Références

References

Ad Her. = (1954). Rhetorica ad Herennium. Trans. by H. Caplan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.

Adam J.-M. (1996). L’argumentation dans le dialogue. Langue Française, 112. 31-49.

Adorno Th. W., Frenkel-Brunswik E., Levinson D. J. & Sanford R. N. (1950). The  Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper & Row

Agazzi E. (ed.) (1980). Modern Logic – A Survey. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Al-Ghazali (Bal.) = (1998). La Balance Juste. Paris: Iqra.

Al-Ghazali (Dég.) = (1995). Les Dégâts des Mots. Paris: Iqra.

Amossy R. (1991). Les Idées Reçues. Sémiologie du Stéréotype. Paris: Nathan.

Amossy R. (ed.) (1999a). Images de Soi dans le Discours. La Construction de l’Éthos. Geneva: Delachaux & Niestlé.

Amossy R. (1999b). La notion d’éthos, de la rhétorique à l’analyse de discours. In Amossy R. (ed.) (1999a). 9-30.

Amossy R. (2000). L’Argumentation dans le Discours. Paris: Nathan.

Angenot M. (2008). Dialogue de Sourds. Traité de Rhétorique Antilogique. Paris: Mille et Une Nuits.

Anscombre J.-C. (ed.) (1995a). Théorie des Topoi. Paris: Kimé.

Anscombre J.-C. (1995b). De l’argumentation dans la langue à la théorie des topoi. In Anscombre J.-C. (ed.) (1995a). 11-47.

Anscombre J.-C. & Ducrot O. (1983). L’Argumentation dans la Langue. Brussels: Mardaga.

Anscombre J.-C. & Ducrot O. (1986). Informativité et argumentativité. In Meyer M. (eds) (1986). 79-94.

Anselm of Canterbury (Pros.) = (2000). Proslogion. In Complete Philosophical and Theological Treatises of Anselm of Canterbury. Trans. by J. Hopkins and H. Richardson. Minneapolis: The Arthur J. Banning Press. http://jasper-hopkins.info/proslogion.pdf

Antiphon (Disc.) = (1923). Discours. Ed. and trans. by L. Gernet. Paris: Les Belles-Lettres. Apothéloz D. & Miéville D. (1989). Cohérence et discours argumenté. In M. Charolles (ed.) (1989). The Resolution of Discourse. Hambourg, Buske. 68-87.

Arendt H. (1958). What was authority? In Friedrich C. (ed.) (1958). Authority. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.

Arendt H. [1951] = (1976). The Origins of Totalitarianism. San Diego: Harcourt Brace

Aristotle (PA) = Prior Analytics. Trans. by A. J. Jenkinson. http://classics.mit.edu//Aristotle/prior.html (12-12-2017).

Aristotle (Pol.) = (1855). Politics. Vol. 1. Trans. by B. Jowett. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Aristotle (Post. An.) = (1960). Posteriors Analytics. Trans. by H. Trendennick. In Aristotle,

Posteriors Analytics – Topica. Cambridge, MA, London, Eng.: Harvard UP.

Aristotle (Rhet.) =
— (2005) Rhetoric. In Aristotle, Poetics and Rhetoric. Introd. and notes by E. Garver. Rhetoric trans. by W. Rhys Roberts (1924). Poetics, trans. by S. H. Butcher (1911). New York: Barnes and Nobles.

— (1926). Rhetoric. Trans. by J. H. Freese. London: William Heinemann & New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons.

Aristotle (Soph.) = (1955). On Sophistical Refutations. Trans. by E. S. Forster. Cambridge, MA & London: Harvard UP. https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/a/aristotle/sophistical/

Aristotle (Top.) = (1960). Topica. In Aristotle, Posteriors Analytics – Topica. Trans. by E. S. Forster. Cambridge, MA & London, England: Harvard UP.

Arnauld A. & Nicole P. [1662] = (1850). Logic, or The Art of Thinking, Being the Port-Royal Logic. Trans. and introd. by Th. S. Baynes. Edinburgh: Sutherland and Know.

Atkinson J.-M. & Heritage J. (eds) (1984). Structures of Social Action – Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge, MA: CUP. 79-112.

Auroux S. (1995). Argumentation et anti-rhétorique. La mathématisation de la logique classique. Hermès 15. 129-144.

Auroux (1990). Encyclopédie Philosophique Universelle. Vol. 2: Les Notions Philosophiques. Paris: PUF.

Auroux S. (ed.) (1992). Histoire des idées linguistiques. Brussels: Mardaga.

Austin J. L. (1962). How To Do Things With Words. Oxford: Oxford UP.

Bacon F. [1620] = (1901). Novum Organum. Ed. by J. Devey. New York: Collier and Son.

Bailly A. [1901]. Abrégé du Dictionnaire Grec-Français. Paris: Hachette. http://home.scarlet.be/tabularium/bailly/index.html

Baker M. J. (1996). Argumentation et co-construction des connaissances. Interaction et Cognitions 2, 3. 157-191.

Bakhtin = Bakhtine M. (1978). Esthétique et Théorie du Roman. Trans. by D. Olivier. Paris: Gallimard.

Balacheff N. (1999). Apprendre la preuve. In Sallantin J. & Szczeciniarz J. J. (eds.) (1999). 197-236.

Barthes R. (1970). L’ancienne rhétorique. Aide-mémoire. Communications, 16. 195-226.

Barthes R. (1977) = (1996). Inaugural Lecture at the Collège de France. In Kearney R & Rainwater M. (1996). The Continental Philosophy Reader. New York: Routledge. 364-377.

Bassham G. (2003). Linked and independant premises. A new analysis. In Eemeren, F.H van, Blair J. A., Willard C. A., Snoeck-Henkemans A. F. (eds) (2003). 69-73.

Beardsley M. C. [1950] = (1975). Thinking Straight. Principles of Reasoning for Readers and Writers. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Benett B. S. (2005). Hermagoras of Temnos. In Ballif M. & Moran M. G. (eds) (2005) Classical Rhetorics and Rhetoricians: Critical Studies and Sources. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Benoit W. L. (1987). On Aristotle example. Philosohy and Rhetoric 20. 261-267.

Benoit W. L. & Lindsey J. J. (1987). Argument fields and forms of argument in natural language. In van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Blair, J. A., Willard, C. A. (eds.) (1987). 215-224.

Bentham J., [1824] = (1962). The Book of Fallacies. In The Works of Jeremy Bentham. Published by J. Bowring. Vol. 2. New York, Russell & Russell.

Benveniste É. [1958] = (1971). Subjectivity in language. In Problems in General Linguistics. Trans. by M. E. Meek. Miami, University of Miami Press. 223-230.

Benveniste É. [1959] = (1971) The correlations of tense in the French verb. In Problems in General Linguistics. Trans. by M. E. Meek. Miami: University of Miami Press. 205-248.

Benveniste É. [1969] = (1973). The censor and auctoritas. In Indo-European Language and Society. Trans. by E. Palmaer and J. Lallot. Miami: University of Miami Press. http://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/article/display/3961

Berlioz J. (1980). Le récit efficace: L’exemplum au service de la prédication. Rhétorique et Histoire. Mélanges de l’École Française de Rome, Moyen Âge – Temps Modernes, 92. 113-146.

Bernays E. L. (1928). Propaganda. New York: Horace Liveright.

Bernier R. (1980). Le rôle de l’analogie dans l’explication en biologie. In A. Lichnerowicz & al. (eds) (1980). 167-193.

Bible = The Bible. www.biblegateway.com

Billig M. [1987] = (1989). Arguing and Thinking. A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge UP & Paris: Éditions de la MSH.

Bilmes J. (1991). Toward a theory of argument in conversation. The preference for disagreement. In van Eemeren F. H., Grootendorst R., Blair J. A. & Willard C. (eds) (1991) 462-469.

Bird O. (1961). The re-discovery of the topics: Professor Toulmin’s inference warrant. Mind 70. 76-96.

Bitzer L. (1959). Aristotle’s Enthymeme Revisited. Quarterly Journal of Speech 45. 399-408.

Bitzer L. F. [1968] = (1974) The rhetorical situation. In Fisher W. R. (ed.) (1974). Rhetoric: a Tradition in Transition. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State UP. 247-260.

Black M. (1962). Models and Metaphor. Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Black M. (1979). More about metaphor. In A. Ortony (ed.) (1979). 19-43.

Blair J. A & Johnson R. (eds) (2011). Conductive Argument: An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning. London: College Publications.

Blair J. A. (2012). Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation. Dordrecht: Springer.

Blair J. A. & Johnson R. H. (eds) (1980). Informal Logic: The First International Symposium. Inverness: Edgepress.

Blanché R. (1970). L’axiomatique, Paris: PUF

Blanché R. (1973). Le raisonnement. Paris: PUF.

Boeckh P. A. [1886] = (1988). Philological hermeneutics. In Mueller-Vollmer K. (ed.) (1988). 132-147.

Boethius, Top. = (1978). De Topicis Differentiis. Trans. Notes and Essays by E. Stump. Ithaca: Cornell University Press,

Bonhomme M. (1998). Les Figures Clés du Discours. Paris: Le Seuil.

Booth W. C. (1974). Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Borel M.-J., Grize J.-B. & Miéville D. (1983). Essai de Logique Naturelle. Berne, Peter Lang.

Bori P. C. [1987] = (1991) L’Interprétation Infinie. Trans. by F. Vial. Paris: Le Cerf.

Bornscheuer L. (1976). Topik. Zur Struktur der gesellschaftlichen Einbildungskraft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Bossuet J.-B. [1677] = (1990). Logique du Dauphin. Paris: Éditions Universitaires.

Bouamrane C. & Gardet L. (1984). Panorama de la Pensée Islamique. Paris: Sindbad.

Boudon R. (1990). L’art de se Persuader des Idées Douteuses, Fragiles ou Fausses. Paris: Le Seuil.

Bourdieu P. (1982). Ce que Parler Veut Dire. L’Économie des Échanges Linguistiques, Paris:
Fayard.

Bouveresse J. [1999]. Prodiges et Vertiges De l’Analogie. Paris: Raisons d’Agir.

Bouverot D. (ed.) (1993). Rhétorique et Sciences du Langage. Verbum, 1-2-3.

Bouvier A. (1999). Philosophie des Sciences Sociales – Un point de vue argumentativiste en sciences sociales. Paris: PUF.

Bouvier A. (ed.) (1994-1995). Argumentation et Sciences sociales, (I) et (II). L’Année Sociologique, 44-45.

Boyer A., Vignaux G. (ed.) (1995). Argumentation et Rhétorique, (I) & (II). Hermès 15-16.

Brandt P.-Y. & Apothéloz D. (1991). L’articulation raisons-conclusion dans la contre-argumentation. La Négation. Travaux du Cercle de Recherches Sémiologiques, 59). 88-102.

Brémond Cl. (1982). Décomposition syntagmatique: Les parties de l’exemplum. In Brémond Cl., & al. (1982). 113-143.

Brémond Cl., Le Goff J. & Schmitt J-Cl. (1982). L’Exemplum. Turnhout: Brepols.

Breton Ph. (1996). L’Argumentation dans la Communication. Paris: La Découverte.

Breton Ph. (1997). La Parole Manipulée. Paris: La Découverte.

Breuer D. & Schanze H. (eds) (1981). Topik. München: Wilhelm Fink.

Brody B. A. (1967). Logical terms, Glossary of —. In Edwards P (ed.) (1967). Vol. 5. 57-77.

Brown R. W. & Levinson S. (1978). Politeness. Some Universal en Language Usage. Cambridge, CUP.

Brunschwig J. (1967). Introduction. In Aristote, Topiques. Paris: Les Belles-Lettres.

Bühler K. [1933] = (1976). Die Axiomatik der Sprachwissenschaften. Einleitung und Kommentar von E. Ströker. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klosterman.

Burke K. (1945). A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Burke K. (1950). A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Buty Chr. & Plantin Chr. (2009). Argumenter en Classe de Sciences. Du débat à l’Apprentissage. Lyon: INRP.

Carel M. (1995). Trop: Argumentation interne, argumentation externe et positivité. In Anscombre I. C. (ed.) Théorie des Topoi. Paris: Kimé. 177-206.

Carel M. (1999). Sémantique discursive et sémantique logique: Le cas de mais. Modèles linguistiques, XX, 1. 133-144.

Carel M. (2011). L’Entrelacement Argumentatif. Lexique, Discours et Blocs Sémantiques. Paris: Champion.

Casagrande C., Vecchio S. [1987] = (1991). Les péchés de la langue. Discipline et éthique de la parole dans la culture médiévale. Pref. by J. Le Goff. Trans. by Ph. Baillet. Paris: Le Cerf.

Cassin B. (2004). Vocabulaire Européen des Philosophies – Dictionnaire des Intraduisibles. Paris: Le Seuil.

CD = Cambridge Dictionary, http://dictionary.cambridge.org

Chabrol Cl. & Radu M. (2008). Psychologie de la Communication et de la Persuasion. Brussels: De Boeck.

Chaignet A. E., 1888). La Rhétorique et Son Histoire. Geneva: Slatkine Reprints.

Chakhotine S. [1939] = (1940). The Rape of the Masses; The Psychology of Totalitarian Political Propaganda. Trans. by E. W. Dickes. New York: Alliance Book / London: Routledge.

Charaudeau P. & Maingueneau D. (2002). Dictionnaire d’Analyse du Discours. Paris: Le Seuil.

Chenique F. (1975). Éléments de Logique Classique. T. 1. L’Art de Penser et deJjuger. T. 2. L’Art de Raisonner. Paris: Dunod.

Cicero (Acad.) = The Academic Questions. Trans. by C. D. Yonge. The University of Adelaide. https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/c/cicero/academic-questions/ (08-17-2017)

Cicero (De Inv.) = (2006). On Invention. Trans. by H. M. Hubbell. Cambridge MA & London England: Harvard UP.

Cicero (De Or.) = (1878). De Oratore. Translated or edited by J. S. Watson. New York, Harper. Quoted after Cicero, On Oratory and Orators. Carbondale & Edwardsville: Southern Illinois UP (1970).

Cicero (Part.) = De Partitione Oratoria. In Cicero, IV. Trans. by H. Rackham. First published (1942). Cambridge MA, London England: Harvard UP.

Cicero (Top.) = (2006) Topics. In Cicero, On Invention — Best Kind of Orators – Topics. Trans. by H. M. Hubble. Cambridge MA, London: Harvard UP. (2006).

Condillac E. B. de [1976] = (1981). Traiter de l’Art de Raisonner. Paris: Vrin.

Conein B., de Fornel M. & Quéré L. (eds) (1990). Les Formes de la Conversation. Vol. 1. Paris: CNET.

Conley T. M. (1984). The enthymeme in perspective. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70. 168-187.

Cooper J. M. (1996). An Aristotelian Theory of the Emotions. In A. O. Rorty (ed.) Essays on Aristotle’s Rhétoric. Berkeley: University of California Press. 238-257.

Cosnier J. (1994). Psychologie des Émotions et des Sentiments. Paris: Retz & Nathan.

Cousin J. (1976). Note [to Quintilien Institution Oratoire V, 10]. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.

Cox J. R. & Willard C. A. (eds) (1982). Advances in Argumentation Theory and Research. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Curtius E. R. [1948] = (1953). European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages. Trans. by W. Trask. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

D.c = Dictionary.com. http://www.dictionary.com

Damasio A. R. (1994). Descartes’s Error — Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. New York: Avon Books.

Danblon E. (2005). La Fonction Persuasive. Anthropologie du Discours Rhétorique: Origines et Actualité. Paris: Armand Colin.

Dascal M. (2009). Colonizing and decolonizing minds. In I. Kuçuradi (ed.) Papers of the 2007 World Philosophy Day. Ankara: Philosophical Society of Turkey. 308-332.

Davidson D. (1978). What metaphors mean. In Sacks, S. (ed.) (1978). 29-45.

De Vries E., Lund K., & Baker M. J. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 11, 1. 63-103.

Declerq G. (1993). L’Art d’Argumenter. Structures Rhétoriques et Littéraires. Paris: Éditions Universitaires.

Declerq G. (2002). Avatars de l’argument ad hominem. Éristique, sophistique, rhétorique. In M. Murat, M., G. Declercq & J. Dangel (eds) (2002). La Parole Polémique, Paris: Champion. 327-376.

Descartes R. [1628] = (1954). Rules for the Direction of the Mind. Trans. by E. Anscombe & P.T. Geach. In E. Anscombe & P. T. Geach (1954). Descartes. Philosophical Writings. A Selection. London: Nelson.

Descartes R. [1637] = (1987). Discours de la Méthode. Introd. and notes by É. Gilson. Paris: Vrin.

Descartes R. [1641] = (1911). Meditations on First Philosophy. In The Philosophical Works of René Descartes. Trans. by E. S. Haldane. Cambridge: CUP.

Descartes R. [1649] = (1989). The Passions of the Soul. Introd. by G. Rodis-Lewis. Trans. by S. Voss. Indianapolis, IN & Cambridge, MA: Hackett.

Dicolat = Dictionnaire latin-français.
http://www2c.aclille.fr/verlaine/College/Projets/Latin/dictionnaire_fr_latin/Dico-lat-C.html.

Dic = Dictionary.com, http://www.dictionary.com

Dieter A. O. L. (1950). ‘Stasis’. Speech Monographs, 17, 4. 345-69.

Domenach J. M. [1950] = (1979). La Propagande Politique. Paris: PUF.

