Implementation of Toulmin Dialogue Game. In Legal Knowledge-Based Systems. JURIX: The Eleventh Conference (pp. 5–19), Nijmegen: Gerard Noodt Instituut.
31. Bench-Capon, Trevor (2002). Agreeing to Differ: Modelling Persuasive Dialogue between Parties with Different Values. Informal Logic 22 (3): 231–245.
32. Bench-Capon, Trevor (2003). Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-Based Argumentation Frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation 13 (3): 429–448.
33. Bench-Capon, Trevor & Atkinson, Katie (2009). Abstract Argumentation and Values. In Iyad Rahwan & Guillermo Simari (eds.), Argumentation in Artii cial Intelligence (pp. 45–64), Berlin: Springer.
34. Bentham, Jeremy (1952). Bentham’s Handbook of Political Fallacies. H. A. Larrabee (ed.), Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
35. Ben-Ze’ev, Aaron (2000). The Subtlety of Emotions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36. Bierwisch, Manfred (1969). On Certain Problems of Semantic Representation. Foundations of Language 5 (2): 153 –184.
37. Blackstone, William (1769). Commentaries on the Laws of England. Vol. IV. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
38. Blakey, Robert (1982). The RICO Civil Fraud Action in Context: Rel ections on Bennett v. Berg. Notre Dame Law Review 58 (2): 237–349.
39. Blokker, Niels (2000). Is the Authorization Authorized? Powers and Practice of the UN Security Council to Authorize the Use of Force by ‘Coalitions of the Able and Willing.’ European Journal of International Law 11 (3): 541–568.
40. Bocchino, Anthony & Sonenshein, David (2006). A Practical Guide to Federal Evidence. Louisville, CO: NITA.
41. Boethius, Anicius Manlius Severinus (1891). Liber de Difi nitione. In J.-P. Migne (ed.), Patrologia Latina, vol. 64, Paris.
42. Boethius, Anicius Manlius Severinus (1966). Porphyrii Isagoge, Translatio Boethii. In L. Minio-Paluello (ed.). Bruges: Descl é e De Brouwer.
43. Boethius’s De Topicis Differentiis. Translated by E. Stump. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
44. Boethius’s In Ciceronis topica (1988). Translated, with notes and Introduction by Eleanore Stump. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
45. Braet, Antoine (1987). The Classical Doctrine of Status and the Rhetorical Theory of Argumentation. Philosophy & Rhetoric 20 (2): 79 –93.
46. Brewer, Scott (1996). Exemplary Reasoning: Semantics, Pragmatics and the Rational Force of Legal Argument by Analogy. Harvard Law Review 109 (5): 923–1028.
47. Brewka, Gerhard (2001). Dynamic Argument Systems: A Formal Model of Argumentation Processes Based on Situation Calculus. Journal of Logic and Computation 11 (2): 257–282.
48. Broda-Bahm, Kenneth (1999). Finding Protection in Dei nitions: The Quest for Environmental Securit y. Argumentation & Advocacy 35 (4): 159–170.
49. Brown, Donald (1955). Evaluative Inference. Philosophy 30 (114): 214–228.
50. Brown, Lester (1977). Redei ning National Security. Worldwatch Paper 14. Washington DC: Worldwatch Institute.
51. Buchanan, Bruce, Carenini, Giuseppe, Mittal, Vibhu, & Moore, Johanna (1998). Designing Computer-Based Frameworks that Facilitate Doctor–Patient Collaboration. Artii cial Intelligence in Medicine 12 (2): 169–191.
52. Burgess-Jackson, Keith (1995). Rape and Persuasive Dei nition. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 25 (3) appeared in issue 3: 415–454.
53. Burnyeat, Myles (1980). Aristotle on Learning to be Good. In A. Rorty (ed.), Essays on Aristotle’s Ethics (pp. 69–92), Berkeley: University of California Press.
54. Burton-Roberts, Noel (1989). The Limits to Debate: A Revised Theory of Semantic Presupposition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
55. Calboli Montefusco, Lucia (2004). Stylistic and Argumentative Function of Rhetorical “Amplii catio”. Hermes 132 (1) appeared in issue 1: 69–81.
56. Carston, Robyn (2002). Thoughts and Utterances. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
57. Chesterton, Gilbert (2009). Heretics. Rockville, MD: Serenity.
58. Chi, Michelene & Roscoe, Rod (2002). The Process and Challenges of Conceptual Change. In M. Limon & L. Mason (eds.), Reconsidering Conceptual Change: Issues in Theory and Practice (pp. 3–27). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
59. Chisholm, Roderick (1976). Person and Object: A Metaphysical Study. London: Routledge.
60. Chomsky, Noam (1971). Deep Structure, Surface Structure and Semantic Interpretation. In D. Steinberg & L. Jakobovits (eds.), Semantics, an Interdisciplinary Reader in Linguistics, Philosophy and Psychology (pp. 183–216), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
61. Chomsky, Noam (1972). Some Empirical Issues in the Theory of Transformational Grammar. In Stanley Peters (ed.), Goals of Linguistic Theory (pp. 63–130). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
62. Cicero, Marcus Tullius (1916). The Orations of Marcus Tullius Cicero. vol. 1. The First Oration Against Verres. Translated by C. D. Yonge. London: G. Bell and Sons.
63. Cicero, Marcus Tullius (1965). Rhetorica ad Herennium. Translated by Harry Caplan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
64. Cicero, Marcus Tullius (1988). De Inventione. In The Orations of Marcus Tullius Cicero. Translated by C. D. Yonge. London: George Bell & Sons.
