oru.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 27 of 27
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Doury, Marianne
    et al.
    LCP, CNRS.
    Quet, Mathieu
    CEPED, IRD.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    Le façonnage de la critique par les dispositifs: Le cas du débat sur les nanotechnologies2015In: Semen, ISSN 0761-2990, E-ISSN 1957-780X, Vol. 39, p. 39-58Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article discusses the ways in which counter-discourse is managed in institutionalised methods of deliberation. More specifically it studies two methods of public deliberation concerning nanotechnology policy, namely the consensus conference organized by the Region Ile-de-France in 2006-2007 and the public hearing organized by the Commission Particulière du Débat Public in 2009-2010. At a macro-discursive level, it becomes clear that the critiques against nanotechnology expressed by the various parties in these two methods vary only marginally. At a micro-discursive level, the ways in which critical reactions are advanced by the participants vary depending on the constraints that each method places.

  • 2.
    Doury, Marianne
    et al.
    Laboratoire Communication et Politique, CNRS, Paris, France.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    The place of counter discourse in two methods of public deliberation: The conférence de citoyens and the débat public on nanotechnologies in France2013In: Journal of Argumentation in Context, ISSN 2211-4742, E-ISSN 2211-4750, Vol. 2, no 1, p. 75-100Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we examine two methods of public participation, namely consensus conference (conférence de citoyens) and public hearing (débat public). While both methods are used in order to involve the public in decision making about science and technology policy, they differ in a number of aspects. Consensus conference seeks the active participation of a selected group of citizens who are expected to elaborate cooperatively a text of recommendations. Public hearing seeks to inform the public and to collect as many reactions by it as possible. In our analysis, we consider the characteristics of these two methods described in the social and political sciences literature as institutional constraints that can play a role in the production of argumentative discourse. We focus our study on the discourse produced in two concrete instances of the application of these participatory methods on the deliberation over the development of nanotechnology in France. More specifically, we study the expression of counter discourse and seek to describe how the participants in the two deliberation processes end up managing the institutional constraints in order to have their criticisms expressed. In this way, we propose a bottom-up approach to the theorization of the role that institutional context plays in the practice of argumentation, and discuss the descriptive adequacy of existing definitions of the deliberative genre within argumentation studies.

  • 3.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Analysing multimodal argumentation within the pragma-dialectical framework: Strategic manoeuvring in the front covers of The Economist2017In: Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics / [ed] Frans van Eemeren & Wu Peng, Amsterdam, Neteherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2017, p. 335-359Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this chapter, I argue that the theoretical assumptions and concrete analytical concepts of Pragma-dialectics constitute a fertile ground for the study of visual and multimodal argumentation. This is primarily because the pragma-dialectical theory takes a procedural, pragmatic and functional approach to the study of argumentation which allows it to incorporate insights from the growing field of multimodal discourse analysis. Within the pragma-dialectical approach, next to the evidentiary function of visual images other argumentative functions can be researched, such as the use of images to advance a standpoint, to criticize, to explain and to draw attention to various aspects of the argumentative procedure. It is also argued that Pragma-dialectics can accommodate insights from multimodal analysis in order to account for the meaning conveyed not only by the verbal and visual content but also by the verbal and visual style as well as by the interplay of the various semiotic modes. Moreover, its focus on the institutional constraints and possibilities of a variety of communicative practices makes it possible not only to consider the context in a systematic way in order to reconstruct multimodal argumentative discourse but also to describe specific argumentative activity types which employ images and text. As a case in point, I analyse a series of front covers from The Economist in order to show how the interplay of image and text amounts to strategic manoeuvring.

  • 4.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    Umiversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    Argumentative functions of visuals: beyond claiming and justifying2013In: Virtues of argumentation: proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22-26 May 2013 Windsor, ON / [ed] Dima Mohammed; Marcin Lewinski, Ontario Society for the study of Argumentation (OSSA) , 2013, p. 1-17Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Up until now, the study of the argumentative role of visuals has been restricted to theformal concept of argument as product, consisting of premises and conclusion. In this paper, I adoptthe pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation as a social and discursive activity in order toexplore argumentative functions of visuals that go beyond claiming and justifying. To do this I payattention to the visual form and to the interaction between the verbal and the visual mode inargumentative discourse.

