Turning the Tables: Up- and Downgrading of Evaluative Terms in Public Controversies

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

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 languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)89-113
Number of pages25
JournalJournal of Applied Logics — IfCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications
Volume8
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 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

Cite this