Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing. Jaargang 29

[p. 191]

Abstracts Volume 29 no.1 2007

Paul van den Hoven
University of Utrecht, The Netherlands
Causal relations: an onomasiological approach

ABSTRACT: Argumentative speech acts are often indirectly represented by epistemic or content causal relations. Such relations are indicated in a variety of ways. This causes that the relation between text and complex argumentation is very indirect. Two argumentative texts are analyzed. It shows that 50% of the relations is unmarked, that marked relations are usually deeply embedded in the argument structure, that conventional markers are very rare, and most of all that the interpretative efforts to construct a coherent argumentative interpretation are huge. A number of challenges for text (psycho) linguistics follow from these analyses. coherent argumentative interpretation are huge. A number of challenges for text (psycho) linguistics follow from these analyses.

KEYWORDS: argumentation, causality, discourse, text linguistics

Christan Burgers
Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Verbal irony: A literature review

ABSTRACT: This article is a literature review of theories on verbal irony. The first part focuses on the question how verbal irony can be defined. Various definitions of verbal irony are discussed and compared. These can be classified into five categories: (Neo-)Gricean definitions, (2) Giora's definition of irony as indirect negation, (3) definitions based on Sperber and Wilson's relevance theory, (4) definitions based on the concept of pretense and (5) definitions based on Fauconnier's mental space theory. The second part of this article deals with the question how an ironic message is decoded from its literal meaning into the intended meaning. Three models of irony processing are examined; the Standard Pragmatic Model, the direct access view (Gibbs) and the graded salience hypothesis (Giora). Empirical evidence used to attack or defend these models is also taken into account. Finally, a brief overview of other empirical research on verbal irony is given.

KEYWORDS: verbal irony, literature review, definition of irony, irony processing, figurative language, trope

Harm Kloosterhuis
Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Strategic manoeuvring with linguistic arguments in legal sentences

ABSTRACT: In justifying interpretative decisions, judges have a choice of various types of interpretative arguments. These arguments vary from strictly formal interpretative argumentation, such as linguistic arguments, to substantial arguments. Given the constitutional position of the judge formal arguments enjoy the preference above substantial arguments. The wish to reach an acceptable result in applying legal norms can result in strategic maneuvering with formal and substantial

[p. 192]

arguments. This can happen by selecting interpretation problems in a certain manner or by selecting types or applications of interpretative arguments. Maneuvering can be sound, but also derail and become fallacious. In this paper the theory concerning strategic maneuvering of Van Eemeren and Houtlosser is used to demonstrate how debates concerning interpretations of legal norms can be analyzed as forms of strategic maneuvering. The analysis is focused on the use of linguistic arguments.

KEYWORDS: legal argumentation, legal interpretation, linguistic arguments, strategic manoeuvring

Henrike Jansen
Leiden University, the Netherlands
Silence as conversational implicature. On the value of a Gricean perspective on legal interpretation

ABSTRACT: Argumentation theorist Douglas Walton and legal theorist Taco Groenewegen have recently argued for the adoption of a Gricean perspective on legal argumentation in general (Walton) and e contrario reasoning in particular (Groenewegen). In their view, an interpretation of a legal rule can be based on the reasoning that if one follows the opposed interpretation, the legal rule would constitute a violation of a Gricean postulate. In this paper it is argued that although a Gricean perspective offers a clear analysis of the considerations upon which a legal interpretation is based, it does not provide insights not yet known in jurisprudence. Furthermore, additional legal considerations remain necessary in order to analyse and evaluate legal argumentation in which an interpretation of a legal rule is defended.

KEYWORDS: conditional perfection, cooperative principle, e contrario reasoning, Gricean postulates, implicature, legal interpretation, legal argumentation, methods of interpretation