65. Cicero, Marcus Tullius (2003). Cicero’s Topica. Edited and translated by Tobias Reinhardt. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
66. Cigada, Sara (2006). Connectif et relation entre locuteurs. In Giovanni Gobber, Maria Cristina Gatti, & Sara Cigada (eds.), S ý ndesmoi (pp. 97–173), Milano: Vita e Pensiero.
67. Clark, Herbert (1993). Arenas of Language Use. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
68. Connor-Linton, Jeff (1991). A Sociolinguistic Model of Successful Speech Act Construction. In Jef Verschueren (ed.), Pragmatics at Issue (pp. 93–112). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
69. Corblin, Francis (2003). Presuppositions and Commitment Stores. In Proceedings Diabruck, 7th Workshop on the Semantics and the Pragmatics of Dialogue. Wallerfangen, Germany.
70. Crothers, Edward (1979). Pragmatic Structure Inference. Norwood: Ablex.
71. Crowley, Sharon & Hawhee, Debra (1999). Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
72. Damascenus, Johannes (1953). Dialectica. O. Colligan (ed.), St. Bonaventure: The Franciscan Institute.
73. Damasio, Antonio (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: G. P. Putnam’ s Sons.
74. Damasio, Antonio (2000). The Feeling of What Happens: Body, Emotion and the Making of Consciousness. London: Vintage.
75. Dascal, Marcelo (2001). Nihil sine ratione [1] Blandior ratio (‘Nothing without a reason [1] A softer reason’). In H. Poser (ed.), Nihil sine ratione – Proceedings of the VII. Internationaler Leibniz-Kongress (pp. 276–280). Berlin: Gottfried-Wilhelm- Leibniz Gesellschaft.
76. De Bessé, Bruno (1990). La d é i nition terminologique. In J. Chaurand & F. Mazi è re (eds.), La d é i nition, Actes du Colloque organis é par CELEX (pp. 252–261). Paris: Larousse.
77. De Sousa, Ronald (1987). The Rationality of Emotion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
78. Doyle, Michael & Sambanis, Nicholas (2006). Making War and Building Peace: United Nations Peace Operations. Princeotn, NJ: Princeton University Press.
79. Ducrot, Oswald (1966). “Le roi de France est sage”. Implication logique et Pr é supposition linguistique. Etudes de linguistique appliqu é e 4: 39–47.
80. Ducrot, Oswald (1968). Le structuralisme en linguistique. In O. Ducrot, T. Todorov, et al. (eds.), Qu’est-ce que le structuralisme? (pp. 13–96). Paris: Seuil.
81. Ducrot, Oswald (1972 a). Dire et ne pas dire. Paris: Hermann
82. Ducrot, Oswald (1972 b). De Saussure à la philosophie du langage. Preface to John Searle, Les actes de langage (pp. 7–34). Paris: Hermann
83. Ducrot, Oswald (1978). Deux mais. Cahier de linguistique 8: 109–120.
84. Dummett, Michael (1973). Frege: Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
85. Eco, Umberto (1976). A theory of semiotics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
86. Engel, Morris (1980). Analyzing Informal Fallacies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall.
87. Engel, Morris (1994). Fallacies and Pitfalls of Language: The Language Trap. New York: Dover Publications.
88. Ephratt, Michal (2008). The functions of Silence. Journal of Pragmatics 40 (11) appeared in issue 11: 1909–1938.
89. Fillmore, Charles (1982). Towards a Descriptive Framework for Spatial Deixis. In R. Jarvella & W. Klein (eds.), Speech, Place, and Action (pp. 31–59), London: Wiley.
90. Fillmore, Charles (2003). Double-Decker Dei nitions: The Role of Frames in Meaning Explanations. Sign Language Studies 3 (3): 263–295.
91. Finocchiaro, Maurice (2007). Arguments, Meta-arguments, and Metadialogues: A Reconstruction of Krabbe, Govier, and Woods. Argumentation 2 (3): 253–268.
92. Fisher, Nick (1992). Hybris: A Study in the Values of Honour and Shame in Ancient Greece. Warminster, UK: Aris & Phillips.
93. Forcellini, Egidio (1831). Totius latinitatis lexicon, Vol. 2. Schneeberg: Schumann.
94. Freeman, James (2005). Acceptable Premises: An Epistemic Approach to an Informal Logic Problem. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
95. Frege, Gottlob (1897). Logic. In H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulbach (eds.), Posthumous Writings: Gottlob Frege, translated by P. Long and R. White (pp. 126–151). Oxford: Blackwell, 1979.
96. Frege, Gottlob (1948). Sense and Reference. The Philosophical Review 57 (3): 209–230.
97. Frijda, Nico (1998). The Laws of Emotion. In J. Jenkins, K. Oatley, & N. Stein (eds.), Human Emotions: A Reader (pp. 271–287). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
98. Frijda, Nico & Mesquita, Batja (1998). The Analysis of Emotions: Dimensions of Variation. In M. Mascolo & S. Grifi n. (eds.), What Develops in Emotional Development? (pp. 273–295). New York: Plenum Press.
99. Frijda, Nico & Mesquita, Batja (2000). Beliefs through Emotions. In N. Frijda, A. Mansteade, & S. Bem (eds.), Emotions and Beliefs: How Feelings Inl uence Thoughts (pp. 45–77). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
100. Fusco, Federico (2008). Commencement of the Prescription Period in Case of Damage Due to Omissions. In Helmut Koziol & Barbara Steininger (eds.), Tort and Insurance Law Yearbook. European Tort Law. volume 2007(pp. 79–93). New York: Springer.
