paulsari on webjam

The following is taken from an analysis of the rhetoric in this speech given by EU Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid Luis Michel on 21 November 2007, six weeks before the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific countries (ACPs) were scheduled to complete negotiations and sign Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs)

Arguments in rhetoric, according to Toulmin (2003:92), consist of three parts in their fundamental structure[1]: a “claim” which is based on “data” and a “warrant” which provides a link for the claim to the data. However, as Toulmin says the warrant often remains unsaid in the specific argumentation in the text, and this may be because the warrant is dubious or by no means an unequivocal truth. In the speech by Michel at the WTO in November 2007, the claim is:

“Aid for trade must be based on countries' own assessments of their strengths and weaknesses in the global competition and on their own trade and development strategies.”

The data are:

“I am glad that we have reached a global consensus on this key parameter to address the root causes of economic marginalisation.”

The implicit warrant here is that countries making “assessments of their strengths and weaknesses in the global competition ...”, i.e. ACPs, are members of the same “we” group (in the data) which “have reached a global consensus”, yet this would be in contradiction to the rest of the text and the first line of this paragraph. The superficial involving of developing countries in global economic policy by western governments and the WTO noted in “global consensus” underlines the arguments of those that claim that these organisations barely involve poorer countries in (economic) decision making (Ghafele, 2004; Holborow, 2006).

[1] Toulmin also discusses “backing” for the warrant and “qualifier” as a step prior to reaching the claim. I simplify this diagram because the model still functions without them and is still sufficient for our current purposes. “Standpoint, explicit premise, unexpressed premise” (van Eemeren et al 2002:70) are basically the same as “claim, data and warrant” respectively in Toulmin’s analysis.

Ghafele (2004) ‘The metaphors of globalization and trade: An analysis of the language used in the WTO’. Journal of Language and Politics 3:3, 441–462

Holborow, M. (2006) ‘Language, Ideology and Neoliberalism’ Journal of Language and Politics 6:1, 51-73

Toulmin, S. (1959). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

van Eemeren, F., Grootendorst, R, Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2002) Argumentation: Analysis, Evalutaion, Presentation London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Comments

written on 16-Sep-2008
chickerino says:
hmmm, I understand neither what the argument is about, nor the analysis...
bloody intellectuals!
written on 16-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
This was written by lawyers!
written on 16-Sep-2008
chickerino says:
bloody lawyers!
written on 16-Sep-2008
paulsari says:
Well, I'm not a lawyer.

I'm half linguist half (macro-)economist. Actually, that sounds even worse, doesn't it!?
written on 16-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
It could be worst but not grey undefined lawyer language... which is useful to be right as well as to be wrong!...

For sure, when they wrote this, they hadn't Webjam Pens... which are truly more interactive
written on 17-Sep-2008
paulsari says:
Nope, this was definitely not written with a webjam pen. Will I ever get a webjam pen, Marcus?
written on 17-Sep-2008
paulsari says:
So, Cristián, are you perhaps referring to the text from the EUwhen you talk about lawyers or are you referring to the / my analysis ?
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
To the EU text!...The analysis is great!... (I read it several times... I hope, I undertood it correctly )

Also... as you mentioned, you're not a lawer, you are [0.5 linguistic + 0.5 macro-economist]
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
Also... developing countries probably have their own agenda... and their representatives also have their own agendas which use to be different than th country ones... I mean, these countries are no only poorly involved in decision making, but also, their representatives are not enough interested...
written on 17-Sep-2008
paulsari says:
Thanks Cristián. It's great that we can have these debates on webjam. Well done the boy Greenwood and his crew for allowing us to do so.

The EU is all about CYA (cover your arse).
written on 17-Sep-2008
paulsari says:
That second point is something I am very interested to investigate. I often wonder how many poor policy decisions in both Europe and Africa (or anywhere, in fact) are made, not because of lack of information, but because of alterior personal motives. I mean it is something we all suspect, but not few really study it. I am actually thinking about doing this this masters into two years time alongside my PhD. It would be a bit crazy on the workload, but then again it's a worth a try.
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
Hmmmm... Try these:
- Analyze, in a timeline, the relation between incomes and fortune evolution (the one declare to tax departments) of polititians during the period that they had an important position... Split developed from developing countries... You'll be surprised
- Calculate, for the same period, a correlation between fortune of those politians and 1/[country GDP] in developing contries... "R" coeficient will be close to 1...
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
And it's true... Thanks Marcus, Alberto, Yann et al... Webjam is fantastic (instead of they do not offer me yet to transform Brand 3.0 in a channel... for free ... It will be the very first "Essential Branding Channel" over the World -different to "brandchannel" from Interbrand which is a document repository and blog)

Hmmmm... Need to contact my Lobby Department!...
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
And it's true... Thanks Marcus, Alberto, Yann et al... Webjam is fantastic (instead of they do not offer me yet to transform Brand 3.0 in a channel... for free ... It would be the very first "Essential Branding Channel" over the World -different to "brandchannel" from Interbrand which is a document repository and blog)

Hmmmm... Need to contact my Lobby Department!...
written on 17-Sep-2008
paulsari says:
Cristián, it looks like you're making use of my blog for free advertising space of Brand 3.0 as well as some form of electioneering Ha ha ...Nice work. If there's anything I can do to offer my support to your lobbying, just let me know

p.s. the info above about the correlation was useful!
written on 17-Sep-2008
chickerino says:
You just need to keep bugging us Cristian!
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
Still more?... It's a difficult task...

I'll see our lobby department suggestions
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
Paul!... You are co-editor of the Wiki-Semantic... This effort is also in your interest!...
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
I've read again what I wrote in the last two post and they could be understood as strong and rude... which was not my intention...

So, if I offended somebody... Sorry

If not... They are still valid!
written on 17-Sep-2008
paulsari says:
What you wrote seemed to me to be true with an amusing streak. To be honest, I would be surprised if anyone reading this blog took offence to them.

I myself have an almost chronic inability to stay serious for anywhere near all the time, anyhow.
written on 17-Sep-2008
cristian.saracco says:
Welll... you never know... Virtuallity has some risks!
written on 17-Sep-2008
paulsari says:
Ah, indeed! To say "know" would be quite a different statement.
written on 13-Jun-2010
WeaverKirsten [http://www.lowest-rate-loans.com] says:
That is well known that money can make us disembarrass. But what to do when someone doesn't have money? The one way only is to try to get the loans and financial loan.

Page navigation

My Blog » I like a good argument

Comments

Leave a Comment