Dominicy M. (s.d.). Perelman et l’École de Bruxelles. www.philodroit.be/spip.php?page=article&id_article=452&lang=fr. (09-20 -2013)

Dopp J. (1967). Notions de Logique Formelle. 2nd revised ed. Louvain & Paris: Béatrice Nauwelaerts.

Douay-Soublin F. (1992). La rhétorique en Europe à travers son enseignement. In S. Auroux (ed.), T. 2. 467-507.

Douay-Soublin F. (1999). La Rhétorique en France au XIXe siècle à travers ses pratiques et ses institutions: Restauration, renaissance, remise en cause. In M. Fumaroli (ed.) (1999). 1071-1214.

Doury M. (1997). Le Débat Immobile – L’Argumentation dans le Débat Médiatique sur les Parasciences. Paris: Kimé.

Doury M. (2000). La réfutation par accusation d’émotion. In Plantin Chr., Doury M., & Traverso V. (eds) (2010). 265-277.

Doury M. (2003). L’évaluation des arguments dans les discours ordinaires. Le cas de l’accusation d’amalgame. Langage et société, 105. 9-37.

Doury M. (2006). Evaluating analogy. Toward a descriptive approach to argumentative norms. In Houtlosser P. & van Rees A. (eds) (2006). Considering Pragma-Dialectics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 35-49.

Dubucs J. (1995). Les arguments défaisables. Argumentation et Rhétorique I. Hermès 15. 271-290.

Ducrot O. s.d. Quelques raisons de distinguer ‘locuteurs’ et ‘énonciateurs’.
www.hum.au.dk/romansk/polyfoni/Polyphonie_III/Oswald_Ducrot.htm. (09-20-2013).

Ducrot O. (1972). Dire et ne pas Dire. Tours, Hermann.

Ducrot O. (1973). La Preuve et le Dire. Paris: Mame.

Ducrot O. (1975). ‘Je trouve que’. Semantikos 1. 62-88. Re-published in Ducrot & al.
(1980). 57-92.

Ducrot, O. (1980). Les Échelles Argumentatives. Paris: Minuit.

Ducrot O. (1984). Le Dire et le Dit. Paris: Minuit.

Ducrot O. (1988). Polifonía y Argumentación. Cali, Universidad del Valle.

Ducrot O. (1993). Les topoi dans la Théorie de l’Argumentation dans la Langue. In C. Plantin (ed.) (1993). 233-248.

Ducrot O. (1995). Les modificateurs déréalisants. Journal of Pragmatics, 24. 145-165.

Ducrot O. & al. (1980). Les Mots du Discours. Paris: Minuit.

Ducrot O. & al. (1982). Justement, l’inversion argumentative. Lexique, 1. 151-164.

Ducrot O. (ed.) (1966). Logique et linguistique. Langages 2. 3-30.

Dufour M. (2008). Argumenter – Cours de Logique Informelle. Paris: Armand Colin.

Dumarsais C. Ch. [1730] = (1988). Des Tropes ou des Différents Sens dans Lesquels on Peut Prendre un Même Mot dans une Même Langue. Ed. by F. Douay-Soublin. Paris: Flammarion.

Dumoncel, J.-C. (1990). Évidence. In Auroux, S. (1990). 908.

Dupleix S. [1607] = (1984). La Logique, ou Art de Discourir et Raisonner. Paris: Fayard.

Dupont F. (2000). L’Orateur Sans Visage. Essai sur l’Acteur Romain et son Masque. Paris: PUF.

Dupréel E. (1939). Esquisse d’une Philosophie des Valeurs. Paris: Alcan.

Dupriez B. (1984). Gradus. Les Procédés Littéraires – Dictionnaire. Paris: UGE.

Duval R. (1992-1993). Argumenter, démontrer, expliquer. Continuité ou rupture explicative? « petit x » 31. 37-61.

Duval R. (1995). Sémiosis et Pensée Humaine. Registres Sémiotiques et Apprentissages Intellectuels. Berne: Peter Lang.

Edwards P. (ed.) (1967). Encyclopedia of Philosophy. New York: MacMillan & London: Collier.

van Eemeren F. H., Blair J. A., Willard C. A., & Snoeck-Henkemans A. F. (eds) (2003). Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the International Society for the Study of argumentation. Amsterdam: SICSAT.

van Eemeren F. H., Blair, J. A., Willard, C. A. & Garssen, B. (eds.) (2007). Proceedings ofthe Sixth International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam: SICSAT.

van Eemeren F. H. & Garssen B. (2009). The fallacies of composition and division revisited. Cogency, 1, 1. 23-42.

van Eemeren F., Garssen B., Godden D., Mitchell G. (eds) (2011). Proceedings of the 2010 ISSA Conference. Amsterdam: SICSAT.

van Eemeren F. H., Garssen, B. & Meuffels, B. (2009). Fallacies and Judgements of Reasonableness – Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-dialectical Discussion Rules. Dordrecht, Springer.

van Eemeren F. H. & Grootendorst R. (1984). Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the analysis of Discussions Directed Towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion. Dordrecht: Foris.

van Eemeren F. H. & Grootendorst R. (1992). Argumentation, Communication, Fallacies. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

van Eemeren F. H. & Grootendorst R. (1995). The Pragma-Dialectical Approach to Fallacies. In Hansen H. V. & Pinto R. C. (eds) (1995). Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State UP. www.ditext.com/eemeren/ pd.html (09-20-2013).

van Eemeren F. H. & Grootendorst R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-dialectical Approach. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge UP.

van Eemeren F. H., Grootendorst R., Blair J. A. & Willard, C. A. (eds.) (1987). Proceedings of the Conference on argumentation (1986). Dordrecht: Foris.

van Eemeren F. H., Grootendorst R., Blair J. A. & Willard C. A. (eds.) (1991). Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation. Amsterdam: SICSAT.

van Eemeren F. H., Grootendorst R., Blair J. A. & Willard C. A. (eds.) (1995). Proceedings of the Third ISSA conference on argumentation (1994). Amsterdam: SICSAT.

van Eemeren F. H., Grootendorst R., Blair J. A. & Willard, C. A. (eds.) (1999). Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam: SICSAT.

van Eemeren F. H., Grootendorst R. & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2002). Argumentation: Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

van Eemeren F. H., Grootendorst R., Snoeck Henkemans A. F., Blair J. A., Johnson R.

H., Krabbe E. C. W., Plantin Chr., Walton D. N., Willard C. A., Woods J. &

Zarefsky D. (1996). Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory, A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

van Eemeren F. H. & Houtlosser P. (2002). Dialectic and Rhetoric. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

van Eemeren F. H. & Houtlosser P. (2003). More About Fallacies as Derailments of Strategic Maneuvering: The Case of Tu Quoque. “Informal Logic @ 25” Conference, OSSA, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario. CDRom.

van Eemeren F. H., Houtlosser P. & Snoeck Henkemans A. F. (2007). Argumentative Indicators in Discourse. A Pragma-Dialectical Study. Amsterdam: Springer.

van Eemeren F. H. & Houtlosser P. (eds) (2000). The Relation Between Rhetoric and Dialectic. Argumentation, 14-3.

van Eemeren F. H. & Houtlosser P. (eds) (2006). Perspectives on Strategic Maneuvering. Argumentation 20, 4.

van Eemeren F. H. & Kruiger T. (1987). Identifying Argumentation Schemes. In van Eemeren F. H., Grootendorst R., Blair J. A. & Willard, C. A. (eds.) (1987). 271-291.

Eggs E. (1994). Grammaire du Discours Argumentatif. Paris: Kimé.

Eggs E. (2000). Logos, ethos, pathos – L’actualité de la rhétorique des passions chez Aristote. In Plantin Chr., Doury M. Traverso V. (eds). (2000). 15-31.

Ehninger D. & Brockriede W. [1960] = (1983). Toulmin on argument – An interpretation and application. In Golden, J. L., Berquist, G. F. & Coleman, W. E. (1983). 121-130.

Ekman P. (1999). Basic emotions. In T. Dalgleish and T. Power (Eds.) The Handbook of Cognition and Emotion. Sussex, U.K.: John Wiley. 45–60.

Ellrodt R. (1980). Histoire et analogie de Saint Augustin à Milton. In Lichnerowicz A., Perroux F. & Gadoffre G. (eds) (1980). 39-53.

Ellul J. [1961] = (1999). Histoire des Institutions I. L’Antiquité. Paris: PUF.

Empson W. (1951). The Structure of Complex Words. London: Chatto and Windus.

EOD = English Oxford Dictionary. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com

Erasmus D., [1524] = (no date) On the Freedom of the Will. Trans. by E. G. Rupp. www.sjsu.edu/people/james.lindahl/courses/Hum1B/s3/Erasmus-and-Luther-on-Free-Will-and-Salvation.pdf. (17-05-23) (no pag.)

Erduran S. & Jiménez-Aleixandre M. P. (2007). Argumentation in Science Education. Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer.

Feigl H. & Sellars W. (1949). Readings in philosophical analysis. Atascadero, CAL:Ridgeview.

Feteris E. T. (1999). Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation – A Survey of Theories on the Justification of Judicial Decisions. Dordrecht, Kluwer.

FF = The Fallacy Files, http://www.fallacyfiles.org.

Finocchiaro M. A. (1994). The positive versus the negative evaluation of arguments. In Johnson R. H. & Blair J. A. (eds) (1994). 21-35.

Finocchiaro M. A. (1999). A critique of the dialectical approach – Part II. In Eemeren, FH. van, Grootendorst, R., Blair, J. A. & Willard, C. A. (eds.) (1999). 195-199.

Finocchiaro M. A. (2013). Meta-Argumentation – An Approach to Logic and Argumentation. Theory. London: College Publications.

Fisher D. H. (1970). Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought. New York:

Harper & Row

Fogelin R. (1985). The Logic of deep disagreement. Informal Logic 7, 1. 3-11.

Fogelin R. J. & Duggan T. J. (1987). Fallacies. Argumentation 1, 3. 255-262.

Fontanier P. [1827], [1831] = (1977). Les Figures du Discours: Traité Général des Figures du

Discours Autres Que les Tropes (1827) — Manuel Classique Pour l’Étude des Tropes ou

Elémens de la Science des Mots (1831). Introd. by G. Genette. Paris: Flammarion.

Foucault M. (1969). L’archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard.

Foucault M. (1971). L’ordre du discours. Paris: Gallimard.

Foviaux J. (1986). De l’empire romain à la féodalité. Droit et Institutions. Paris: Economica.

Fraisse P. & Piaget J. (1968). Les émotions. In P. Fraisse & J. Piaget (eds) (1968). Traité

de psychologie expérimentale V: Motivation, émotion et personnalité. Paris: PUF. 86-

155.

Frank R. H. (1988). Passions within reason. The strategic role of the emotions. New York: Nor-

ton.

Frankena W. K. (1967). Value and valuation. In Edwards P. (ed) (1967). The Encyclopedia

of Philosophy. New York: MacMillan.

Frege G. [1879] = (1952). Begriffschrift. A Formula Language, Modeled upon that of Arithmetic,

for Pure Thought. In Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege. Ox-

ford: Blackwell. 1-20.

Freud S. [1900] = (1955). The Interpretation of Dreams. Trans. and ed. by J. Strachey. New

York, Basic Books, 2010.

Freud S. [1923] = (1961). The Ego and the Id. In J. Strachey, The Standard Edition of the

Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Volume XIX (1923-1925): The Ego

and the Id and Other Works. London: Hogarth Press & the Institute of Psycho-

analysis. 1-66.

Freud S. [1925] = (1961). Negation. In J. Strachey The Standard Edition of the Complete

605References

Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Volume XIX (1923-1925): The Ego and the

Id and Other Works. London: Hogarth Press & the Institute of Psycho-analysis.

233-240.

Fumaroli M. (1980). L’âge de l’éloquence. Rhétorique et ‘res literaria’ de la Renaissance au seuil

de l’époque classique. Paris: Droz.

Fumaroli (ed.) (1999). Histoire de la Rhétorique dans l’Europe Moderne 1450-1950. Paris:

PUF.

Gabbay D. M. & Woods J. (2003). Agenda Relevance: An Essay in Formal Pragmatics. Am-

sterdam: North-Holland, 2003.

Gabbay D. M. & Woods J. (2005). The Reach of Abduction: Insight and Trial. Amsterdam:

North-Holland.

Gadamer H.-G. [1967] = (1988). Rhetoric, hermeneutics, and the critique of ideology.

In Mueller-Vollmer, K. (ed.) (1988). 256-292.

Gadoffre G. (1980). Introduction. In Lichnerowicz A., Perroux F. & Gadoffre G. (eds)

(1980). 7-10.

Gadoffre G., Walker P. & Tripet A. (1980). Les hommes de la renaissance et l’analogie.

In Lichnerowicz A., Perroux F. & Gadoffre G. (eds) (1980). 47-53.

Gaffiot F. (1934). Dictionnaire Illustré Latin-Français. Paris: Hachette.

Gardet L. & Anawati M. M. [1967] = (1986). Mystique Musulmane. Aspects et Tendances,

Expériences et Techniques. Paris: Vrin.

Gardet L., Anawati M. M. [1948] = (1981). Introduction à la Philosophie Musulmane. Essai de

Théologie Comparée. Paris: Vrin.

Garfinkel H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Gautier M. (2004). Dialectique. In Dictionnaire des Notions. Paris: Encyclopædia Univer-

salis. 268-270

Genette G. (1970). La Rhétorique restreinte. Communications 16. 158-171.

Gil F. (1988). Preuves. Paris: Aubier.

Gilman S. L., Blair C. & Parent D. J. (1989). Friedrich Nietzsche on Rhetoric and Language.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gilson É. see Descartes R. [1637]

Ginzburg C. (1999). History, Rhetoric and Proof. Hannovre & London: University Press of

New England.

Goddu G. G. 2007). Against making the linked-convergent distinction. In van Eemeren

469. H., Blair J. A., Willard C. A., Garssen B. (eds.) (2007). 465-469.

Goffman E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Goffman E. [1956] = (1987). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. London: Penguin.

Golden J. L., Berquist G. F. & Coleman W. E. (1983). The Rhetoric of Western Thought.

3rd ed. Dubuque: Kendall & Hunt.

Golder C. (1996). Le Développement des Discours Argumentatifs. Lausanne: Delachaux &

Niestlé.

Google = Google Dictionary

606References

Govier T. (1987). Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation. Dordrecht: Foris.

Grice H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole P. Morgan J. L. (eds) (1975). Syntax

and Semantics – Vol.3 Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press. 41-58

Grimshaw A. D. (ed.) (1990). Conflict talk – Sociolinguistic Investigations on Arguments in

Conversation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Grize J.-B. (1972). Logique Moderne. 1: Logique des Propositions et des Prédicats. Paris: Mouton

& Gauthier-Villars.

Grize J.-B. (1982). De la Logique à l’Argumentation. Pref by G. Busino. Geneva: Droz.

Grize J.-B. (1990). Logique et Langage. Gap: Ophrys.

Grize J.-B. (1993). Comment fait-on pour dire ‘P donc Q’ ? In G. Maurand (ed.) Le

raisonnement. Toulouse: cals. 3-12.

Grize J.-B. (1987). Pensée Naturelle, Logique et Langage – Hommage à Jean-Blaise Grize. Neu-

châtel, Université de Neuchâtel Cahiers Vilfredo Pareto – Revue européenne des sciences

sociales 77, XXV.

Grize J.-B. (ed.) (1971). Logique de l’Argumentation et Discours Argumentatifs. Travaux du

CdRS 7, Centre de Recherches sémiologiques. Neuchâtel: Université de Neu-

châtel.

Grize J.-B. (ed.) (1974). Recherches sur le Discours et l’Argumentation. Geneva: Droz.

Grize, J.-B. (1996). Logique et Communication. Paris: PUF.

Groupe Mu (1970) = Dubois J., Edeline F., Klinkenberg J.-M, Minguet P., Pire F., &

Trinon H. (1970). Rhétorique générale. Paris: Larousse.

Hamblin C. L. (1970). Fallacies. Londres, Methuen.

Han-Fei-tse, Tao = (1999) Han-Fei-tse ou Le Tao du Prince. Introd. and trans. by J. Levi.

Paris: Le Seuil.

Hedge L. (1838). Elements of Logick, or a Summary of the General Principles and Different modes

of Reasoning. Boston: Hilliar.

Heritage J. (1987). Interactional accountability. A conversation analytic perspective. In

Conein, B., de Fornel M., Quéré L. (eds) 1987. 23-49.

Hermogenes (AR) = (1997). L’art Rhétorique. Trad., introd. and notes by M. Patillon.

Pref. by P. Laurens. Lausanne: L’Âge d’Homme.

Hermogenes (OI) = (1995). Hermogenes On Issues. Trans. by M. Heath. Oxford: Clar-

endon Press.

Hesse M. (1967). Models and analogy in science. In Edwards P. (ed.) (1967). Vol. 5.

354-359.

Hintikka J. (1979). Information-seeking dialogues: A Model. Erkenntnis 38. 355-368.

Hintikka J. (1987). The fallacy of fallacies. Argumentation 1, 3. 211-238.

Hirschman A. O. (1991). The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy. Cambridge,

MA & London: CUP.

Hoaglund J. (2003). Using argument types. In van Eemeren F. H., Blair J. A., Willard C.

495. & Snoeck-Henkemans A. F. (eds) (2003). 491-495.

Hoaglund J. (2007). Informal Logic and Pragma-Dialectics. In van Eemeren F. H., Blair

607References

624. A., Willard C. A. & Garssen B. (eds.) (2007). 621-624.

IEP = Fieser J. & Dowden B., s.d. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. www.iep.utm.edu/ (09-

20-2013)

Jacobs L. & Derovan D. (2007). Hermeneutics. In Skolnik & Berenbaum (eds) (2007)

Encyclopedia Judaica. 2nd ed. vol. 9. USA: MacMillan & Jerusalem: Keter. 25-29.

Jacobs S. & Jackson S. (1982). Conversational argument. A discourse analytic approach.

In J. R. Cox J. R., Willard C. A. (eds) (1982). 205-237.

Jakobson R. [1960] = (1987). Linguistics and poetics. In Pomorska K. & Rudt S. (eds)

(1987). Language in Literature – Roman Jakobson. Cambridge, MA: Belknap & Har-

vard UP. 62-94.

Jakobson R. (1971). A joint conference of anthropologists and linguists. In Selected

Writings II. Words and Language. The Hague, Paris: Mouton 1971. 554-567.

Johnson R. H. (1996). The Rise of Informal Logic. Newport News VA: Vale Press.

Johnson R. H. & Blair J. A. (eds) (1994). New Essays in Informal Logic. Windsor, Informal

Logic.

Joule R. V. & Beauvois J. L. (1987). Petit Traité de Manipulation à l’Usage des Honnêtes Gens.

Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.

Kahane H. (1971). Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life. Bel-

mont CA: Wadsworth.

Kalinowski G. (1965). Introduction à la Logique Juridique – Éléments de Sémiotique Juridique,

Logique des Normes et Logique Juridique. Paris: Librairie Générale de Droit et de Ju-

risprudence.

Kallmeyer W. (ed.) (1996). Gesprächsrhetorik – Rhetorisches Verfahren im Gesprächsprocess.

Tübingen: Gunter Narr.

Kant I. [1781] = (1998) Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. and ed. by P. Guyer & A. W.

Wood. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Kelsen H., [1934] = (1967). Pure Theory of Law. Trans. by M. Knight. Berkeley, CA:

University of California Press.

Kennedy G. A., [1980] = (1999). Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition

from Ancient to Modern Times. 2nd revised and enlarged edition. Chapel Hill, NC:

University of North Carolina Press.

Kerbrat-Orecchioni C. (1980). L’Énonciation. De la Subjectivité dans le Langage. Paris: Ar-

mand Colin.

Kerbrat-Orecchioni C. (1990 – 1994). Les Interactions Verbales. T. 1 (1990); T. 2 (1992);

1. 3 (1994). Paris: Armand Colin.

Kerbrat-Orecchioni C. (2000). L’analyse des interactions verbales. La notion de ‘négo-

ciation conversationnelle’ – Défense et illustration. Lalies 20. 63-141.

Khallâf ‘A. al-W. [1942] = (1997). Les Fondements du Droit Musulman. Trans. by Cl. Dab-

bak, A. Godin & M. Labidi Maiza. Pref. by A. Turki. Paris: Al Qalam.

Kienpointner M. (1987). Towards a typology of argumentative schemes. In van Eeme-

ren F. H., Grootendorst R., Blair J. A. & Willard C. A. (eds.) (1987). 275-288.

Kienpointner M. (1992). Alltagslogik. Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern.

608References

Stuttgart-Bad Cannstadt: Fromman-Holzboog.

Kienpointner M. (2003). Nouvelle Rhétorique / Neue Rhetorik. In G. Ueding (Hg.)

Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik, Bd 6. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 561-587.

Kleene S. C. [1967] = Mathematical Logic. New York: Wiley

https://archive.org/details/KleeneMathematicalLogic (09-26-2017)

Kleiber G. 1990). La Sémantique du Prototype – Catégorie et Sens Lexical. Paris: PUF.

Klinkenberg J.-M. (1990). Rhétorique de l’argumentation et rhétorique des figures. In

Meyer M. & Lempereur, A. (eds) (1990). 115-137.

Klinkenberg J.-M. (2000). L’Argumentation dans la figure. Cahiers de praxématique 35.

http://journals.openedition.org/praxematique/2898 (09-26-2016)

Klinkenberg J.-M. (2001). Retórica de la argumentación y retórica de las figuras: ¿her-

manas o enemigas ? Tonos digital, 1. um.es/tonosdigital/znum1/estudios/Klinkenberg.htm.

(09-20-2017)

Kneale W. & Kneale M. [1962] = (1984). The Development of Logic. Oxford: Clarendon

Press.

Koons R. (2005). Defeasible reasoning. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. E. N. Zalta

(ed.). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2005/entries/reasoning-defeasible/

Kotarbinski T. [1964] = (1971). Leçons sur l’Histoire de la Logique. Trans. by A. Posner.

Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Krabbe E. C. W. (1998). Who is afraid of figures of speech ? Argumentation 12, 2. 281-

294

Lakoff G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University

Press.

Laplanche J. & Pontalis, J.-B. (1967). Dictionnaire de Psychanalyse. Paris: PUF.

Lausberg H., [1960] = (1973). Handbook of Literary Rhetoric: A Foundation for Literary

Study . Translated from German by M. T. Bliss, A. Jansen & D. E. Orton. Edit-

1. D. E. Orton & R. D. Anderson. Foreword G. A. Kennedy. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Lausberg H., [1963] = (1971). Elemente der literarischen Rhetorik. Munich: Max Hueber.

Le Bon G. [1895] = (1960). The Crowd. A Study of Popular Mind. New York: Macmillan.

Le Brun J. (2011). Review of Houdard S., Les Invasions Mystiques. In Revue de l’Histoire des

Religions, 1. 124-128. http://rhr.revues.org/7738 (09-20-2013).

Leibniz G. W. [1765] = (1896). New Essays Concerning Human Understanding. Trans. by A.

1. Langley. London: Macmillan.

Lempereur A. (1990). Les restrictions des deux néo-rhétoriques. In Meyer M. & Lem-

pereur A. (eds) (1990). 139-158.

Lévinas E. [1981] = (1987). Langage quotidien et rhétorique sans éloquence. In Hors

sujet. Fata Morgana. 201-211.

Lévy C. & Pernot L. (1997). Dire l’Évidence. Philosophie et Rhétorique Antiques. Paris:

L’Harmattan.

Lichnerowicz A., Perroux F. & Gadoffre G. (eds) (1980). Analogie et Connaissance. T. 1,

Aspects historiques. T. II, De la Poésie à la Science. Paris: Maloine.

Littré É. [1863] = (1972) Dictionnaire de la Langue Française. Paris: Hachette.

609References

http://www.littre.org/ (09-20-2013).

Lloyd G. E. R. (1990). Demystifyng Mentalities. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University

Press.

Lo Cascio V. (2009). Persuadere e Convincere Oggi. Nuovo Manuale dell’Argomentazione. Acqui

Terme: Academia Press.

Locke J. [1690] = (1959). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Collected and anno-

tated by A. C. Fraser. New York: Dover.

Lorenzo-Basson M.-C. (2004). La Vente à Domicile. Stratégies Discursives en Interaction. PhD, Lyon 2 University, under the supervision of C. Kerbrat-Orecchioni.

Louis P. (1990). Vie d’Aristote. Paris: Hermann.

Mackenzie J. (1988). Distinguo. The response to equivocation. Argumentation 2-4. 465-

482.

Mackie J. L. (1967). Fallacies. In Edwards P. (ed.) The Encylopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 3.

169-179.

Maingueneau D. (1976). Initiation aux Méthodes de l’Analyse du Discours. Paris: Hachette.

Maingueneau D. (1990). L’Analyse du Discours. Paris: Hachette.

Maingueneau D. (1999). Ethos, scénographie, incorporation. In Amossy R. (ed.) (1999).

75-102.

Man P. de (1978). The epistemology of metaphor. In Sacks S. (ed.) On Metaphor. 11-28.

Maritain J. [1923] = (1946). An Introduction to Logic. Trans. by I. Choquette. London:

Scheed & Ward.

Mayans y Siscar G. (1786). Rhetorica. Valencia: Josef y Thomas de Orga (2e ed.)

McAdon B. (2003). Probabilities, necessary signs, idia and topoi. The confusing discus-

sion of material for enthymemes in the Rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 36, 3. 223-

248.

McAdon B. (2004). Two irreconcilable conceptions of rhetorical proof in Aristotle’s

Rhetoric. Rhetorica, 22, 4. 307-325

McEvoy S. (1995). L’invention Défensive — Poétique, Linguistique, Droit. Paris: Métailié.

Meyer M. (ed.) (1986). De la Métaphysique à la Rhétorique. Brussels: Éditions de

l’Université de Bruxelles.

Meyer M. & Lempereur A. (eds) 1990). Figures et Conflits Rhétoriques. Brussels: Éditions

de l’Université de Bruxelles.

