- Cicero, De Inventione, trans. H. M. Hubbell, Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1960); Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, trans. H. E. Butler, Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1920–22). Also see Otto A. Dieter, “Stasis,” Speech Monographs, 17 (1950), 345–369; Wilbur Samuel Howell, “The Positions 3f Argument: An Historical Examination,” in Papers in Rhetoric, Ed. Donald C. Bryant (Saint Louis: Washington University Press, 1940), pp. 3–17; and Wilbur Samuel Howell, Ed. and trans., The Rhetoric of Alcuin if Charlemagne (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1941), pp. 36–45.
- Dieter, p. 368.
- See, for example, Warren Choate Shaw, The Art of Debate (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1922); and Lee S. Hultzén, “Status in Deliberative Analysis,” in The Rhetorical Idiom, Ed. Donald C. Bryant (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1958), 97–123.
- See, for example, Robert P. Newman, “Analysis and Issues—A Study of Doctrine,” Central States Speech Journal, 13 (1961), 43–54; and Raymond E. Nadeau, “In Defense of Deliberative Stock Issues,” Central States Speech Journal, 13 (1962), 142–146.
- Hultzen, p. 111.
- See John R. Searle, Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (London: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1969), pp. 33–42.
- See Jürgen Habermas, Communication and the Evolution of Society, trans. Thomas McCarthy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1979), Chapter 1.
- See Searle; and J. L. Austin, How to do Things with Words (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1962).
- For a systematic explication and analysis of Habermas' program, see Thomas A. McCarthy, The Critical Theory of Jürgen Habermas (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1978). For bibliography of works on Habermas, see Susan L. Kline, “A Bibliography of Works by and on Jürgen Habermas,” Political Theory, in press.
- For a critical exposition of Habermas' theory of communication, see Brant R. Burleson and Susan L. Kline, “Habermas' Theory of Communication: A Critical Explication,” Quarterly Journal of Speech, in press.
- Habermas, Communication and the Evolution of Society, Chapter 1.
- Jürgen Habermas, “Some Distinctions in Universal Pragmatics: A Working Paper,” Theory and Society, 3 (1976), pp. 155–167.
- Habermas, “Some Distinctions,” p. 155.
- T. A. McCarthy, “A Theory of Communicative Competence,” Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 3 (1973), 137.
- McCarthy, “A Theory,” p. 138.
- Habermas, Communication and the Evolution of Society, Chapter 1.
- See, for example, Scott Jacobs, “Some Formal Procedures for Doing Requests in Conversation,” unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois, Urbana; William Labov and David Fanshel, Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation (New York: Academic Press, 1977); and Searle.
- Habermas, Communication and the Evolution of Society, p. 34.
- Ibid., p. 62.
- For a discussion of validity claims, see Jürgen Habermas, “Theories of Truth,” trans. Richard Grabau, unpublished manuscript, Purdue University.
- For a discussion of the concept of discourse, see Habermas, “Theories of Truth.”
- Cicero, Topica, 21. 79–82, as quoted in Hultzén, p. 100.
- Catherine Garvey, “Requests and Responses in Children's Speech,” Journal of Child Language, 2 (1975), 41–63.
- Garvey, p. 41.
- Sally Jackson and Scott Jacobs, “The Organization of Argument in Natural Discourse,” paper presented at the Speech Communication Association Convention, 1978; Scott Jacobs and Sally Jackson, “The Social Production of Influence,” paper presented at the Central States Speech Association, 1979; and Labov and Fanshel.
The Journal of the American Forensic Association
Volume 16, 1979 - Issue 2