COMMUNICATION PERFORMANCE IN THE PUBLIC SPACE. IS THERE STILL ROOM FOR ARGUMENTATION THEORIES IN THE CONTEXT OF INFODEMIA?

MARIA CORINA BARBAROS

Abstract


The main aim of this study is to draw attention, in a critical manner, to what communication performance means, on the one hand from the perspective of argumentation theories, and on the other hand from the perspective of the current public arena and its dynamics. Firstly, the conceptual article revises several approaches in the field of argumentation theories: natural logic, discursive schematizations, interactive argumentation strategies, discursive interaction rules imposed by the pragma-dialectical theory of discourse, highlighting the meaning of communicative performance according to these analytical perspectives. Subsequently, the attention is turned to the research question that underlies the study: does argumentation theories have an outdated perspective? It seems that the field of argumentation theories is overtaken by current communicational and political realities characterized by infodemia, misinformation, emphasis on image and argumentative over-simplification. However, in the second part of the article we argue that some concepts extensively studied in the field of argumentation theories, such as common construction of the meaning, the discursive schematizations, the interactivity aspects of communication are able to contribute to the current requirement of communicative performance, thus the study is affirmatively answering to the question addressed by the title.

Keywords


argumentation theories, infodemia, communication performance, dezinformation

References


Adams, S. (2017). Win Bigly: Persuasion in A World where Facts Don’t Matter. New York: Portfolio/ Penguin.

Cameron, K. A. (2009). A practitioner’s guide to persuasion: An overview of 15 selected persuasion theories, models and frameworks. Patient Education and Counseling, 74, 309-317.

Doury, M. & Moirand, S. eds. (2004). L’Argumentation aujourd’hui (textes reunis). Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle.

Grize, J.-B. (1996). Logique naturelle et communications. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Henkemans, F. (2017). Argumentation. Analysis and evaluation. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group

Lamy, B. (1998). La rhetorique ou l’art de parler. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France

Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (2012). Noua retorică. Tratat de argumentare. Iași: Editura Universității « Alexandru Ioan Cuza ».

Skerlep, A. (2001). Re-evaluating the role of rhetoric in public relation theory and in strategies of corporate discourse. Journal of Communication Management, 6 (2), 176-188.

Toulmin, S. (2003). The Uses of Arguments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

van Eemeren, F.; Grootendorst, R. & Snoeck Henkemans, F. (1996). Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory. A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporany Developments. New Jersey : Laurence Erlbaum Associates.

van Eemeren, F., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.