  • 5. Tseronis, Assimakis
    Christian Plantin: Dictionnaire de l’Argumentation. Une Introduction aux E´ tudes d’Argumentation. [Review]2017In: Argumentation: an international journal on reasoning, ISSN 0920-427X, E-ISSN 1572-8374, Vol. 31, no 4, p. 727-734Article, book review (Other academic)
  • 6.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    Des 'craintes' légitimes aux 'craintes irrationnelles': Analyse argumentative de l’inscription des modalités appréciatives dans les textes du débat public sur les nanotechnologies2014In: Discours - Revue de linguistique, psycholinguistique et informatique, ISSN 1963-1723, E-ISSN 1963-1723, Vol. 15Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper studies the way in which evaluative modality is used in argumentative discourse. The aim is to identify the strategic ef ect of the various linguistic realisations of evaluative modality in two argumentative moves, namely the move of advancing a standpoint and the move of advancing arguments in support of the standpoint. This ef ect depends on the distinct function that each of these moves plays in a debate. As a case in point, the strategic ef ect of evaluative modality is studied in a corpus of 51 texts produced by various stakeholders during the public debate on nanotechnology in France held between 2009 and 2010.

  • 7.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Determining the commitments of image-makers in arguments with multimodal allusions in the front covers of the Economist: Insights from Relevance Theory2018In: International Review of Pragmatics, ISSN 1877-3095, E-ISSN 1877-3109, Vol. 10, no 2, p. 243-269Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The alleged vagueness of visual images and the lack of a univocal coding scheme make it difficult to be sure about the propositions to which image-makers are committed. This is particularly problematic for the analysis of multimodal discourse from an argumentation studies perspective, because it makes it hard for the analyst to establish the argumentative nature and relevance of visuals. The paper explores how insights from Relevance Theory can be applied in order to determine the commitments of image-makers. In particular, it has recourse to the inferential processes involved in the recovery of explicit and implicit content in order to analyse a series of covers from The Economist, where visuals in combination with verbal text cue allusions to films and paintings. It argues that these multimodal allusions are not simply used to attract the audience's attention but also help the analyst to reconstruct the argument of the cover.

  • 8.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Diglossic past and present lexicographical practices: The case of two Greek dictionaries2002In: Language Problems and Language Planning, ISSN 0272-2690, E-ISSN 1569-9889, Vol. 26, no 3, p. 219-252Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The publication of a dictionary is a means to describe, codify and ultimately standardise a language. This process is complicated by the lexicographer’s own attitude towards the language and the public’s sensitivity on language matters. The recent publication of the two most authoritative dictionaries of Modern Greek and their respective lexical coverage reveals the continuing survival of the underlying ideologies of the two sponsoring institutions concerning the history of the Greek language, as well as their opposing standpoints on the language question over the past decades, some 25 years after the constitutional resolution of the Greek diglossia, affecting the way they describe the synchronic state of language. The two dictionaries proceed from opposing starting points in attempting to influence and set a pace for the standardisation of Modern Greek by presenting two different aspects of the synchronic state of Greek, one of which focuses on the long history of the language and thus takes the present state to be only a link in an uninterrupted chain dating from antiquity, and the other of which focuses on the present state of Greek and thus takes this fully developed autonomous code to be the outcome of past linguistic processes and socio-cultural changes in response to the linguistic community’s present needs. The absence of a sufficiently representative corpus has restrained the descriptive capacity of the two dictionaries and has given space for ideology to come into play, despite the fact that both dictionaries have made concessions in order to account for the present-day Greek language.

  • 9.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Netherlands, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Documentary film as multimodal argumentation: Arguing audio-visually about the 2008 financial crisis2015In: Building Bridges for Multimodal Research: International Perspectives on Theories and Practices of Multimodal Analysis / [ed] Janina Wildfeuer, Peter Lang Publishing Group, 2015, Vol. 7, p. 327-345Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 10.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    Laboratoire Communication et Politique CNRS, Paris, France.
    From Connectives to Argumentative Markers: A Quest for Markers of Argumentative Moves and of Related Aspects of Argumentative Discourse2011In: Argumentation: an international journal on reasoning, ISSN 0920-427X, E-ISSN 1572-8374, Vol. 25, no 4, p. 427-447Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, I explore the potential of systematically studying the linguistic surface of discourse for the purposes of identifying markers of argumentative moves and other related categories, such as types of arguments and argumentative strategies. Such a list of argumentative markers can prove useful for the (semi)automatic treatment of a large corpus of texts. After reviewing literature on the linguistic realization of argumentative moves as well as literature on the subject of discourse markers, it becomes clear that the search for representative items of argumentative markers cannot be restricted to those elements marking relations but that it should also include elements that signal a certain function that is of pertinence to argumentative analysis. In this view, argumentative markers can be any single or complex lexical expression as well as a discursive configuration whose presence in a given utterance marks that utterance or the one preceding/following it, or a larger piece of discourse as having a certain argumentative function (as an argumentative move, a type of argument or an argumentative strategy). Examples taken from a French corpus on the controversy surrounding the development and applications of nanotechnology currently under study are used to illustrate the different types of argumentative markers proposed. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