101. Gallie, Walter (1956). Essentially Contested Concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56: 167–198.
102. Gano, Darwin Curtis & Williams, Samuel C. (2008). Teacher’s Handbook to Accompany Gano’s Commercial Law. Charleston, SC: BiblioLife
103. Gildenhard, Ingo (2011). Creative Eloquence: The Construction of Reality in Cicero’s Speeches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
104. Giuliani, Alessandro (1972). The Aristotelian Theory of the Dialectical Dei nition. Philosophy & Rhetoric 5 (3) appeared in issue 3: 129–142.
105. Glanville, Williams (1983). Textbook of Criminal Law. London: Steven & Sons.
106. Gobber, Giovanni (2007). Some Remarks on Interrogativity and Argumentation. In F. H. van Eemeren, A. Blair, C. Willard, & B. Garssen (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 461–464). Amsterdam: SicSat.
107. Gordon, Thomas (1994). The Pleadings Game: An Exercise in Computational Dialectics. Artii cial Intelligence and Law 2 (4) appeared in issue 4: 239–292.
108. Gordon, Thomas & Walton, Douglas (2009). Proof Burdens and Standards. In Iyad Rahwan & Guillermo Simari (ed.), Argumentation in Artii cial Intelligence (pp. 239–260). Berlin: Springer.
109. Gorsky, D.P. (1981). Dei nition. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
110. Governatori, Guido (2008). Labelled modal tableaux. In Carlos Areces and R. Goldblatt (eds.), Advances in Modal Logic, volume 7: 87–110.
111. Governatori, Guido, Maher, Michael, Billington, David, & Antoniou, Grigoris (2004). Argumentation Semantics for Defeasible Logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 14 (5): 675–702.
112. Green, Georgia (1996). Pragmatics and Natural language understanding. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
113. Green-Pedersen, Niels (1984). The Tradition of the Topics in the Middle Ages: The Commentaries on Aristotle’s and Boethius’ Topics. Munich: Philosophia Verlag.
114. Greenwood, Katie, Bench-Capon, Trevor, & McBurney, Peter (2003). Structuring Dialogue between the People and Their Representatives. In R. Traunmuller (ed.), Electronic Government, Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 2739 (pp. 55–62). Berlin: Springer.
115. Grice, Paul (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
116. Grice, Paul (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
117. Grimaldi, William (1988). Aristotle, Rhetoric II. A Commentary. New York: Fordham University Press.
118. Grimes, Joseph (1975). The Thread of Discourse. The Hague: Mouton.
119. Groarke, Leo & Tindale, Christopher (2004). Good Reasoning Matters! Oxford: Oxford University Press.
120. Gundel, Jeanette & Fretheim, Thorstein (2004). Topic and Focus. In L. Horn & G. Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatic Theory (174–196). Oxford: Blackwell.
121. Hahn, Ulrike, & Oaksford, Mike (2006). A Normative Theory of Argument Strength. Informal Logic 26 (1): 1–24.
122. Halld é n, S ö ren (1960). True Love, True Humour and True Religion: A Semantic Study. Lund: Gleerup.
123. Hamblin, Charles (1970). Fallacies. London: Methuen.
124. Hamblin, Charles (1971). Mathematical Models of Dialogue. Theoria 37 (2) appeared in issue 2: 130–155.
125. Hammond, Scott, Hardwick, Kevin, & Lubert, Howard (2007). Classics of American Political and Constitutional Thought. Volume 1: Origins through the Civil War. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
126. Hare, Richard (1952). The Language of Morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
127. Hare, Richard (1963). Freedom and Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
128. Hart, Herbert (1948–1949; 1951). The Ascription of Responsibility and Rights. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 49: 171 –194. Reprinted in Logic and Language, ed. A. Flew, Oxford: Blackwell, 1951, 145–166.
129. Hart, Herbert (1961). The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
130. Hastings, Arthur (1963). A Reformulation of the Modes of Reasoning in Argumentation. Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
131. Heath, Malcolm (1994). The Substructure of Stasis-Theory from Hermagoras to Hermogenes. The Classical Quarterly, New Series 44 (1): 114–129.
132. Hickey, Leo (1993). Presupposition under Cross-Examination. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 6 (1): 89–109.
133. Hintikka, Jaakko (1979). Information-Seeking Dialogues: A Model. Studia Logica 38 (4): 355–368.
134. Hjelmslev, Louis (1961). Prolegomena to a theory of language. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
135. Hobbs, Jerry (1979). Coherence and Coreference. Cognitive Science 3 (1) appeared in issue 1: 67–90.
136. Hobbs, Jerry (1985). On the Coherence and Structure of Discourse. Report No. CSLI-85–37, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University.
137. Hockett, Charles (1950). Peiping Morphophonemics. Language 26 (1): 63–85.
138. Holtgraves, Thomas (2002). Language as Social Action. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
139. Honigsberg, Peter Jan (2007). Chasing ‘Enemy Combatants’ and Circumventing International Law: A License for Sanctioned Abuse. UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs 12 (1): 1–74.
140. Hopper, Robert (1981 a). The Taken-for-Granted. Human Communication Research 7 (3): 195–211.
141. Hopper, Robert (1981 b) How to Do Things without Words: The Taken-for-Granted as Speech-Action. Communication Quarterly 29 (3): 228–236.
