Abstract
We discuss the strategy of using dyslogistic terms in a novel, laudatory manner, or eulogistic terms pejoratively. By such up- and downgrading of evaluative terms the proponent of a standpoint may attempt to turn the tables in a public controversy: what formerly looked like a bad argument comes to be regarded as a strong one, or vice versa. Is this a licit strategy? We take our lead from Macagno and Walton who examined evaluative words from an argumentative stance.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 89-113 |
| Number of pages | 25 |
| Journal | Journal of Applied Logics — IfCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - Feb-2021 |
Keywords
- up- and downgrading
- evaluation reversal
- emotive language
- laudatory terms
- dyslogistic terms
- evaluative meaning
- evaluative terms
- pejorative terms
- eulogistic terms
- multicultural
- public controversy
- persuasive definition
- question begging appellatives
- quasi-persuasive definition
- reclamation of slurs
- argumentation