Abstract
Perelman's work has been very influential in various disciplines, among them philosophy, rhetoric and law. Especially the typology of argumentative schemes which he developed together with L. Olbrechts-Tyteca has been considered as an excellent classification of arguments in natural language. There are, however, some weaknesses of this typology which make its application to empirical research quite difficult, namely, the lack of explicitness and the absence of clear criteria of demarcation. Still, the typology is highly relevant for empirical research, if these weaknesses are removed. This is illustrated with an example: the scheme called ‘the division of the whole into its parts’ by Perelman/Olbrechts-Tyteca is described explicitly and then applied to the analysis of a sample of everyday arguments (mostly taken from newspapers).
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abaelardus, P.: 1956,Dialectica (ed. by L. M. De Rijk), Van Gorcum, Assen.
Boethius: 1860,De Differentiis Topicis, in J. P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina 64, Paris, pp. 1173–1216.
Cicero: 1976,De Oratore (ed. by H. Merklin), Reclam, Stuttgart.
Cicero: 1983,Topica (ed. by H. G. Zekl), Meiner, Hamburg.
Copi, I. M.: 1972,Introduction to Logic, Macmillan, New York.
Engel, U.: 1988,Deutsche Grammatik, Groos, Heidelberg.
Geckeler, H.: 1979,Antonymie und Wortart, in E. Bülow/P. Schmitter (eds.),Integrale Linguistik, Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 455–482.
Grize, J. B.: 1982,De la logique à l'argumentation, Droz, Genève.
Halliday, M. A. K.: 1985,An Introduction to Functional Grammar, Arnold, London.
Jacques, F.: 1979, “Logique ou rhétorique de l'argumentation?’,Revue Internationale de Philosophie 127–128, 47–68.
Jenkins, R.: 1986,Racism and Recruitment: Managers, Organizations and Equal Opportunity in the Labour Market, Cambridge UP, Cambridge.
Johnstone, H. W.: 1978,Validity and Rhetoric in Philosophical Argument, The Dialogue Press, University Park, Pennsylvania.
Kahane, H.: 1976,Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric, Wadsworth, Belmont.
Kalinowski, G.: 1972,Einführung in die Normenlogik, Athenäum, Frankfurt/M.
Katz, J. J.: 1972,Semantic Theory, Harper & Row, New York.
Kelley, D.: 1988,The Art of Reasoning, Norton & Company, New York.
Kienpointner, M.: 1982, “Probleme einer Argumenttypologie”,Klagenfurter Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 8, 175–190.
Kienpointner, M.: 1983,Argumentationsanalyse, Verlag des Sprachwissenschaftlichen Instituts, Innsbruck.
Kienpointner, M.: 1987, “Towards a Typology of Argumentative Schemes”, in F. H. Van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and Ch. A. Willard (eds.),Argumentation: Across the Line of Discipline, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 275–287.
Kienpointner, M.: 1991, “Rhetoric and Argumentation: Relativism and Beyond”,Philosophy and Rhetoric 24.1., 43–53.
Kienpointner, M.: 1992a,Alltagslogik. Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern, Frommann - Holzboog, Stuttgart.
Kienpointner, M.: 1992b, How to Classify Arguments, in F. H. Van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and Ch. A. Willard (eds.),Argumentation Illuminated, SICSAT, Amsterdam.
Kopperschmidt, J.: 1989,Methodik der Argumentationsanalyse, Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart.
Kühner, R. and C. Stegmann: 1962,Ausführliche Grammatik der Lateinischen Sprache, Satzlehre, Vol. II, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt.
Leech, G.: 1981,Semantics, Penguin, Harmondsworth.
Lyons, J.: 1977,Semantics, Vol. I, Cambridge UP, Cambridge.
Maier-Leibnitz, H.: 1984,Erste Versuche zur Anwendung der “Neuen Rhetorik” auf die Bewertung von Diskussionen über Naturwissenschaft und Technik, Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, München.
Miéville, D.: 1989, “Lorsque la logique rencontre l'argumentation”,Argumentation 3.1., 45–57.
Perelman, Ch.: 1970a,Le champ de l'argumentation, Presses Universitaires, Bruxelles.
Perelman, Ch.: 1970b, “Reflexions sur la classification”, in 1970a, pp. 353–358.
Perelman, Ch.: 1979a, “La philosophie du pluralisme et la Nouvelle Rhétorique’,Revue Internationale de Philosophie 127–128, 5–17.
Perelman, Ch.: 1979b,Juristische Logik als Argumentationslehre, Alber: Freiburg/Müchen.
Perelman, Ch.: 1979c,Logik und Argumentation, Athenäum, Königstein.
Perelman, Ch.: 1980:Das Reich der Rhetorik, Beck, München.
Perelman, Ch. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca: 1983,Traité de l'argumentation, La Nouvelle Rhétorique, Éditions de l'université de Bruxelles, Bruxelles.
Pirie, M.: 1985:The Book of the Fallacy, Routledge & Kegan, London.
Quintilianus: 1953,Institutio Oratoria (ed. and transl. by H. E. Butler), Heinemann, London.
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech and J. Svartvik: 1985,A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, Longman, London.
Salmon, M. H.: 1984,Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, Harcort Brace Jovanovich, San Diego.
Schellens, P. J.: 1985,Redelijke Argumenten, Utrecht.
Shi, Xu: 1991, “Contradistictive Argumentation and its Use in Conversation”, in F. H. Van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, A. J. Blair and Ch.A. Willard (eds.),Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation, Amsterdam, June 19–22, 1990 (696–708).
Tarello, G.: 1979, “La Nouvelle Rhétorique et le droit. L'argument ‘A cohaerentia’ et l'analyse de la pratique des organes judiciaires”,Revue Internationale de Philosophie 127–128, 294–302.
Toulmin, S.: 1958,The Uses of Argument, Cambridge UP, Cambridge.
Toulmin, S., R. Rieke and A. Janik: 1984,An Introduction to Reasoning, Macmillan, New York.
Van Dijk, T. A.: 1987,Discourse and the Reproduction of Racism, Centre for Race and Ethnic Studies, Amsterdam.
Van Eemeren, F. H. and Kruiger, T.: 1987, “Identifying Argumentation Schemes”, in F. H. Van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, Ch.A. Willard (eds.),Argumentation: Perspectives and Approaches, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 70–81.
Van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R. and Kruiger, T.: 1987,Handbook of Argumentation Theory, Foris, Dordrecht.
Walton, D. N.: 1982,Topical Relevance in Argumentation, Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Walton, D. N.: 1989,Informal Logic, Cambridge UP, Cambridge.
Walton, D. N. and Woods, J.: 1982,Argument: the Logic of the Fallacies, McGraw-Hill Ryerson, Toronto.
Webster'sThird New International Dictionary, 1976, Merriam, Springfield/Mass.
Zillig, W.: 1982,Bewerten: Sprechakttypen der bewertenden Rede, Niemeyer, Tübingen.
Zyskind, H.: 1979, “The New Rhetoric and Formalism”, inRevue Internationale de Philosophie 127–128, 18–32.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kienpointner, M. The empirical relevance of Perelman's New Rhetoric. Argumentation 7, 419–437 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00711059
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00711059