Argument kinds and argument roles in the Ontario provincial election, 2011
Argument kinds and argument roles in the Ontario provincial election, 2011
复制标题
DOI：
10.1075/jaic.2.2.03han
复制
发表时间：
2013-01-01
影响因子：
0.8
通讯作者：
Walton, Douglas N.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hansen, Hans V.;Walton, Douglas N.
本文是一项关于候选人在竞选政治职位时如何辩论的初步研究报告。研究的选举是2011年秋天加拿大安大略省的省级选举。我们从报纸媒体上收集了大约250个选举期间的论点，并寻求以下问题的答案，其中包括：(i)哪些论点方案在政治选举中最流行？列出最著名的辩论方法是否足以将选举中提出的论点分类？应在熟悉的清单上增加哪些计划，使其更适合研究选举？（iv）将论点分为积极的、政策关键的、个人关键的和防御目的是否有用？是否可以通过指出它们喜欢的论点种类和它们最经常使用的论点来有效地描述政党的特征？（vi）从这项研究中可以吸取哪些教训，以便更好地设计未来的同类研究？
This paper is a report of a pilot study of how candidates argue when they are running for political office. The election studied was the provincial election in Ontario, Canada, in the fall of 2011. Having collected about 250 arguments given during the election from newspaper media, we sought answers to the following questions, among others: (i) which argumentation schemes have the greatest currency in political elections? (ii) Is a list of the best known argumentation schemes sufficient to classify the arguments given in elections? (iii) What schemes should be added to the familiar list to make it more adequate for studying elections? (iv) Is it useful to classify arguments as being used for positive, policy-critical, person-critical and defensive purposes? (v) Can political parties be usefully characterized by noting their preferred kinds of arguments and their most frequent uses of arguments? (vi) What lessons can be learned from this study to better design future studies of the same kind?