142. Horn, Laurence & Ward, Gregory (2004). The handbook of pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell.
143. Houtlosser, Peter (2001). Points of View. In F. H. van Eemeren (ed.), Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory (pp. 27–50). Amsterdam: SicSat.
144. Huxley, Aldous (1955) Eyeless in Gaza. London: Chatto & Windus.
145. Huxley, Aldous (1998). Brave New World. New York: Harper Perennial.
146. Isidore of Seville (2005). Isidore of Seville ‘s Etymologies: Complete English Translation, Volume 1. Translated by Priscilla Throop. Charlotte, VT: MedievalMS.
147. Isidorus Hispalensis (1966). Etymologiarum libri XX. W. M. Linsday (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
148. Jackendoff, Ray (1972). Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
149. J ø rgensen, Charlotte (1998). Public Debate – An Act of Hostility? Argumentation 12 (4): 431–443.
150. Kamp, Hans & Reyle, Uwe. (1993). From Discourse to Logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
151. Karimi, Simin (2003). Word Order and Scrambling. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
152. Karttunen, Lauri (1973). Presuppositions of Compound Sentences. Linguistic Inquiry 4 (2): 169–193.
153. Katz, Jerrold (1973). On Dei ning “Presupposition.” Linguistic Inquiry 4 (2): 256–260.
154. Katz, Jerrold & Fodor, Jerry (1963). The Structure of a Semantic Theory. Language 39 (2): 170–210.
155. Kauffeld, Fred (1995 a). The Persuasive Force of Arguments on Behalf of Proposals. In In F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Analysis and evaluation: Proceedings of the third ISSA conference on argumentation. (Vol. II, pp. 79–90). Amsterdam: International Centre for the Study of Argumentation.
156. Kauffeld, Fred (1995 b). On the Difference between Assumptions and Presumptions. In S. Jackson (ed.), Argumentation and Values: Proceedings of the Ninth SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation (pp. 509–514). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
157. Kauffeld, Fred (1998). Presumptions and the Distribution of Argumentative Burdens in Acts of Proposing and Accusing. Argumentation 12 (2): 245–266.
158. Kauffeld, Fred (2003). The Ordinary Practice of Presuming and Presumption with Special Attention to Veracity and the Burden of Proof. In F. H. van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Anyone Who Has a View: Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation (pp. 136–146). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
159. Kauffman, Charles. (1989). Names and Weapons. Communication Monographs 56 (3): 273–285.
160. Keenan, Edward (1971). Two Types Of Presupposition in Natural Language. In C. J. Filmore & D. T. Langendoen (eds.), Studies in Linguistic Semantics (pp. 45–54). New York: Holt.
161. Kelly, Gregory & Bazerman, Charles (2003). How Students Argue Scientii c Claims: A Rhetorical-Semantic Analysis. Applied Linguistics 24 (1): 28–55.
162. Kempson, Ruth (1975). Presupposition and the Delimitation of Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
163. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine (1977). La connotation. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon.
164. Kienpointner, Manfred (1992). Alltagslogik: Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern. Stuttgart: Fromman-Holzboog.
165. Kiewe, Amos & Houck, Davis (1991). A Shining City on a Hill: Ronald Reagan’s Economic Rhetoric, 1951–1989. New York: Praeger.
166. Krabbe, Erik (2003). Metadialogues. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard, & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 641–644). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
167. Krabbe, Erik (2007). On How to Get Beyond the Opening Stage. Argumentation 21 (3) appeared in issue 3: 233–242.
168. Kramer, Adam (2003). Common Sense Principles of Contract Interpretation. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 23 (2): 173–196.
169. Kupperman, Joel (2002). Ethical Knowledge. London: Routledge.
170. Lakoff, George (1971). On Generative Semantics. In D. Steinberg & L. Jakobovits (eds.), Semantics: An Interdisciplinary Reader in Philosophy, Linguistics and Psychology (pp. 232–296). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
171. Lakoff, George (1999). Cognitive Models and Prototype Theory. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (eds.), Concepts (pp. 391–421). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
172. Lakoff, George (2004). Don’t Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing.
173. Lakoff, George (2006). Thinking Points: Communicating Our American Values and Vision, available at: http://www.cognitivepolicyworks.com/resource-center/ thinking-points/ (URL accessed on 11 October 2011).
174. Lakoff, Robin (1971). If’s, and’s, and but’s about conjunction. In C. Fillmore & D. Langendoen (eds.), Studies in Linguistic Semantics (pp. 115–150). New York: Holt.
175. Lascarides, Alex & Asher, Nicholas (1993). Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy 16 (5): 437–493.
176. Leech, Geoffrey (1974). Semantics. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
177. Leenes, Ronald (2001). Burden of Proof in Dialogue Games and Dutch Civil Procedure. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Artii cial Intelligence and Law (pp. 109–118). New York: ACM Press.
178. Leigh, Matthew (2004). Quintilian on the Emotions (Institutio Oratoria 6 Preface and 1–2). The Journal of Roman Studies 94: 122–140.
179. Leighton, Stephen (1984). Feelings and Emotion. The Review of Metaphysics 38 (2): 303–320.
180. Leighton, Stephen (1988). Modern Theories of Emotion. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy 2 (3): 206–224.
181. Leonard, Henry (1967). Principles of Reasoning. New York: Dover Publications.
182. Levinson, Stephen (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
183. Lewis, David (1979). Scorekeeping in a Language Game. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1): 339–359.
