Abstract
This paper aims to make a pragmatic account of encompassing argumentation by a communicative theory such as Relevance Theory (RT). While communication can be viewed as a discourse in which communicators share their intentions with each other, argumentation is a process of vindicating something in a systematized and logical way, which consists of one or more claims, and presents one or more grounds for supporting them. In general, a speaker conveys his intention to a hearer for the purpose of making an influence in the hearer’s mind. With reference to this point, there have been two relevant pragmatic theories such as RT and Argumentation Theory (AT). Judging from the pragmatic point of view, argumentation can be viewed as a part of communication; thus, it is possible to assume that RT could effectively encompass argumentation. This paper argues that although RT has focuses more on examining the process of communication than how argumentation is performed, by extending the range of its application, it can integrate AT and successfully cover the domain of argumentation as well.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