  • 11. Tseronis, Assimakis
    I. Fairclough and N. Fairclough, Political discourse analysis. A method for advanced students.  [Review]2013In: Journal of Argumentation in Context, ISSN 2211-4742, E-ISSN 2211-4750, Vol. 2, no 2, p. 269-278Article, book review (Other academic)
  • 12.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    Laboratoire Communication et Politique, CNRS, Paris, France.
    Les marqueurs d'une stratégie de gestion de la charge de la preuve: franchement et en fait qualifiant une thèse2010In: Revue Verbum, ISSN 0182-5887, Vol. 32, no 1, p. 73-91Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Up until now, most studies that deal with the linguistic realization of argumentationare mainly interested in the « indicative potential » of the words and phrases studiedand tend to neglect the potential strategic effect of these words in argumentativediscourse. In this article, I propose a systematic study of “illocutionary adverbs”,such as franchement and honnêtement, when they appear in the utterance thatfunctions as a standpoint. I also argue that the adverbial phrase en fait has the samestrategic effect. In order to account for the strategic role of these adverbs when theyserve as qualifiers of a standpoint, I have recourse to the concept of burden of proof,a concept that is essential to the act of advancing a standpoint. I argue that theseadverbs can be considered as a means at the arguer’s disposal when formulating hisstandpoint to manage the burden of proof to his advantage. As a result, the analystmay consider their presence in the utterance that functions as a standpoint as amarker of the strategy of managing the burden of proof.

  • 13.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Multimodal argumentation: Beyond the verbal/visual divide2018In: Semiotica, ISSN 0037-1998, E-ISSN 1613-3692, Vol. 2018, no 220, p. 41-67Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    What would the consequences be for the interpretation and analysis of arguments if we were to accept that communication, within which arguments are produced and interpreted, involves the intricate use of more than just the verbal mode? In this paper, I discuss the shortcomings of the conception of argument as a purely verbal phenomenon and of the mere juxtaposition of the visual argument to the verbal, as suggested in the discourses of the sceptics and the advocates and of "visual" argument, respectively. Instead I propose a multimodal perspective on the analysis of argumentative discourse, according to which there is no a priori division of labor between the verbal and the visual mode, and attention is paid both to the (verbal and visual) content and to the (verbal and visual) style. In this view, argument is neither verbal nor visual, since argument is not to be defined on the basis of the verbal, visual or other semiotic means by which it is realized in communication. As a case in point, I analyze an ad campaign for the promotion of the British newspaper The Guardian in the United States. © 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston 2018.

  • 14.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Multimodal argumentation in news magazine covers: A case study of front covers putting Greece on the spot of the European economic crisis2015In: Discourse, Context & Media, ISSN 2211-6958, E-ISSN 2211-6966, Vol. 7, p. 18-27Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, front covers of news magazines are studied as a distinct multimodal genre that invites readers to buy the magazine not only by attracting their attention but also by assuming a position with respect to the particular cover story. In order to account for the argument that a front cover may convey in support of that position, an argumentative reconstruction is required that also needs to take seriously into account the way in which the verbal and the visual modes interact to create meaning. The study proposes a multimodal argumentation perspective on the systematic reconstruction of the arguments that front covers of news magazines put forward. As a case in point, six covers by two German weekly news magazines are analysed, featuring the role of Greece in the eurozone crisis in the period 2010-2012. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.

  • 15.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Multimodale argumentatie: Bruggen slaan tussen argumentatieleer en multimodale analyse2016In: Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, ISSN 1573-9775, Vol. 38, no 1, p. 1-26Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Multimodal argumentation: Building bridges between argumentation theory and multimodal analysis

    Since the end of the 90s there has been an increasing interest in the analysis of images and in their interplay with written language. Even though images, especially when used in advertisements, have already been studied within rhetorical approaches to communication and visual studies, there still lacks a systematic account of their contribution to the way standpoints are put forward and argumentation is advanced. At the same time, within the field of discourse analysis interest has been expressed in the analysis of visual and other non-verbal elements of communication. Nevertheless, no special attention has been paid within this field to those communicative situations where the support of a standpoint with arguments and the acceptability of the argumentation are at stake. In order to be able to analyse the various aspects of multimodal documents on their merits and to account for their argumentative relevance it is necessary to build bridges between argumentation theory and multimodal analysis. This paper discusses critically the current state of affairs regarding the analysis of multimodal documents from an argumentation studies perspective and argues for a systematic study of the interplay of the verbal and the visual modes within the framework of Pragma-dialectics. Three print advertisements are analysed in order to illustrate the merits of such an approach to the argumentative analysis of multimodal documents.