184. Lifton, Robert (1986) The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide. New York: Basic Books.
185. Lodder, Arno (1999). DiaLaw. On Legal Justii cation and Dialogical Models of Argumentation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
186. Loui, Ronald (1998). Process and Policy: Resource-Bounded Non-Demonstrative Reasoning. Computational Intelligence 14 (1) appeared in issue 1: 1–38.
187. Louisell, David (1977). Construing Rule 301: Instructing the Jury on Presumptions in Civil Actions and Proceedings. Virginia Law Review 63 (2): 281–321.
188. Macagno, Fabrizio & Walton, Douglas (2009 a). Reasoning from Classii cations and Dei nitions. Argumentation 23 (1): 81–107.
189. Macagno, Fabrizio & Walton, Douglas (2009 b). Argument from Analogy in Law, the Classical Tradition, and Recent Theories. Philosophy and Rhetoric 42 (2): 154–182.
190. Mackenzie, Jim (1979). Question-Begging in Non-Cumulative Systems. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1): 117–133.
191. Mackenzie, Jim (1981). The Dialectics of Logic. Logique et Analyse 94: 159–177.
192. Mahadevan, Swaminatha & Garmel, Gus (2005). An Introduction to Clinical Emergency Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
193. Manicas, Peter & Kruger, Arthur (1968). Essentials of Logic. New York: American Book Company.
194. Marsh Charles (2005). The Syllogism of Apologia: Rhetorical Stasis Theory and Crisis Communication. Paper presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication in San Antonio, Texas August 2005.
195. Martins, Isabel, Mortimer, Eduardo, Osborne, Jonathan, Tsatsarelis, Charalampos, & Jim é nez Aleixandre Maria, Pilar (2001). Rhetoric and Science Education. In H. Behrendt et al. (eds.), Research in Science Education – Past, Present, and Future (pp. 189–198). Amsterdam: Kluwer.
196. Max, Ingolf (2008). Dimensions of Discourse: Presuppositions of (German) Connectors. In A. Steube (ed.), The Discourse Potential of Underspecii ed Structures (pp. 551–580). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
197. Mayall, James (1996). The New Interventionism 1991–1994: United Nations Experience in Cambodia, Former Yugoslavia and Somalia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
198. Mazilu, Simona (2011). Persuasive Dei nitions in Ethical Argumentation on Abortion. In F. H. van Eemeren (ed.), Proceedings of the 7th ISSA Conference (pp. 1208–1220). Amsterdam: SicSat.
199. McCawley, James (1971). Interpretative semantics meets Frankenstein. Foundations of Language 7 (2): 285–296.
200. Mel’cuk, Igor (1997). Vers une linguistique Sens-Texte. Le ç on inaugurale. Paris: Coll è ge de France.
201. Mill, James (1869). Analysis of the Phenomena of the Human Mind. London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer.
202. Moli è re, Jean-Baptiste (2000). Don Juan. In J. Wood & D. Coward (trans.), Moli è re. The Miser and other plays. Toronto: Penguin Books.
203. Mostovaia, Anna (2009). Color Words in Literary Russian: Connotations and Gender Differences in Use. Journal of Literary Semantics 38 (1): 1–37.
204. Mousourakis, George (2003). The Historical and Institutional Context of Roman Law. Aldershot: Ashgate.
205. Myers, Norman (2004). Environmental Security: What’s New and Different? Background paper for the Hague Conference on Environment, Security, and Sustainable Development, 9–12 May, 2004, The Hague, The Netherlands.
206. Naess, Arne (1966). Communication and Argument. London: Allen & Unwin LTD.
207. Naess, Arne (2005). Interpretation and Preciseness. In A. Drengson (ed.), The Selected Works of Arne Naess, vol. I. Dordrecht: Springer (Original edition: Dybway 1953).
208. Nakhnikian, George (1959). An Examination of Toulmin’s Analytical Ethics. The Philosophical Quarterly 9 (34): 59–79.
209. Nute, Donald (1994). Defeasible Logic. In Handbook of Logic in Artii cial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Volume 3: Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning (pp. 353–395). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
210. O’Connell, Mary Ellen (2002). The Myth of Preemptive Self-Defense. The American Society of International Law. Available at http://www.asil.org/taskforce/oconnell.pdf. Olscamp, Paul (1970). Hare’s Failure to Dei ne Good Reasons. Mind 79 (314): 241–244.
211. Orwell, George (1946). Politics and the English Language. Horizon. April.
212. Orwell, George (1949). Nineteen Eighty-Four. London: Martin Secker & Warburg.
213. Page, Herbert (1919). The Law Of Contracts. Cincinnati, OH: W. H. Anderson.
214. Partee, Barbara (1992). Syntactic Categories and Semantic Type. In M. Rosner & R. Johnson (eds.), Computational Linguistics and Formal Semantics (pp. 97–126), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
215. Perelman, Chaim & Olbrechts-Tyteca, Lucie (1951). Act and Person in Argument. Ethics 61 (4): 251–269.
216. Perelman, Chaim & Olbrechts-Tyteca, Lucie (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
217. Petrus Hispanus (1947). Petri Hispani Summulae Logicales (ed. I. M. Bochenski). Torino: Marietti.
218. Phillipps, Samuel (1815). A Treatise on the Law of Evidence. London: Strahan.
219. Plantin, Christian (2004). On the Inseparability of Reason and Emotion in Argumentation. In E. Weigand (ed.), Emotion in Dialogic Interaction (pp. 269–280). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
220. Polanyi, Livia (1985). A theory of discourse structure and discourse coherence, In: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Chicago: University of Chicago, Dept. of Linguistics.
221. Prakken, Henry (2001). Modelling Reasoning about Evidence in Legal Procedure. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Artii cial Intelligence and Law (pp. 119–128). New York: ACM Press.
222. Prakken, Henry (2005). Coherence and Flexibility in Dialogue Games for Argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation 15 (6): 1009–1040.
223. Prakken, Henry (2006). Formal Systems for Persuasion Dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21 (2): 163–188.
224. Pugmire, David (1998). Rediscovering Emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
225. Pugmire, David (2005). Sound Sentiments. Integrity in the Emotions. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
226. Pustejovsky, James (1991). The Generative Lexicon. Computational Linguistics 17 (4): 409 –441.
227. Pustejovsky, James (1998). The Semantics of Lexical Underspecii cation. Folia Linguistica 32 (3–4): 323–347.
228. Quintilian, Maximus Fabius (1996). Institutio Oratoria. Translated by H. E. Butler. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
229. Ranney, Frances (2005). Aristotle’s Ethics and Legal Rhetoric: An Analysis of Language Beliefs and the Law. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.
230. Rescher, Nicholas (1977). Dialectics: A Controversy-Oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowledge. Albany: State University of New York Press.
231. Rescher, Nicholas (2006). Presumption and the Practices of Tentative Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
232. Rigotti, Eddo (1993). La sequenza testuale. L’analisi linguistica e letteraria 1: 43–148.
233. Rigotti, Eddo (1995). Verit à e Persuasione. Il nuovo areopago 14 (1): 3–14.
234. Rigotti, Eddo (1997). Lezioni di Linguistica Generale. Milano: CUSL.
235. Rigotti, Eddo (2005). Towards a Typology of Manipulative Processes. In Louis de Saussure & Peter Schulz (eds.), Manipulation and Ideologies in the Twentieth Century: Discourse, Language, Mind (pp. 61–83), Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
236. Rigotti, Eddo & Cigada, Sara (2004). La comunicazione verbale. Milano: Apogeo.
237. Rigotti, Eddo & Greco, Sara (2006). Topics: The Argument Generator, Argumentum eLearning Module. Available at www.argumentum.ch (accessed on 14 September 2011).
238. Rigotti, Eddo & Rocci, Andrea (2006). Denotation vs. Connotation. In K. Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd Edition (pp. 1–9), Oxford: Elsevier.
239. Robinson, Daniel (1947). The Principles of Reasoning: An Introduction to Logic and Scientii c Method. New York: D. Appleton – Century.
240. Robinson, Richard (1950). Dei nition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
241. Ruiter, Dick (1993). Institutional Legal Facts: Legal Powers and Their Effects. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
242. Russell, Bertrand (1905). On Denoting. Mind 14 (4): 479–493.
243. Sager, Juan (2000). Essays on Dei nition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
244. Sandulescu, George (1975). Presupposition, Assertion, and Discourse Structure. In N. E. Enkvist and V. Kohonen (eds.), Reports on Text Linguistics: Approaches to Word Order (pp. 197–214.). Å bo: Å bo Akademi, No. 8.
245. Schaff, Philip (1894). A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology, 3rd ed., Vol. 1. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.
246. Schiappa, Edward (1989). The Rhetoric of Nukespeak. Communication Monographs 56 (3): 253–272.
247. Schiappa, Edward (1993). Arguing about Dei nitions. Argumentation 7 (4) appeared in issue 4: 403–417.
248. Schiappa, Edward (1996). Towards a Pragmatic Approach to Dei nition: `Wetlands’ and the Politics of Meaning. In A. Light & E. Katz (eds.), Environmental Pragmatism (pp. 209–230). New York: Routledge.
249. Schiappa, Edward (1998). Constructing Reality Through Dei nitions: The Politics of Meaning. A lecture presented for the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies of Writing and the Composition, Literacy, and Rhetorical Studies Minor, Speakers Series 11.
250. Schiappa, Edward (2003). Dei ning Reality. Dei nitions and the Politics of Meaning. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
251. Schwarz, David (1977). On Pragmatic Presupposition. Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (2): 247–257.
252. Seager, Robin (2001). Maiestas in the Late Republic: Some Observations. In John Cairns and Olivia Robinson (eds.), Critical Studies in Ancient Law, Comparative Law and Legal History (pp. 143–153). Oxford and Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.
253. Searle, John (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. London: Cambridge University Press.
254. Searle, John (1979). Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
255. Searle, John, & Vanderveken, Daniel (1985). Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
256. Searle, John, & Vanderveken, Daniel (2005). Speech Acts and Illocutionary Logic. In Daniel Vanderveken (ed.), Logic, Thought and Action (pp. 109–132). Dordrecht: Springer.
257. Seuren, Peter (2000). Presupposition, Negation and Trivalence. Journal of Linguistics 36 (2): 261–297.
258. Seuren, Peter (2010). The Logic of Language: Language from Within (vol. 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
259. Simons, Greg (2006). The Use of Rhetoric and the Mass Media in Russia’s War on Terror. Demokratizatsiya 14 (4): 579–600.
260. Simons, Herbert, Morreale, Joanne, & Gronbeck, Bruce (2001). Persuasion in Society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
261. Sinclair, John (2004). Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London and New York: Routledge.
262. Sini, Francesco (1991). Bellum Nefandum. Virgilio e il problema del “diritto internazionale antico.” Sassari: Libreria Dess ì Editrice.
