„verbAndskasten !MÜS!sen wir haben“. Zum argumentativen Potenzial von Prosodie am Beispiel von Einigungsdiskussionen bei Grundschulkindern

Kreuz, Judith; Mundwiler, Vera

doi:10.19195/0137-1169.35.6

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 8 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When it comes to multimodality in argumentation, visual argumentation is probably the best theorized and analyzed. Other modalities are rather new to the analysis of argumentation, with some exceptions like the work by Bose and Gutenberg (2003), Jaquin (2015,2018) and Kreuz and Mundwiler (2016). Perret-Clermont et al (2019) point to the role of elements in argumentation that function as non-verbalized premises (or context knowledge) that are visually available to the participants.…”

Section: Methods and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Frozen

Hannken-Illjes

Bose

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we consider the ways different degrees of dissent are established in interaction, especially in interactions among children. One important aspect in the development of the ability to argue is the framing of interactions as rather cooperative or agonistic. Different framings seem to allow for different forms of argumentative activity. The focus in this paper is on the mediation of degrees of dissensus in argumentation in child-child communication. It is established, we argue, through verbal as well as non-verbal means, and the agonistic and cooperativity can be indicators for the space argumentation has in child-child interaction.

show abstract

Section: Methods and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Frozen

Hannken-Illjes

Bose

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Collaborative Decision-Making in Argumentative Group Discussions Among Primary School Children

Mundwiler

Kreuz

2018

Argumentation Library

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the role of voice and prosody in argumentation among pre-school children

Bose

Hannken-Illjes

2020

RCSI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the role of voice and prosody in children’s argumentation and its relation to framing argumentation as more or less cooperative. Theoretically the project draws from rhetoric, argumentation studies, child studies and linguistics. After a brief overview of the current state in children’s argumentation we shall discuss the notion of multimodality in argumentation studies, specifically the role of voice and prosody in argumentation. The paper analyses two instances of child–child argumentation that show striking similarities and differences: Both deal with the same quaestio – that is the same controversial standpoint – and employ similar topoi – that is formal and material resources for arguments. However, they differ with respect to the cooperative framing – that relates in part to the framing of the interaction as fictional or factual – and with respect to the interaction tension. Methodologically, the paper takes a sequential perspective, grounded in conversation analysis and auditory phonetics. We work with longitudinal corpora of authentic child–child communication (3.0–7.0) in play. We argue that other-than-verbal means like voice and prosody play a crucial role in framing the interaction, thereby mediating the degree of cooperativity. This mediation has consequences for the elaboration of argumentative sequences by the children. Thus, voice and prosody we argue, can play a substantial role in argumentation.

show abstract

„verbAndskasten !MÜS!sen wir haben“. Zum argumentativen Potenzial von Prosodie am Beispiel von Einigungsdiskussionen bei Grundschulkindern

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Frozen

Frozen

Collaborative Decision-Making in Argumentative Group Discussions Among Primary School Children

On the role of voice and prosody in argumentation among pre-school children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About