LEADER 03562nam 22006255 450 001 9910252695703321 005 20200629210631.0 010 $a9789402410631 024 7 $a10.1007/978-94-024-1063-1 035 $a(CKB)3710000001095350 035 $a(DE-He213)978-94-024-1063-1 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC4820295 035 $a(EXLCZ)993710000001095350 100 $a20170308d2017 u| 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurnn|008mamaa 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aModality in Argumentation $eA Semantic Investigation of the Role of Modalities in the Structure of Arguments with an Application to Italian Modal Expressions /$fby Andrea Rocci 205 $a1st ed. 2017. 210 1$aDordrecht :$cSpringer Netherlands :$cImprint: Springer,$d2017. 215 $a1 online resource (XI, 488 p. 66 illus.) 225 1 $aArgumentation Library,$x1566-7650 ;$v29 311 $a94-024-1061-9 311 $a94-024-1063-5 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references at the end of each chapters and index. 327 $aAcknowledgements -- Introduction -- Chapter 1: Meaning and argumentation -- Chapter 2: Three views of modality in Toulmin -- Chapter 3: Relative modality and argumentation -- Chapter 4: Types of conversational backgrounds and arguments -- Chapter 5: Case studies of Italian modal constructions in context -- Conclusion -- Index. 330 $aThis book addresses two related questions that have first arisen in Toulmin?s seminal book on the uses of argument. The first question is the one of the relationship between the semantic analysis of modality and the structure of arguments. The second question is the one of the distinctive place, or role, of modality in the fundamental structure of arguments. These two questions concern how modality, as a semantic category, relates to the fundamental structure of arguments. The book addresses modality and argumentation also according to another perspective by looking at how different linguistic modal expressions may be taken as argumentative indicators. It explores the role of modal expressions as argumentative indicators by using the Italian modal system as a case study. At the same time, it uses predictions/forecasts in the business-financial daily press to investigate the relation between modality and the context of argumentation. 410 0$aArgumentation Library,$x1566-7650 ;$v29 606 $aSemantics 606 $aLogic 606 $aLanguage and languages?Philosophy 606 $aSociolinguistics 606 $aSemantics$3https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/N39000 606 $aLogic$3https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/E16000 606 $aPhilosophy of Language$3https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/E26000 606 $aSociolinguistics$3https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/N44000 615 0$aSemantics. 615 0$aLogic. 615 0$aLanguage and languages?Philosophy. 615 0$aSociolinguistics. 615 14$aSemantics. 615 24$aLogic. 615 24$aPhilosophy of Language. 615 24$aSociolinguistics. 676 $a415.6 700 $aRocci$b Andrea$4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$0327275 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910252695703321 996 $aModality in Argumentation$92534595 997 $aUNINA