263. Soames, Scott (1982). How Presuppositions Are Inherited: A Solution to the Projection Problem. Linguistic Inquiry 13 (3): 483–545.
264. Soboleva, Anita (2007). Topical Jurisprudence: Reconciliation of Law and Rhetoric. In A. Wagner, W. Werner, & D. Cao (eds.), Interpretation, Law and the Construction of Meaning (pp. 49–63). Amsterdam: Springer.
265. Solomon, Robert (2003). Not Passion’s Slave: Emotions and choice. New York: Oxford University Press.
266. Soter, Steven (2007). What is a Planet? Scientii c American, 296 (1): 34–41.
267. Stalnaker, Robert (1970). Pragmatics. Synthese 22 (1–2): 272–289.
268. Stalnaker, Robert (1974). Pragmatic Presuppositions. In M. Munitz & P. Unger (eds.), Semantics und Philosophy (pp. 197–214). New York: New York University Press.
269. Stalnaker, Robert (1998). On the Representation of Context. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 7 (1): 3–19.
270. Stalnaker, Robert (2002). Common Ground. Linguistics and Philosophy 25 5–6: 701–721.
271. Stati, Sorin (1990). La Transphrastique. Paris: PUF.
272. Stebbing, Susan (1933). A Modern Introduction to Logic. New York: Humanities Press.
273. Stevenson, Charles Leslie (1937). The Emotive Meaning of Ethical Terms. Mind 46 (181): 14–31.
274. Stevenson, Charles Leslie (1938 a). Persuasive Dei nitions. Mind 47 (187): 331–350.
275. Stevenson, Charles Leslie (1938 b). Ethical Judgments and Avoidability. Mind 47 (185): 45–57.
276. Stevenson, Charles Leslie (1944). Ethics and Language. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
277. Strawson, Peter (1950). On referring. Mind 59 (235): 320–344.
278. Strawson, Peter (1952). Introduction to logical theory. London: Metheun.
279. Strawson, Peter (1971). Identifying Reference and Truth-Values. In Logico-Linguistic Papers (pp. 75–95). London: Methuen.
280. Stump, Eleonore (1989). Dialectic and Its Place in the Development of Medieval Logic. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
281. Sutton, Clive (1996). The Scientii c Model as a Form of Speech. In G. Welford, J. Osborne, & P. Scott (eds.), Research in Science Education in Europe (pp. 143–152). London: Falmer Press.
282. Sweitzer, Brett G. (1997). Implicit Redei nitions, Evidentiary Proscriptions, and Guilty Minds: Intoxicated Wrongdoers after Montana v. Egelhoff. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 146 (1): 269–321.
283. Szwedek, Aleksander (1980). Lexical Cohesion in Text Analysis. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 11: 95–100.
284. Tadros, Victor (2006). Rape Without Consent. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 26 (3): 515–543.
285. Tannen, Deborah (1985). Silence: Anything but. In D. Tannen & M. Saville-Troike (eds.), Perspectives on Silence (pp. 93–111). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
286. Tarello, Giovanni (1980). L’interpretazione della legge. Milano: Giuffr è.
287. Taylor, Bryan (1998). Nuclear Weapons and Communication Studies: A Review Essay. Western Journal of Communication 62 (3): 300–315.
288. Tellegen-Couperus, Olga (2003). Quintilian and the Law: The Art of Persuasion in Law and Politics. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
289. Temkin, Jennifer (2002). Rape and the Legal Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
290. Thayer, James (1898). A Preliminary Treatise on Evidence at the Common Law. Boston: Little Brown.
291. Tiersma, Peter (1999). Legal Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
292. Toulmin, Stephen (1950). An Examination of the Place of Reason in Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
293. Toulmin, Stephen (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
294. Ullman-Margalit, Edna (1983). On Presumption. The Journal of Philosophy 80 (3): 143–163.
295. Van Dijk, Teun (1977). Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. New York: Longman.
296. Van Eemeren, Frans & Grootendorst, Rob (1984). Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. Dordrecht: Foris.
297. Van Eemeren, Frans & Grootendorst, Rob (1987). Fallacies in Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Argumentation 1 (3) appeared in issue 3: 283–301.
298. Van Eemeren, Frans & Grootendorst, Rob (1992). Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
299. Van Eemeren, Frans & Grootendorst, Rob (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
300. Vanderveken, Daniel (1990). Meaning and Speech Acts: Principles of Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
301. Vanderveken, Daniel (2001). Illocutionary Logic and Discourse Typology. Revue internationale de philosophie 216 (2) appeared in issue 2: 243–255.
302. Vanderveken, Daniel (2002). Universal Grammar and Speech Act Theory. In D. Vanderveken & S. Kubo (eds.), Essays in Speech Act Theory (pp. 25–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
303. Vendler, Zeno (1964). The Grammar of Goodness. The Philosophical Review 72 (4): 446–465.
304. Verheij, Bart (2003). Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. Artii cial Intelligence and Law 11 (2–3): 167–195.
305. Victorini, Caius Marius (1997). Liber de dei nitionibus: eine spä tantike Theorie der Dei nition und des Dei nierens (mit Einleitung, Ü bersetzung und Kommentar von A.Pronay). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
306. Viskil, Erick (1994). Dei nieren – Een bijdrage tot de theorievorming over het Opstellen Van Dei nities. Amsterdam: IFOTT.
307. Von Fintel, Kai (2008), What is Presupposition Accommodation, Again? Philosophical Perspectives 22 (1): 137–170.
308. Von Wright, Georg (1972). On So-Called Practical Inference. Acta Sociologica 15 (1): 39–53.
309. Walton, Douglas (1980). Omissions and other negative actions. Metamedicine 1 (3): 305–324.
310. Walton, Douglas (1984). Logical dialogue-games and fallacies. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
311. Walton, Douglas (1993). The Speech Act of Presumption. Pragmatics & Cognition 1 (1): 125–148.
312. Walton, Douglas (1996). Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
313. Walton, Douglas (1997). Appeal to Pity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
314. Walton, Douglas (1998). The New Dialectic. Conversational Contexts of Argument. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
315. Walton, Douglas (1999). Dialectical Relevance in Persuasion Dialogue. Informal Logic 19 (2): 119–143.
316. Walton, Douglas (2000). Scare Tactics: Arguments that Appeal to Fear and Threats. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
317. Walton, Douglas (2002). Legal Argumentation and Evidence. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
318. Walton, Douglas (2004). Abductive Reasoning. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
319. Walton, Douglas (2005 a). Deceptive Arguments Containing Persuasive Language and Persuasive Dei nitions. Argumentation 19 (2): 159–186.
320. Walton, Douglas (2005 b). Argumentation Methods for Artii cial Intelligence in Law. Berlin: Springer.
321. Walton, Douglas (2006). How to Make and Defend a Proposal in Deliberation Dialogue. Artii cial Intelligence and Law 14 (3): 177–239.
322. Walton, Douglas (2007 a). Media Argumentation: Dialectic, Persuasion, and Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
323. Walton, Douglas (2007 b). The Speech Act of Clarii cation in a Dialogue Model. Studies in Communication Sciences 7 (2): 165–197.
324. Walton, Douglas (2007 c). The Three Bases for the Enthymeme: A Dialogical Theory. Journal of Applied Logic 6 (3): 361–379.
325. Walton, Douglas & Godden, David (2005). Persuasion Dialogue in Online Dispute Resolution. Artii cial Intelligence and Law 13 (2) appeared in issue 2: 273–295.
326. Walton, Douglas & Krabbe, Erik (1995). Commitment in Dialogue. Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. Albany: State University of New York Press.
327. Walton, Douglas & Macagno, Fabrizio (2005 a). Common Knowledge and Argumentation Schemes. Studies in Communication Sciences 5 (2): 1–22.
328. Walton, Douglas & Macagno, Fabrizio (2005 b). Common Knowledge in Legal Reasoning about Evidence. International Commentary on Evidence 3 (1): 1–42.
329. Walton, Douglas, Reed, Chris, & Macagno, Fabrizio (2008). Argumentation Schemes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
330. Weaver, Richard (1953). The Ethics of Rhetoric. Chicago: Henry Regnery.
331. Weiler, Michael (1992). The Reagan Attack on Welfare. In Michael Weiler & Pearce W. Barnett (eds.), Reagan and Public Discourse in America (pp. 227–250). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
332. Weiler, Michael & Barnett, Pearce (1992). Reagan and Public Discourse in America. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
333. Weinreb, Lloyd. (2005). Legal Reason: The Use of Analogy in Legal Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
334. Welsh, Paul (1957). On the Nature of Inference. The Philosophical Review 66 (4): 509–524.
335. Whitehead, Alfred & Russell, Bertand (1927). Principia Mathematica (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
336. Wigmore, John (1940). A Treatise on the Anglo-American System of Evidence in Trials at Common Law: Including the Statutes and Judicial Decisions of all Jurisdictions of the United States and Canada (2nd ed.). Boston: Little Brown.
337. Williams, Glanville (1983). Textbook of Criminal Law. London: Stevens.
338. Wilson, Deidre (1975). Presupposition and Non-Truth-Conditional Semantics. London: Academic Press.
339. Windes, Russell & Hastings, Arthur (1965). Argumentation and Advocacy. New York: Random House.
340. Woods, John & Walton, Douglas (1978). Arresting Circles in Formal Dialogues, Journal of Philosophical Logic 7 (1): 73–90.
341. Woolf, Amy (2004). Nonstrategic Nuclear Weapons. Washington, DC: CRS Report for Congress, RL32572. Retrieved from www.digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs/ data/2004/upl-meta-crs-6104/meta-crs-6104.ocr (accessed on 11 October 2011).
342. World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. New York: Oxford University Press.
343. W Ü est, Jakob (2001). La gerarchia degli atti linguistici nel testo. Studies in Communication Sciences 1 (1): 195–211.
344. Zarefsky, David (1998). Dei nitions. In J. F. Klumpp (ed.), Argument in a Time of Change: Dei nitions, Frameworks, and Critiques (pp. 1–11). Annandale, VA: National Communication Association.
345. Zarefsky, David (2004). Presidential Rhetoric and the Power of Dei nition. Presidential Studies Quarterly 34 (3): 607–619.
346. Zarefsky, David (2006). Strategic Maneuvering through Persuasive Dei nitions: Implications for Dialectic and Rhetoric. Argumentation 20 (4): 399–416.
347. Zarefsky, David, Miller-Tutzaur, Carol, & Titzuar, Frank E. (1984). Reagan’s Safety Net for the Truly Needy: The Rhetorical Uses of Dei nition. Communication Studies 35 (2): 113–119.
348. Zeevat, Henk (1992). Presupposition and Accommodation in Update Semantics. Journal of Semantics 9 (4): 379–412.