Year 2011, Volume 10, Issue 3, Pages 1021 - 1035 2011-12-01

Analysis of Arguments in the Public Debate on the Alphabet Change in bilingual Kazakhstan

Lyazzat Kimanova [1]

179 477

By focusing on an example of a public social debate on language policy, this article aims at showing the relevant contribution of argument analysis to the understanding of such debates. Argumentative discourse constitutes an essential condition for real democratic practice. Perelman & Olbrechts-Tyteca (1958: 73) point out that the commitment to argumentative practice offers an alternative to the use of violence. The relationship between argumentation and a democratic society is fundamental: argumentation is the substance of democracy, which differs from other social systems in that the only legitimate power is the power of the word. It is free will, which builds on the word alone, that enables us to live together in freedom. An important aspect of democracy, being based on a dialectic ideal, is its uncertain outcome: van Eemeren (2002: 71) characterizes democracy as «institutionalized uncertainty». Thus, insight into the functioning of argumentation contributes significantly to the understanding of democratic processes
Argumentation, Pragma-dialectical approach, Analytical reconstruction of arguments, Argument schemes, Loci, Argumentum model of Topics
  • Christopher-Guerra, S. 2008. ‘Themen, Thesen und Argumente zur Position des Italienischen in der viersprachigen Schweiz’. Studies in Communication Sciences 8 (1): 135-159.
  • Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 1995, Article 7
  • Eemeren, F. H. van, and R. Grootendorst (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical account. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Eemeren, F. H. van, R. Grootendorst, and A. F. Snoeck-Henkemans (2002). Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah (NJ): Erlbaum.
  • Eemeren, F. H. van, Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S. & Jacobs, S. (1993). Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse. Tuscaloosa/London: The University of Alabama Press.
  • Garssen, B. 2001. Argument schemes. In Crucial concepts in argumentation theory, ed. F. H. van Eeemeren, 81-99. Amsterdam: Sic-Sat.
  • Nazarbayev, N. "Message of the President of the Country to the People of Kazakhstan," Kazakhstan-2030 (London: Embassy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 1998)
  • Olcott , M. “The Politics of Language Reform in Kazakhstan.“ In Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Soviet National Languages: Their Past, Present, and Future. ed. Isabelle Kreindler, 345-61. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1985.
  • Perelman, C. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1958). Traité de l’argimentation: la nouvelle rhétorique. Paris: P.U.F.
  • Rigotti, E. (2006). Relevance of context-bound loci to topical potential in the argumentation stage. Argumentation 20(4): 519-540.
  • Rigotti, E. (2009a). ‘Whether and how classical topics can be revived in the contemporary theory of argumentation’. In: F. H. van Eemeren and B. J. Garssen (eds), Pondering on problems of argumentation, New York: Springer, pp. 157-178
  • Rigotti, E. (2009b forthcoming). ‘Locus a causa finali’. In Word meaning in argumentative dialogue, ed. G. Gobber, S. Cantarini, S. Cigada, M. C. Gatti and S. Gilardoni. Special issue of L’analisi linguistica e letteraria 2009/2.
  • Rigotti, E., and S. Greco Morasso (2006). Topics: the argument generator. Argumentation for financial communication. Argumentum eLearning module. www.argumentum.ch
  • Rigotti, E. and Greco Morasso, S. (2009), Comparing the Argumentum-Model of Topics with other contemporary approaches to argument schemes; the procedural and the material components
  • Tynyshpayev, Mukhamedzhan. Istoriya Kazakhskogo Naroda. Almaty: Sanat, 1998. Walton, D. (2005). How to Evaluate Argumentation Using Schemes, Diagrams, Critical Questions and Dialogues. In: M. Dasc al et al. (eds.). Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction. Studies in Communication Sciences Special Issue: 51–74.
  • Walton, D., C. Reed, and F. Macagno. 2008, Argumentation schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  • Egemen Kazakhstan 6 Jan. 1996
  • Irtysh 18 Mar. 1997
  • Kazak Adebieti 24 Feb. 1998
  • Kazakhstanskaya Pravda (31 July 1992; 6 June 1995; 13 Mar.1996; 19 Feb.1998)
  • Kazakhstan Sarbazy 31 Mar. 1998
  • Novaya Gazeta 5 July 1996;
  • Novoe Pokolenie 20 aug. 1997;
  • Panorama 9:4 Mar. 1995
  • Russki Yazik I Literatura v Kazakhskoi Shkole 1995, № 7-8:35
  • Turkestan 25 Nov. 1998
  • Zaman - Kazakhstan 12 Jan. 1996
Other ID JA32RC75MZ
Journal Section Article
Authors

Author: Lyazzat Kimanova
Institution: GAZİANTEP ÜNİVERSİTESİ, GAZİANTEP EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ

APA Kimanova, L . (2011). Analysis of Arguments in the Public Debate on the Alphabet Change in bilingual Kazakhstan. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 10 (3), 1021-1035. Retrieved from http://dergipark.org.tr/jss/issue/24243/257016