因果关系,论证和连接词

IF 0.1 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Linguistica Pragensia Pub Date : 2011-01-01 DOI:10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2
Ondžej Pešek
{"title":"因果关系,论证和连接词","authors":"Ondžej Pešek","doi":"10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper deals with the relation between argumentation and causality. After having defined causality (referring to D. Hume) and its language representation, we distinguish three types of argumentative discourse articulated by an argument-introducing connective (parce que, puisque, car, en effet etc.), i.e. argument for the utterance content, argument for the illocutionary act and argument for the act of enunciation. Afterwards, we examine the relation between argument and conclusion in these three types of discourse from the point of view of causality. We show that causality operates as a principle which the argumentation is based on only in the case of truth-conditional acts. We try to explain some restrictions concerning the distribution of the causally related entities which are observed.","PeriodicalId":40638,"journal":{"name":"Linguistica Pragensia","volume":"12 1","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Causality, Argumentation and Connectives\",\"authors\":\"Ondžej Pešek\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper deals with the relation between argumentation and causality. After having defined causality (referring to D. Hume) and its language representation, we distinguish three types of argumentative discourse articulated by an argument-introducing connective (parce que, puisque, car, en effet etc.), i.e. argument for the utterance content, argument for the illocutionary act and argument for the act of enunciation. Afterwards, we examine the relation between argument and conclusion in these three types of discourse from the point of view of causality. We show that causality operates as a principle which the argumentation is based on only in the case of truth-conditional acts. We try to explain some restrictions concerning the distribution of the causally related entities which are observed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40638,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistica Pragensia\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistica Pragensia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistica Pragensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/V10017-011-0001-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文讨论了论证与因果关系的关系。在定义了因果关系(参照休谟)及其语言表征之后,我们区分了三种由引语连接词(parce que, puisque, car, en effet等)所表达的议论文语,即话语内容的议论文、言外行为的议论文和发音行为的议论文。然后,我们从因果关系的角度考察了这三种类型话语中论点和结论之间的关系。我们表明,因果关系作为一个原则运作,只有在真理条件行为的情况下,论证才基于这个原则。我们试图解释一些关于所观察到的因果相关实体分布的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Causality, Argumentation and Connectives
The paper deals with the relation between argumentation and causality. After having defined causality (referring to D. Hume) and its language representation, we distinguish three types of argumentative discourse articulated by an argument-introducing connective (parce que, puisque, car, en effet etc.), i.e. argument for the utterance content, argument for the illocutionary act and argument for the act of enunciation. Afterwards, we examine the relation between argument and conclusion in these three types of discourse from the point of view of causality. We show that causality operates as a principle which the argumentation is based on only in the case of truth-conditional acts. We try to explain some restrictions concerning the distribution of the causally related entities which are observed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Linguistica Pragensia
Linguistica Pragensia LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Tracing back the history of Italian Attributive-Appositive Noun+Noun compounds: First outcomes “Il libro di lettura non sia un centone di trite nozioni”: i manuali di lettura nei programmi ministeriali per la scuola elementare (1860–1905) Anglicisms: Towards defining their concept and typology Writer-reader interaction in L2 learner academic discourse: Reader engagement in Czech students’ Master’s theses The Catalan language as seen by foreign travellers in the second third of the 19th century
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1