Milgram S. (1974). Obedience to authority. An Experimental View. London: Tavistock Publi-

cations. https://archive.org/stream/ObedienceToAuthority_368/milgram

Mill J. S. [1843] = (2017). A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive. London: John W.

Parker. http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/mill1843book1.pdf

Mill J. S. [1859] = (1987). On Liberty. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics.

Moeschler J. & Reboul A. (1994). Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de Pragmatique. Paris: Le

Seuil.

Moeschler J. (1985). Argumentation et Conversation. Éléments pour une Analyse Pragmatique du

Discours. Paris: Hatier.

610References

Molinié G. (1992). Dictionnaire de Rhétorique. Paris: Librairie Générale Française.

Molino J. (1979) Métaphores, modèles et analogies dans les sciences. Langages, 54. 83-

102.

Moore G. E., [1903] = (1986). Principia Ethica. Cambridge, MA: CUP.

Mortureux M.-F. (1993). Paradigmes désignationnels. Semen 8, Besançon: Presses de

l’Université de Franche-Comté. 121-142. http://journals.openedition.org/semen/4132

Mueller-Vollmer K. (1988). The Hermeneutics Reader. New York: Continuum.

MW = Merriam-Webster Dictionary. www.merriam-webster.com

Nadeau R. (1958). Hermogenes on ‘stock issues’ in deliberative speaking. Speech Mono-

graphs, 25. 59-66.

Nadeau R. (1964). Hermogenes’ On Stases. A translation with an introduction and notes.

Speech Monographs, 31. 361-424.

Newman J. H., [1870] = (2010). An Essay in Aid of a Grammar of Assent. London: Burns,

Oates. Quoted after http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=34022

(19-07-2017)

Nicolas L. (2007). La Force de la Doxa. Rhétorique de la Décision et de la Délibération. Paris:

L’Harmattan.

Nietzsche F. see Gilman & al.

Nonnon E. (1996) Activités argumentatives et élaboration de connaissances nouvelles.

Langue Française 112. 67-87.

O’Keefe B. J., [1977] = (1982). Two concepts of argument and arguing. In Cox, J. R.,

23. A., Willard (eds) (1982). 3-23.

OD = Oxford Dictionary https://en.oxforddictionaries.com (07-09-2017)

OED = Online Etymology Dictionary. http://www.etymonline.com/ (07-09-2017)

Olbrechts-Tyteca L. (1974). Le Comique du Discours. Brussels: Éditions de l’Université de

Bruxelles.

Ong W. J. (1958). Ramus. Method and the Decay of Dialogue. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Ortony A. (ed.) (1979). Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University

Press.

Packard V. [1957] = (2007). The Hidden Persuaders. New York: Ig Publishing.

Parent X. & Livet P. (2002). Argumentation, révision et conditionnels. In P. Livet (ed.)

Révision des Croyances. Paris: Hermès Sciences Publication. 229-258.

Pascal B. (Geom.) = (1859). Of the geometrical spirit. In The Thoughts, Letters and Opus-

cules of Blaise Pascal. Trans. by O. W. Wight. New York: Derby & Jackson.

Pascal B. (Mem.) = (1999). Memorial. Trans. by E. T. Knuth & O. Joseph.

http://www.users.csbsju.edu/~eknuth/pascal.html (07-09-2017).

Pascal B. (Thoughts) = (1901). The Thoughts of Blaise Pascal. Trans. by C. Kegan Paul.

London: Georges Bell.

Patillon M. (1988). La Théorie du Discours d’Hermogène le Rhéteur. Essai sur la Structure de la

Rhétorique Ancienne. Paris: Les Belles-Lettres.

611References

Patillon M. (1990). Eléments de Rhétorique Classique. Paris: Nathan.

Peirce C. S. [1958]. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vol. 7, Book II: Scientific Meth-

1. Ed. by A. W. Burke. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Pellegrin P. (1997). Glossaire. In Sextus Empiricus, Esquisses Pyrrhoniennes. Paris: Le

Seuil. 527-556.

Perelman Ch. (1952). Acte et personne dans l’argumentation. In Perelman Ch. & Ol-

brechts-Tyteca L. (1952). 49-84.

Perelman Ch. (1961). Jugements de valeur, justification et argumentation. Revue Interna-

tionale de Philosophie 58, 4. 327-335.

Perelman Ch. [1963] = (1972). Justice et Raison. Brussels: Éditions de l’Université de

Bruxelles.

Perelman Ch. (1977). L’empire rhétorique. Rhétorique et Argumentation. Paris: Vrin.

Perelman Ch. (1979). Logique juridique – Nouvelle rhétorique. Paris: Dalloz.

Perelman Ch. (1980). Logic and rhetoric. In Agazzi E. (ed.) (1980). 457-464.

Perelman Ch. & Olbrechts-Tyteca L. [1950] = (1952). Logique et rRhétorique. In Pe-

relman Ch. & Olbrechts-Tyteca L. (1952). 1-43.

Perelman Ch. & Olbrechts-Tyteca L. (1952). Rhétorique et Philosophie. Pour une Théorie de

l’Argumentation en Philosophie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Perelman Ch. & Olbrechts-Tyteca L. [1958] = (1969). The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on

Argumentation. Trans. by J. Wilkinson and P. Weaver. Notre Dame IN: Universi-

ty of Notre Dame Press.

Piaget J. [1924] = (1967). Le Jugement et le Raisonnement chez l’Enfant. Neuchâtel: Dela-

chaux & Niestlé.

Plantin Chr. (1990). Essais sur l’argumentation. Paris: Kimé.

Plantin Chr. (ed.) (1993). Lieux Communs, Topoi, Stéréotypes, Clichés. Paris: Kimé.

Plantin Chr. (1995). L’Argumentation. Paris: Le Seuil.

Plantin Chr., Doury M., Traverso V. (eds) (2000). Les émotions dans les interactions. Lyon,

PUL.

Plantin Chr. (2005). L’Argumentation: Histoire, Théories, Perspectives. Paris: PUF.

Plantin Chr. (2009). A place for figures of speech in argumentation theory. Argumenta-

tion 23, 3. 325-337.

Plantin Chr. (2011). Les instruments de structuration des séquences argumentatives.

Verbum 32, 1. 31-51.

Plantin, Chr. 2015, Emotion and Affect. In Tracy, Karen, Ilie, Cornelia & Sandel, Todd

(eds.) (2015). The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Boston:

John Wiley & Sons.

Plato CW = (1997) Complete Works. Ed. with Introd. and Notes by J. M. Cooper. Indi-

anapolis& Cambridge, MA: Hackett.

Plato. Euthydemus. Trans. by R. Kent Sprague. In Plato, CW, 708-745

Plato. Gorgias. Trans. by D. J. Zeyl. In Plato, CW, 791-869

Plato. Phaedrus. Trans. by A. Nehamas and P. Woodruff. In Plato, CW, 506-556.

612References

Pomerantz A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments. Some features of

preferred / dispreferred turn-shapes. In Atkinson J.-M. & Heritage J. (eds)

(1984). 79-112.

Popper K. (1963). Conjectures and Refutations – The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London:

Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Porphyry Isa. = (1975) Porphyry the Phœnician. Isagoge. Trans., introd. and notes by E.

1. Warren. Toronto: The Pontifical Institute of Mediæval Studies.

PR = Rey-Debove J., Rey A., Chantreau S. & Drivaud M.-H. (1967). Le Nouveau Petit

Robert: Dictionnaire alphabétique et analogique de la langue française. Paris: Le Robert.

Prior A. N. (1967). Traditional logic. In P. Edwards (ed.) (1967), Vol. 5. 34-45.

Quine W. V .O. (1959). Methods of Logic. Revised ed. New York, etc.: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston.

Quine W. V. O. (1966). Logic as a source of syntactical insight. Journal of Symbolic Logic

31, 3. 496-497.

Quine W. V. O. (1980). Elementary Logic. Revised edition. Cambridge, MA. & London,

England: Harvard UP.

Quine W. V. O. & Ullian, J. S. (1982). The Web of Belief. New York: Random House.

Quintilian, IO = (1903). Quintilian’s Institutes of Oratory. Trans. by J. S. Watson. London:

George Bell.

Reboul O. (1986). La figure et l’argument. In Meyer M. (ed.) (1986). 175–187.

Reboul O. (1991). Introduction à la Rhétorique. Paris: PUF.

Récanati F. (1979). La Transparence et l’Énonciation. Paris: Le Seuil.

Reiter R. (1980). A logic for default reasoning. Artificial intelligence 13. 81-131.

Reverso = Reverso Dictionary, German-French. http://dictionary.reverso.net/German-french/

(12-12-2017)

Richards I. A. (1936). The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rimé B. & Scherer K. (eds) (1993). Les Émotions. Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé.

Rocheblave-Spenlé A.-M. [1962] = (1969) La Notion de Rôle en Psychologie Sociale. Paris:

PUF.

