Publicação em atas de evento científico
Dissociating between ‘is’ and ‘ought’: Recognizing and interpreting positions in climate change controversies
Mali Üzelgün (Üzelgün, M. A. ); Paula Castro (Castro, P.);
Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Argumentation
Ano (publicação definitiva)
2016
Língua
Inglês
País
Reino Unido
Mais Informação
Web of Science®

Esta publicação não está indexada na Web of Science®

Scopus

Esta publicação não está indexada na Scopus

Google Scholar

N.º de citações: 2

(Última verificação: 2025-04-20 18:15)

Ver o registo no Google Scholar

Esta publicação não está indexada no Overton

Abstract/Resumo
This presentation focuses on the uses of dissociation in controversial debates. We report findings from an argumentative analysis of (N=22) interviews, in which participants were presented with contentious assertions concerning climate change action. We show how the interview responses were characterized by contrastive and concessive uses of the connective but, and explore the – temporal and spatial – patterns through which dissociation was used in enhancing the dialectical reasonableness together with the rhetorical effectiveness of the arguments.
Agradecimentos/Acknowledgements
--
Palavras-chave
Appearance/reality pair,Carbon offsetting,controversy,Definition,Dissociation,Environmental discourse,Temporality and spatiality