New Dialectical Rules For Ambiguity
A set often rules is proposed for dealing with problems of ambiguity when interpreting a text of argumentative discourse. The rules are based on Grice's pragmatic rules for a collaborative conversation and on principles and maxims used to deal with ambiguity in interpreting legal and religious...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Windsor
2000-01-01
|
| Series: | Informal Logic |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/2280 |
| _version_ | 1798044024746016768 |
|---|---|
| author | Douglas Walton |
| author_facet | Douglas Walton |
| author_sort | Douglas Walton |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | A set often rules is proposed for dealing with problems of ambiguity when interpreting a text of argumentative discourse. The rules are based on Grice's pragmatic rules for a collaborative conversation and on principles and maxims used to deal with ambiguity in interpreting legal and religious writings. The rules are meant to be applied to a given argument used in a given case, and to resolve (or at least deal with) an ambiguity in the argument (or affecting the argument) by using evidence derived from the text and context of dialogue surrounding the argument in the case. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T22:57:12Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-48ba38b3c96646ad839c61336ef72bda |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0824-2577 2293-734X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T22:57:12Z |
| publishDate | 2000-01-01 |
| publisher | University of Windsor |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Informal Logic |
| spelling | doaj.art-48ba38b3c96646ad839c61336ef72bda2022-12-22T03:58:22ZengUniversity of WindsorInformal Logic0824-25772293-734X2000-01-0120310.22329/il.v20i3.2280New Dialectical Rules For AmbiguityDouglas WaltonA set often rules is proposed for dealing with problems of ambiguity when interpreting a text of argumentative discourse. The rules are based on Grice's pragmatic rules for a collaborative conversation and on principles and maxims used to deal with ambiguity in interpreting legal and religious writings. The rules are meant to be applied to a given argument used in a given case, and to resolve (or at least deal with) an ambiguity in the argument (or affecting the argument) by using evidence derived from the text and context of dialogue surrounding the argument in the case.https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/2280principle of charityequivocationstatutory interpretationargument evaluationconversationdialogue |
| spellingShingle | Douglas Walton New Dialectical Rules For Ambiguity Informal Logic principle of charity equivocation statutory interpretation argument evaluation conversation dialogue |
| title | New Dialectical Rules For Ambiguity |
| title_full | New Dialectical Rules For Ambiguity |
| title_fullStr | New Dialectical Rules For Ambiguity |
| title_full_unstemmed | New Dialectical Rules For Ambiguity |
| title_short | New Dialectical Rules For Ambiguity |
| title_sort | new dialectical rules for ambiguity |
| topic | principle of charity equivocation statutory interpretation argument evaluation conversation dialogue |
| url | https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/2280 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT douglaswalton newdialecticalrulesforambiguity |