Advertisement

Introduction

  • Chunlan JinEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The book is devoted to the exploration of the intricate relationships between textual patterns and the logic underpinnings of the verbal realization. The eight-part essays (or eight-legged essays, “Ba Gu” in Chinese), as a case in point, will be elaborated on for its inner connection between the structure and argumentative practices. The book adopted a linguistically informed perspective applied to the study of argumentative practices.

References

  1. Bai, Y., & Jia, R. (2016). Elite recruitment and political stability: The impact of the abolition of China’s civil service exam. Econometrica, 84(2), 677–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, C. B. (1986). Reasons for the lack of argumentation and debate in the Far East. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(1), 75–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bloom, A. (1981). The linguistic shaping of thought. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Buchtel, E. E., & Norenzayan, A. (2009). Thinking across cultures: Implications for dual processes. In J. S. B. T. Evans & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds. New York: Ox-ford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Chang, H. (2007). Persuasion in the pre-Qin China: The great debate revisited. In M. Dascal & H. Chang (Eds.), Traditions of controversy (pp. 85–100). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cui, Q., & Zhang, X. (2005). chinese logical analogism. Asian and African Studies, 9(2), 27–54.Google Scholar
  7. Elman, B. A. (2000). A cultural history of civil examinations in late imperial China. University of California Press (p. 482).Google Scholar
  8. Elman, B. A. (2004). From pre-modern Chinese natural studies to modern science in China. In M. Lackner & N. Vittinghoff (Eds.), Mapping meanings: The field of new learning in Late Qing China. (Leiden, Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV) (p. 40).Google Scholar
  9. Fraser, C. (2013). Distinctions, judgment, and reasoning in classical Chinese thought. History and Philosophy of Logic, 34(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hall, D., & Ames, R. (1987). Thinking through Confucius. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  11. Harbsmeier, C. (Ed.). (1998). Language and logic (Vol. 7). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Ho, P. (1962). The ladder of success in imperial China. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hoey, M. (1983). On the surface of discourse. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  14. Hoey, M. (1994). Signalling in discourse: a functional analysis of a common discourse pattern in written and spoken English. In M. Coulthard (Ed.) (1994a), pp. 26–45.Google Scholar
  15. Hoey, M. (2001). Textual interaction: An introduction to written discourse analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Holland, R., & Lewis, A. (1997). Written discourse. Centre for English Language Studies: The University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
  17. Jensen, J. V. (1998). Teaching East Asian rhetoric. The Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 18, 136–149.Google Scholar
  18. Kachru, Y. (1998). Culture and argumentative writing in world Englishes. In L. Smith & R. Forman (Eds.), World English 2000 (pp. 48–67). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kirkpatrick, A. (1995). Chinese rhetoric: Methods of argument. Multilingua, 14(3), 271–295.Google Scholar
  20. Li, C., & Thompson, S. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: a functional reference grammar. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lloyd, G. E. R. (1990). Demystifying mentalities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lloyd, G. E. R. (1996). Adversaries and authorities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lloyd, G. E. R. (2006). Cognitive variations: Reflections on the unity and diversity of the human mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lloyd, G. E. R. (2007). Towards a taxonomy of controversies and controversiality: Ancient Greece and China. In M. Dascal & H. Chang (Eds.), Traditions of controversy (pp. 3–16). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Logan, R. F. (1986). The alphabet effect. New York: Morrow.Google Scholar
  26. Lu, Z., & Pu, L. (2008). Thesis writing in Chinese (1st ed.). Beijing: China People’s University Press.Google Scholar
  27. McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. McTavish, D.-G., & Pirro, E.-B. (1990). Contextual content analysis. Quality & Quantity, 24, 245–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mercier, H. (2011). On the universality of argumentative reasoning. http://repository.upenn.edu/goldstone/6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miyazaki, I. (1976). China’s examination hell: The Civil Service Examinations of imperial China. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Moore, B. N., & Parker, R. (1989). Critical thinking: Evaluating claims and arguments in everyday life. Co: Mayfield Pub.Google Scholar
  32. Nakamura, H. (1964). Ways of thinking of eastern peoples: India, China, Tibet, Japan. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  33. Needham, J. (1969). The grand titration: Science and society in East and West (p. 210). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  34. Needham, J. (1964). Science and society in East and West. Science & Society, 28(4), 406–407.Google Scholar
  35. Norenzayan, A., Nisbett, R. E., Smith, E. E., & Kim, B. J. (2000). Rules vs. similarity as a basis for reasoning and judgment in East and West. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  36. Normant, N. (1986). Organizational structure of Chinese subjects writing in Chinese and in ESL. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 21(3), 49–72.Google Scholar
  37. Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54(9), 741–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Průšek, J. (1980). The lyrical and the epic: Studies of modern Chinese literature. In L.O.-F. Lee. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Robinson, S. (2008). Conceptual modeling for simulation part I: Definition and requirements. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(3), 278–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rošker, J. S. (2015). Classical Chinese logic. Philosophy Compass, 10(5), 301–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schaffer, J. C. (1995). The Jane Schaffer method: Teaching the multiparagraph essay: A sequential nine-week unit (3rd ed.). San Diego, CA: Jane Schaffer Publications.Google Scholar
  42. Shang, Y. (2004). Review on the civil exam in Qing China. Tianjin: Baihua Wenyi Press.Google Scholar
  43. Swetz, F., & Chi, A. (1983). Mathematics entrance examinations in Chinese institutions of higher education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 14(1), 39Google Scholar
  44. Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. Bristol, PA: Falmer.Google Scholar
  45. The Oxford handbook of classical Chinese literature (1000 BCE–900 CE). (2017). In W. Denecke, W.-Y. Li, & X. Tian. Oxford University Press (p. 338).Google Scholar
  46. Van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Text and context. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  47. Wang, K. (2005). The Ancient Chinese and informal logic in Ancient China’. Asian and African Studies, 9(2), 55–67.Google Scholar
  48. Wu, Y. (1988). The structure of text. Beijing: Chinese People’s University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Yang, Y., & Yang, Z. (2010). Problem-solution in English vs. Qi-cheng-zhuan-he in Chinese: Are they compatible discourse patterns? Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, (Bimonthly) 33, 5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.East China University of Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations