الفهرس 
AbstractOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 230 |  |  |
| | | from | 230 | | |
Abstract
The present study examines in detail the argumentative uses of two major linguistically-oriented components: speech acts and discourse connectives from a pragma-dialectical approach. This approach combines two types of analysis: pragmatic and dialectical. The pragmatic analysis of the different types of speech acts and discourse connectives elucidates the argumentative functions such items can perform in certain contexts. The dialectical analysis of these linguistic items illuminates the role they play in resolving differences of opinion. The purpose of this study is thus twofold: first, to present a model that combines ideas from two different approaches – pragmatics and argumentation – and, second, to apply this model to political dramatic texts to trace the process of conflict resolution the dramatist highlights through his works.
To achieve this purpose, the researcher uses a theoretical framework that combines two models: Frans H. van Eemeren and Rob Grootendorst’s (1984, 2004) ideal model of a critical discussion and John R. Searle’s (1979) taxonomy of speech acts. David Edgar’s plays- The Prisoner’s Dilemma (2001) and Pentecost (1994) - provide the suitable application of this theoretical framework because Edgar is a political activist and a large portion of the discourse of his plays is largely built on argumentation and debate.
The procedure followed in this thesis is to analyze from a pragma-dialectical approach the different dialogues occurring among the characters of the selected works. The analysis is done on two levels. First, the researcher analyzes the different speech acts performed and the argumentative purpose each speech act achieves throughout the different stages of the critical discussion under investigation. Besides, a classification of the types of speech acts that occur in each stage follows. Second, the researcher analyzes specific discourse connectives used to achieve certain argumentative functions throughout the different stages of the resolution process as presented in the ideal model of a critical discussion.
The thesis falls into six chapters and a bibliographical section. Chapter One is an introduction Chapter Two is a review of the literature on the pragma-dialectical approach argumentative texts. Chapter Three presents the main theoretical framework in the light of which the analysis of data is done. Chapter Four presents the analysis of The Prisoner’s Dilemma in the light of the proposed theoretical apparatus. Chapter Five presents the analysis of Pentecost. Chapter Six provides the conclusion in which the most significant findings of the study are presented. This conclusion is certainly followed by a list of the references consulted during the course of the researcher’s work in this research.