  • 16. Tseronis, Assimakis
    Qualifying Standpoints: Stance adverbs as a presentational device for managing the burden of proof2009Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    A number of studies from pragmatics and discourse analysis have investigated the function of stance adverbs, such as clearly, fortunately, frankly, perhaps, and technically, when used to qualify utterances. Within the field of argumentation studies, scholars who have paid attention to these words have primarily focused on the so-called modal adverbs, and have not considered the insights that can be gained by treating the class of stance adverbs as the linguistic realisation of a certain move in an argumentative discussion. This study aims to fill this gap by investigating the strategic function of stance adverbs when qualifying an utterance that functions as a standpoint. In this study, stance adverbs are examined as a presentational device at the arguer’s disposal when putting forward a standpoint. The study is comprised of three parts. In the first part, the question ‘What is a qualified standpoint?’ is answered by combining illocutionary analysis of the move of advancing a standpoint with pragma-linguistic study of stance ad­verbs. In the second part, the question ‘Why would the protagonist qualify the standpoint?’ is answered based on the concept of burden of proof, which is es­sential to the move of advancing a standpoint. In the third part, the question ‘How does standpoint qualification function strategically in an argumentative discussion?’ is answered by postulating that the protagonist of a qualified standpoint is interested in managing the burden of proof, an assumption which builds on the results of the other two parts. The book is of interest to advanced students and scholars of argumentation and communication studies as well as those interested in an explanation of language use from an argumentative perspective.

  • 17.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    CNRS Délégation Ile-de-France.
    Review of: Dissociation in Argumentative Discussions. A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective2010In: Linguist List, no 21.979Article, book review (Other academic)
  • 18.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    The Explicit/Implicit Distinction in Multimodal Argumentation: Comparing the Argumentative Use of Nano-Images in Scientific Journals and Science Magazines2018In: Argumentation and Inference: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg 2017 Volume II / [ed] Steve Oswald & Didier Maillat, College Publications, 2018, p. 821-842Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The distinction between explicatures and implicatures as well as their varying degrees of strength acknowledged within Relevance Theory can help to capture the complex meaningmaking processes underlying the interpretation of multimoda ltexts as instances of argumentation. These pragmatic insights will be used to compare the ways in which arguments about the revolutionary character and societal impact of nanotechnology are constructed by computer-generated images of the nanoscale on the covers of scientific journals and science magazines.

  • 19.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    Laboratoire Communication et Politique, Paris, France.
    Use and abuse of the strategic function of in fact and frankly when qualifying a standpoint2011In: Pragmatics: Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association, ISSN 1018-2101, E-ISSN 2406-4238, Vol. 21, no 3, p. 473-490Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper seeks to specify the strategic function of adverbs like in fact and frankly when used to qualify the utterance that functions as a standpoint in an argumentative discussion. The aim is to provide a description of their strategic function that takes into consideration the role that the move of advancing a standpoint plays in argumentative discourse. To this direction, the choice of qualifying is explained as a choice that the arguer makes in his attempt to manage the burden of proof that is incurred when advancing a standpoint. By combining the insights from the pragma-linguistic treatment of these adverbs with the theoretical premises of a systematic approach to the analysis of argumentative discourse it becomes possible to specify their strategic function and to evaluate those cases in which this strategic function has been abused to the detriment of the quality of argumentative discourse.

  • 20.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    et al.
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Forceville, Charles
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Arguing Against Corporate Claims Visually and Multimodally: The Genre of Subvertisements2017In: Multimodal Communication, ISSN 2230-6579, E-ISSN 2230-6587, Vol. 6, no 2, p. 143-157Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we describe the conditions under which the manipulation of the verbal and the visual elements or of the visual elements alone in the genre of subvertisements can be considered as an act of objecting or rebutting in an implicit argumentative discussion. We thus consider the cognitive and pragmatic aspects of communication while paying serious attention to the interaction of semiotic modes in order to analyse a number of images produced by anti-consumerist groups such as Adbusters. We identify four different ways in which image-text relations or the visuals alone can cue an incongruity between the message of the original ad and the message of the subvertisement in such a way that the latter functions as an objection or rebuttal of the claim advanced by the original advertisement.