Romilly J. de (1988). Les Grands Sophistes dans l’Athènes de Périclès. Paris: de Fallois.

Rorty A. O. (ed.) (1996). Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Berkeley: University of California

Press.

Russell B. [1905] = (1949). On denoting. In Feigl H. & Sellars W. (1949). 103-115.

Ryan E. E. (1984). Aristotle’s Theory of Rhetorical Argumentation. Montréal: Bellarmin.

Ryle G. (1932). Systematically misleading expressions. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society,

32. 139-170.

Sacks S. (ed.) (1978). On Metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Sallantin J. & Szczeciniarz J. J. (eds.) (1999). Le Concept de Preuve à la Lumière de

l’Intelligence Artificielle. Paris: PUF.

Saussure L. de (2015). The straw Man argument as a pragmatic argumentative winner.

Conference Argumentation and Language, Lausanne, 2015.

613References

Schellens P. J. (1987). Types of argument and the critical reader. In van Eemeren F. H.,

Grootendorst, R., Blair, J. A. & Willard, C. A. (eds.) (1987). Dordrecht: Foris.

3B. 34-41.

Scherer K. R. [1984a] = (1993). Les émotions. Fonctions et composantes. In Rimé, B.

Scherer K. (eds) (1993). 97-133.

Scherer K. R. (1984b). On the nature and function of emotion – A Component Process

Approach. In Scherer K. R. & Ekman P. (eds) (1984). 293-317.

Scherer K. R. & Ekman P. (eds) (1984). Approaches to emotion. Hillsdale, NJ: Law-

rence Erlbaum.

Schiappa E. (1993). Arguing about Definitions. Argumentation 7, 4. 403 – 417.

Schiappa E. (2000). Analyzing argumentative discourse from a rhetorical perspective:

defining ‘person’ and ‘human life’ in constitutional disputes over abortion. Argumen-

tation 14-3. 315-332.

Schiffrin D. (1987). Discourse Markers. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge UP.

Schiffrin D. (1990). The management of a cooperative self in argument. The role of

opinions and stories. In A. Grimshaw (ed.) (1990). 241- 259.

Schmid M. (1980). Bewegung im TV-Studio. In Eine Stadt in Bewegund. Materialen zu den

Zürcher Unruhen. Zürich: SD Stadt Zürich.

Schopenhauer A. [1830] = (2005). The Art of Controversy. Trans. by T. Bailey Saunders

(1896). http://insomnia.ac/essays/the_art_of_controversy/penn_state_ebook.pdf (10-03-2017)

Sextus Empiricus OP = (1996). Outlines of Pyrronism. Trans. with introd. and com. by B.

Mates. New York & Oxford: Oxford UP.

http://www.sciacchitano.it/pensatori%20epistemici/scettici/outlines%20of%20pyrronism.pdf (08-

17-2017)

Shelley C. (2002). Analogy counterarguments and the acceptability of analogical hy-

potheses. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 53. 477-496.

Shelley C. (2004). Analogy counterarguments. A taxonomy for critical thinking. Argu-

mentation 18, 2. 223-238.

SIL = Summer Institute of Linguistics – Glossary of Linguistic Terms. http://www.glossary.sil.org

(12-12-17)

Sitri F. (2003). L’Objet du Débat. La Construction des Objets de Discours dans des Situations

Argumentatives Orales. Paris: Presses de la Sorbonne Nouvelle.

Snoeck Henkemans A. F. (2003). Indicators of analogy argumentation. In van Eeeme-

ren F., Blair, J. A., Willard, C. A. Snoeck Henkemans A. F. (eds) (2003). 969-

973.

Snoeck Henkemans A. F. (2000) Comments on E. Schiappa “Analyzing argumentative

discourse from a rhetorical perspective: Defining ‘Person’ and ‘Human Life’ in

constitutional disputes over abortion”. Argumentation 14, 3. 333-338

Snoeck Henkemans A. F. (1992). Analysing Complex Argumentation. Amsterdam: SICSAT.

Solmsen F. (1941). The Aristotelian tradition in ancient rhetoric. The American Journal of

Philology 62, 2. 169-190.

Sperber D. & Wilson D. (1995). Relevance – Communication and Cognition. Second ed.,

Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell.

614References

Stevenson C. L. [1938] = (1944). Persuasive definitions. In Stevenson, C. L. (1944).

Ethics and language. New Haven & London: Yale UP.

Strauss L. (1953). Persecution and the Art of Writing. Social Research 8, 1-4. 488-503.

Tarello G. (1972). Sur la spécificité du raisonnement juridique. Die Juristische Argumenta-

tion. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, 7. Actes du Congrès de Bruxelles de

1971. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner. 103-124.

Tarski A. [1935] = (1983). The concept of truth in formalized languages. Trans. by J. H.

Woodger. In Tarski A. (1983). Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics. 2nd edition. Ed.

by J. Corcoran. Indianapolis: Hackett. 152-278.

Tesnière L. (1959). Éléments de Syntaxe Structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.

tfd = thefreedictionary. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ (12-12-2017)

TLFi = Trésor de la Langue Française informatisé. http://www.cnrtl.fr. (09-20-2013)

Thomas S. N. (1986). Practical Reasoning in Natural Language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren-

tice Hall.

Thomas Aquinas (ST) = (1947) The Summa Theologica. Trans. by Fathers of the English

Dominican Province. New York: Benziger Bros.

http://dhspriory.org/thomas/summa/FP/FP001.html#FPQ1OUTP1

Toulmin S. E. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Toulmin S. E., Rieke R. & Janik A. (1984). An Introduction to Reasoning. New York:

McMillan.

Traverso V. (2000). La Conversation Ordinaire. Paris: Nathan.

Tricot J. [1928] = (1973). Traité de Logique Formelle. Paris: Vrin.

Trottman C. (1999). Théologie et Noétique au XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Vrin.

Turner D. & Campolo C. (2005). Deep disagreement re-examined. Informal Logic 25. 1-

2.

Tutescu M. (2003). L’Argumentation. Introduction à l’Étude du Discours. Bucarest: Editura

Universitãtii din Bucuresti.

http://ebooks.unibuc.ro/lls/MarianaTutescu-Argumentation/1.htm. (12-12-2017)

Ueding G. (ed.) (1992-2015). Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Vannier G. (2001). Argumentation et Droit. Introduction à la Nouvelle Rhétorique de Perelman

Paris: PUF.

Vax L. (1982). Lexique Logique. Paris: PUF.

Vega Reñon L. & Olmos Gómez P. (2011). Compendio de Lógica – Argumentación y Retórica

Madrid: Trotta.

Vidal G. R. (2000). La Retórica de Antifonte. México: UNAM.

Vignaux G. (1976). L’Argumentation. Essai d’une Logique Discursive. Geneva: Droz.

Vignaux G. (1981). Énoncer, argumenter. Opérations du discours, logiques du discours.

In Bouacha A. & Portine H. (eds) Argumentation et Énonciation. Langue Française

50. 91-116.

Vignaux G. (1999). L’Argumentation. Du Discours à la Pensée. Paris: Hatier.

Vion R. (1992). La Communication Verbale. Paris: Hachette.

615References

Walton D. N. (1992). The Place of Emotion in Argument. University Park, PA: The Penn-

sylvania State University Press.

Walton D. N. (1996). Argument Structure: A Pragmatic Theory. Toronto: University of

Toronto Press.

Walton D. N. (1997). Appeal to Pity – Argumentum ad Misericordiam. Albany: State

University of New York Press.

Walton D. N. (1999). Francis Bacon. Human bias and the four idols. Argumentation 13,

4. 385–389.

Walton D. N. (2004). Abductive Reasoning. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Walton D. N. (2005). Deceptive arguments containing persuasive language and persua-

sive definitions. Argumentation 19, 2. 159-186.

Walton D., Reed C. & Macagno F. (2008). Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge, MA:

Cambridge University Press.

WCD = Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language. Second College Edition. Cleveland &

New York: William Collins & World Publishing CO.

Weaver R. (1953). Abraham Lincoln and the argument from definition. In The Ethics of

Rhetoric. South Bend, IN: Gateway. 85-114.

Weber M. [1922] = (1978) Economy and Society – An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Ed. by

Roth, G. & Wittich C. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA & London England: Uni-

versity of California Press.

http://www.public.iastate.edu/~carlos/607/readings/weber.pdf (12-12-2017)

Weijers O. (1999). De la joute dialectique à la dispute scolastique. In Comptes-rendus des

séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. 509-518.

http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/crai_0065-

0536_1999_num_143_2_16013. (12-12-2017)

Wellman C. (1971). Challenge and Response. Justification in Ethics. Carbondale: Southern

Illinois University Press.

Wenzel J. (1987). The rhetorical perspective on argument. In F. van Eemeren, R.

Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & C. A. Willard (eds) (1987). Vol. 1. 101-109.

