Advocacy and Enactment: Exercitives and Acts of Arguing

• Authors: Cristina Corredor
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Goodwin and Innocenti (2016) have contended that giving reasons may be a form of enactment, where a claim is supported by the very activity of making the claim. In my view, the kind of interaction that these authors are considering should be analysed as a form of advocacy, and therefore as an exercitive speech act. In this paper I will suggest that acts of advocating, qua illocutions, institute a normative framework where the speaker’s obligation to justify cannot be redeemed by a mere “making reasons apparent”. In general, giving reasons is part of the procedure in virtue of which the advocate’s authority to exert influence is recognised by their addressees. This illocutionary effect should be distinguished from other perlocutionary consequences.

Keywords

EN

advocacy; enactment; exercitive speech acts; acts of arguing; Austin

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: Research in Language
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 17
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 21-37

Dates

published

2019-03-30

Contributors

author

Cristina Corredor

• University of Valladolid, Spain

References

• Austin, John L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bermejo-Luque, Lilian. 2011. Giving Reasons: A Linguistic-pragmatic Approach to Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht: Springer.
• Budzyńska, Katarzyna and Maciej Witek. 2014. Non-Inferential Aspects of Ad Hominem and Ad Baculum. Argumentation 28(3). 301-3015.
• Campbell, Karlyn K. and Kathleen H. Jamieson. 1978. ‘Form and Genre in Rhetorical Criticism: An Introduction.’ In Karlyn K. Campbell and Kathleen. H. Jamieson (eds.), Form and Genre: Shaping Rhetorical Action, 9-32. Falls Church: Speech Communication Association.
• Corredor, Cristina. 2001. A Comment on Threats and Communicative Rationality. Theoria: An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science 16(1). 147-166.
• Eemeren, Frans van and Robert Grootendorst. 1982. The Speech Acts of Arguing and Convincing in Externalized Discussions. The Journal of Pragmatics 6(1). 1-24.
• Eemeren, Frans van and Robert Grootendorst. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragmadialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Goodwin, Jean. 2013. Norms of Advocacy. OSSA Conference Archive 61. [Online] Available at: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA10/papersandcommentaries/61 [Accessed on: 7 March 2019]
• Goodwin, Jean. 2014. Conceptions of Speech Acts in the Theory and Practice of Argumentation: A Case Study of a Debate about Advocating. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 36(49). 79-98.
• Goodwin, Jean and Beth Innocenti. 2016. ‘The Pragmatic Force of Making Reasons Apparent.’ In Dima Mohammed and Marcin Lewiński (eds.), Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the 1st European conference on argumentation, Lisbon, 2015, Vol. II, 449-462. London: College Publications.
• Kissine, Mikhail. 2013. From Utterances to Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Lewinski, Marcin. 2017. Practical Argumentation as Reasoned Advocacy. Informal Logic 37(2). 85-113.
• Maitra, Ishani and Mari Kate McGowan (eds.) 2012. Speech and Harm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Matusuda, Mari, Lawrence III, Charles R., Delgado, Richard and Kimberle Williams Crenshaw (eds.) 1993. Words that Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech and the First Amendment. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• O’Keefe, Daniel J. 2007. Potential Conflicts Between Normatively-responsible Advocacy and Successful Social Influence: Evidence from Persuasion Effects Research. Argumentation 21. 151-163.
• Sbisà, Marina. 2006. ‘Communicating Citizenship in Verbal Interaction: Principles of a Speech Act Oriented Discourse Analysis.’ In Heiko Hausendorf and Alfons Bora (eds.), Analysing Citizenship Talk, 151-180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Sbisà, Marina. 2009. Uptake and Conventionality in Illocution. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5.1 / Special Issue on Speech Actions. 33-52.
• Searle, John R. 1975. ‘A Taxonomy of Illocutionary Acts.’ In Keith Gunderson (ed.), Language, mind and knowledge, 344-369. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
• Searle, John R. and Daniel Vanderveken. 1985. Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• The Elizabeth Cady Stanton & Susan B. Anthony Papers Project. [Online] Available at: http://ecssba.rutgers.edu/docs/ecswoman1.html [Accessed on: 7 March 2019]
• Toulmin, Stephen. 1958. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Witek, Maciej. 2015. An Interactional Account of Illocutionary Practice. Language Sciences 47, 43-55.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/rela-2019-0003