In:Prototypical Argumentative Patterns: Exploring the relationship between argumentative discourse and institutional context
Edited by Frans H. van Eemeren
[Argumentation in Context 11] 2017
► pp. 31–51
Chapter 3The role of pragmatic problem-solving argumentation in plenary debate in the European Parliament
Published online: 14 August 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.11.03gar
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.11.03gar
Article outline
- 3.1Introduction
- 3.2The structure of legislative debate in the European Parliament
- 3.3Problem-solving argumentation
-
3.4Argumentation used to defend problem-solving argumentation
- Argumentation to support the premise stating that there is a problem
- Argumentation to support the premise that the proposal solves the problem
- Argumentation to support the connecting premise
- 3.5Argumentation to attack problem-solving argumentation
- Argumentation to support the premise stating that there is no problem
- Argumentation to support the premise stating that the legislation does not solve the problem
- Argumentation to support the premise stating that the proposal is not feasible
- Argumentation to support the premise stating that there are major disadvantages
- Argumentation to support the premise stating that there are better means to solve the problem
- 3.6Prototypical argumentative patterns
- 3.7Conclusion
Notes References
References (7)
Corbett, R., Jacobs, F., & Schackleton, M. (2007). The European Parliament. London: John Harper Publishing.
Eemeren, F. H. van, & Garssen, B. (2010). In varietate concordia – United in diversity: European parliamentary debate as an argumentative activity type. Controversia, 7(1), 19–37.
Eemeren, F. H. van, Garssen, B., Krabbe, E. C. W., Snoeck Henkemans, A. F., Verheij, B., & Wagemans, J. H. M. (2014). Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht etc.: Springer.
Freeley, A. J., & Steinberg, D. L. (2005). Argumentation and debate. Critical thinking for reasoned decisions making. Boston: Wadsworth.
Cited by (20)
Cited by 20 other publications
Finsen, Andreas Bilstrup & Jean Wagemans
Yang, Xian-Ju, Chun-Chun Shen-Tu & Chunhong Liu,
Roncoroni, Tiziana
2024. Argumentation in scientific discourse. In Persuasion in Specialized Discourse [Argumentation in Context, 22], ► pp. 189 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans & Bart Garssen
Garssen, Bart
2022. The argumentative style of the opening speech of a debate in the European Parliament. Journal of Argumentation in Context 11:1 ► pp. 47 ff.
Fetzer, Anita & Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka
Greco, Sara
2021. Review of Brambilla (2020): The quest for argumentative equivalence. Argumentative patterns in political interpreting contexts. Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:3 ► pp. 418 ff.
Reijven, Menno H.
2021. The co-construction of campaign argumentation on U.S.A. late-night talk shows. Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:3 ► pp. 397 ff.
Reijven, Menno H.
Schröter, Juliane & Sebastian Thome
Brambilla, Emanuele
2019. Prototypical argumentative patterns in activist discourse. In Argumentation in Actual Practice [Argumentation in Context, 17], ► pp. 173 ff.
Brambilla, Emanuele
2022. Antifascist argumentation in Giacomo Matteotti’s 1924 speech to the Italian Parliament. Journal of Argumentation in Context 11:1 ► pp. 27 ff.
Schröter, Juliane M.
2019. The TV addresses of the Swiss government before popular votes. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:3 ► pp. 285 ff.
van Eemeren, Frans H.
van Eemeren, Frans H.
van Eemeren, Frans H.
2022. Characterising an MEP’s argumentative style. Journal of Argumentation in Context 11:1 ► pp. 6 ff.
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 march 2026. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.