Whately R., [1828] = (1963). Elements of Rhetoric Comprising an Analysis of the Laws of Moral

Evidence and of Persuasion, with Rules for Argumentative Composition and Elocution. Ed.

by D. Ehninger. Foreword by D. Potter. Carbondale & Edwardsville: Southern

Illinois UP.

Whately R. [1832] = (1854). Elements of Logic. Louisville, KY: Morton & Griswald.

Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page.

Willard C. A. (1989). A Theory of Argumentation. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama

Press.

Windisch U. (1987). Le KO Verbal – La Communication Conflictuelle. Lausanne: L’Âge

d’Homme.

Wittgenstein L. (1974). On Certainty / Über Gewissheit. Ed. by Anscombe G. E. M. & von

Wright G. H.. Trans. by Paul D. & Anscombe G. E. M. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Woods J. & Walton D. N. (1989). Fallacies. Selected Papers 1972-1982. Dordrecht: Foris.

616References

Woods J. (2004). The Death of Argument: Fallacies in Agent-Based Reasoning. Dordrecht:

Kluwer.

Woods J. (2009). Ignorance, inference and proof. Abductive logic meets the criminal

law. In Tuzet G. & Canale D. (eds) The rules of inference: Inferentialism in Law and

Philosophy. Heidelberg: Egea. 151-185.

Woods J. (2013/14). Errors Of Reasoning: Naturalizing the Logic of Inference. London: Col-

lege Publications.

Woods J. (2014). Aristotle’s Earlier Logic. 2nd edition, revised and expanded. London:

College Publications.

Wreen M. J. (1999). A few remarks on the individuation of arguments. In van Eemeren

888. H., Grootendorst R., Blair J. A. & Willard C. A. (eds.) (1999). 884-888.

Wreen M. J. (2000). Review of Douglas Walton ‘Argument from Ignorance’

. Argumentation

14, 1. 51-56.

Yates F. A. (1966). The Art of Memory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Yzerbit V. & Corneille O. (eds) (1994). La Persuasion. Lausanne: Delachaux & Niestlé.

Amossy, Ruth, 2014, Apologie de la polémique. Paris, Presses universitaires de France.

Aristote, Poét. = Poétique. Introduction, traduction… de Michel Magnien. Paris, LGF, 1990.

Austin John L., [1962] / 1970. Quand dire c’est faire [How to do things with words] Paris, Le Seuil.

Bachelard, Gaston, 1938 La formation de l’esprit scientifique. Paris, PUF 1938.

Bennett Beth S. Hermagoras of Temnos (late second century BCE). In Michelle Ballif & Michael G. Moran (eds) Classical Rhetorics and Rhetoricians : Critical studies and sources. London, Praeger, p. 188-193

Bentham, Jeremy. Sophismes parlementaires. Traduction nouvelle d’après la 2^e édition publiée par le Dr Bowring. […] par Elian Regnault. Paris, Pagnerre, 1840. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k9752830d.texteImage

Benveniste, Catégorie de pensée et catégorie de langue. Les Études philosophiques, n° 4 (oct.-déc. 1958. In PLG, Problèmes de linguistique générale, Paris, Gallimard, 1966. p. 63-74

Blair, J. Anthony, 1996. Argument management, Informal Logic and Critical Thinking. In Blair 2012, p. 39-50.

Blair, J. Anthony, 2012.

Boethius [1978] De Topicis differentiis. Translated with Notes and Essays on the text, by Eleonore Stump. Cornell University Press.

Booth, Wayne C, 1974. Modern Dogma and the rhetoric of assent. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

Cadiot Anne, Chevalier Jean-Claude, Delesalle Simone, Garcia Claudine, Martinez Christine, Zedda Paolo 1979. « Oui mais, non mais » ou : II y a dialogue et dialogue. La pragmatique— Langue française, 42.. pp. 94-102;

Cicéron, P. A. = Premiers Académiques. In Œuvres complètes de Cicéron, t. III, avec la traduction en français, publiées sous la direction de M. Nisard, Paris, Dubochet, 1840, p. 469.

Daremberg Charles, Saglio Edmond (dirs), 1877-1911. Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines. Paris, Hachette. http://dagr.univ-tlse2.fr/

Detienne, Marcel, 1967 Les maîtres de vérité dans la Grèce archaïque. Paris, Maspero.

de Pater, 1965. Les Topiques d’Aristote et la dialectique platonicienne. La méthodologie de la définition. Fribourg, Editions Saint Paul.

Estes Douglas Charles. 2013 The Questions of Jesus in John: Logic, rhetoric and persuasive discourse. Leiden, Brill. Biblical Interpretation Series. 123-125

Faure, Richard. 2012. La délibération et le subjonctif délibératif dans la prose grecque classique. Syntaktika 43, p. 5-52. https://journals.openedition.org/syntaktika/124

Fogelin Robert J., Duggan Timothy J., « Fallacies », Argumentation, 1, 3, 1987, p. 255-256.

Freud, Sigmund (1923). Le moi et le ça. Traduction de l’allemand par S. Jankélévitch en 1923, revue par l’auteur. Cité d’après https://www.psychaanalyse.com/pdf/Freud_le_moi_et_le_ca.pdf Les classiques des sciences sociales,  http://www.uqac.uquebec.ca/zone30/Classiques_des_sciences_sociales/index.html

Gabbay D. M. & Woods J. (2003). Agenda Relevance: An Essay in Formal Pragmatics. Amsterdam, North-Holland.

Gabbay D. M. & Woods J. (2005). The Reach of Abduction: Insight and Trial. Amsterdam, North-Holland.

Graham, A. C. 1989. Disputers of the Tao – Philosophical argument in Ancient China. Chicago, Open Court.
http://books.google.fr/books?id=TkwTU6dFTyoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:Boethius&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_brr=3&cd=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Hart, Herbert L. A. 1948-49 The ascription of Responsability and Rights. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New series, 49, pp. 171-194

Jacobs Scott, Jackson Sally, 1982, Conversational argument : a discourse analytic approach. In Cox & Willard 1982.

Kerbrat-Orecchioni Catherine, “Déambulation en territoire aléthique”, in Stratégies discursives, Lyon, PUL, 1978, pp. 53-102.

Lévi-Strauss, Cl. (1962), La pensée sauvage. Paris, Plon.

Maldidier D. 1990, L’inquiétude du discours. Textes de Michel Pêcheux choisis et présentés par Denise Maldidier. Paris : Edition des Cendres.

Maspero, Henri. 1927. Notes sur la logique de Mo-tseu et de son école. T’oung pao, XXV, 1-64. Cité d’après l’édition produite par Pierre Palpant. Chicoutimi, 2016. https://www.chineancienne.fr/d%C3%A9but-20e-s/maspero-henri/maspero-notes-sur-la-logique-de-mo-tseu/.

Masson-Oursel, Paul 1912. Esquisse d’une théorie comparée du sorite. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 20e année, n° 6, novembre 1912. 810-824. Cité d’après Masson-Oursel, Paul. Études de philosophie comparée, p. 20. Produit par Pierre Palpant 2006, p.20. http://classiques.uqac.ca/classiques/masson_oursel_paul/etudes_philo_comparee/etudes_philo_comparee.html

MW-LD = Merriam Webster Learner’s Dictionary

Legrand Pierre, 2005, L’Enseignement mathématique : un guide vers la pensée indépendante. plot, 10, 2005, p. 2-9. Cité d’après https://www.apmep.fr/IMG/pdf/Pensee_independante.pdf apmep : Association des Professeurs de Mathématiques de l’Enseignement Public

Quine, W. van O., Ullian, J. S., [1970] / 1982. The Web of Belief. New York, Random House.

Rahman, Shahid, Akuedotevi, Mawusse Kpakpo, 2010/2015 Le syllogisme catégorique — Un aperçu général à partir de l’Organon, notamment des Premiers analytiques d’Aristote. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/cel-01228907/document

Régnier, François, 2014. Consensus et/ou Dissensus — en filigrane des interactions et du Pouvoir. Académie lorraine des Sciences.
http://als.univ-lorraine.fr/files/conferences/2014/Regnier(12-06-14).pdf).

Robertson, D. W. Jr. and Olson, Paul A., « Uncollected Essays » (2017). Zea E-Books. 60. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/zeabook/60

Scriven, M. Probative logic: Review and preview. In F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & R. H. Johnson. Argumentation across the lines of discipline, p. 7-32. Quoted in Blair 1996, p. 45-46.

Thomas d’Aquin, Sec. An. Com. = “Seconds analytiques” d’Aristote – Commentaire. Traduit par Guy-François Delaporte. Paris, L’Harmattan, 2014. P. 46

Wheatley J. M. O, 1955. Deliberative questions. Analysis, Vol. 15, No. 3 (Jan., 1955), pp. 49-60. DOI: 10.2307/3326941 — https://www.jstor.org/stable/3326941