  • 21.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    et al.
    University o Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Forceville, Charles
    University o Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Introduction: Argumentation and rhetoric in visual and multimodal communication2017In: Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in Media Genres / [ed] Assimakis Tseronis& Charles Forceville, Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2017, p. 2-24Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 22.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    et al.
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    Forceville, CharlesUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in Media Genres 2017Collection (editor) (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This collection advances the study of context-dependent characteristics of argumentative discourse by examining a variety of media genres in which text and image (and other semiotic modes) combine to create meaning. The chapters have been written by an international group of senior and junior scholars researching multimodal argumentation in the last two decades. In each chapter, a specific approach to argumentation and rhetoric is combined with insights from visual studies, metaphor theory, scientific visualization, cognitive science, semiotics, conversation analysis, or (documentary) film theory in order to explain how multimodal genres function argumentatively and rhetorically. Together the chapters present a state-of-the-art in the analysis of multimodal argumentation in such diverse genres as print advertisements, news photographs, scientific illustrations, political cartoons, documentaries, film trailers, political TV advertisements, public debates, and political speeches. The volume will be of interest to advanced students and scholars in argumentation studies, rhetoric, and multimodal communication.

  • 23.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    et al.
    University o Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Forceville, Charles
    University o Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    The argumentative relevance of visual and multimodal antithesis in Frederick Wiseman’s documentaries2017In: Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in Media Genres / [ed] Assimakis Tseronis & Charles Forceville, Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2017, p. 166-188Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this chapter we argue that certain salient contrasts that Frederick Wiseman presents non-verbally and multimodally in his Direct Cinema documentaries can be understood as antitheses that play an argumentative role. In this type of documentary, which renounces the use of voice-over narration and music, a filmmaker has to rely on cinematography and editing in combination with participants’ spoken language to guide viewers’ interpretations. We argue that the ways in which certain sequences and shots are filmed and edited as well as the way dialogue, image, and sound combine within the shot create multimodal meanings that can be accounted for in terms of antithesis and can thereby contribute to the argument developed by the filmmaker. We focus on instances of visual and multimodal antithesis in five of Wiseman’s early films (Titicut Follies, High School, Hospital, Juvenile Court, and Primate) and one later film (Zoo).

  • 24.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    et al.
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Forceville, Charles
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Grannetia, Melle
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    The argumentative role of visual metaphor and visual antithesis in ‘fly-on-the-wall’ documentary2015In: Proceedings of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation / [ed] Bart Garssen; David Godden; Gordon Mitchell; Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, 2015, p. 1380-1395Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we explore the argumentative role of visual metaphor and visual antithesis in theso- fly-on-the-wall documentary. In this subtype of documentary, which emphatically renouncesvoice-over narration, the filmmakers guide their viewers into reaching certain conclusions by makingchoices regarding the editing as well as the cinematography. We analyse a number of scenes from two filmsby one major representative of the Direct Cinema or fly-on-the-wall documentary, Frederick Wiseman.

  • 25.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    et al.
    University of Leiden, Leiden, Netherlands.
    Iordanidou, Anna
    University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
    Modern Greek dictionaries and the ideology of standardization2009In: Standard Languages and Language Standards: Greek, Past and Present / [ed] Alexandra Georgakopoulou & Michael Silk, Ashgate, 2009, 1, p. 167-185Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 26.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    et al.
    University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
    Pollaroli, Chiara
    Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
    Introduction: Pragmatic insights for multimodal argumentation2018In: International Review of Pragmatics, ISSN 1877-3095, E-ISSN 1877-3109, Vol. 10, no 2, p. 147-157Article, review/survey (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this introductory paper to the special issue, we briefly discuss literature from argumentation studies, pragmatics, and multimodal analysis in order to show how pragmatics has benefited argumentation studies until now, and how it can also benefit multimodal analysis. In the last section we introduce the papers of this issue that focus on the question how pragmatics can benefit multimodal argumentation in particular.

  • 27.
    Tseronis, Assimakis
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences.
    Pollaroli, ChiaraUniversità della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
    Special Issue: Pragmatic insights for multimodal argumentation2018Collection (editor) (Refereed)
1 - 27 of 27
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf