TL;DR: Conversational argument is characterized as sequential expansion of adjacency pairs aimed at regulating disagreement as mentioned in this paper, and the preconditions and embedded propositons of the speech act performed in the arguable turn define the sorts of expansions recognizable as arguments.
Abstract: Conversational argument is characterized as sequential expansion of adjacency pairs aimed at regulating disagreement. The preconditions and embedded propositons of the speech act performed in the arguable turn define the sorts of expansions recognizable as arguments. General properties of adjacency pairs explain the prevalence of enthymemes in conversation.
TL;DR: This paper revisited the enthymeme of the Aeneas in the context of speech and discussed its relation with the enthaleme of speech. Quarterly Journal of Speech: Vol. 45, No. 4, No 4, pp. 399-408.
Abstract: (1959). Aristotle's enthymeme revisited. Quarterly Journal of Speech: Vol. 45, No. 4, pp. 399-408.
TL;DR: In this paper, van Eemeren and Houtlosser discuss the relationship between Dialectic and Rhetoric in a classical and a modern perspective. And always the Twain shall meet.
Abstract: Preface. 1. And Always the Twain Shall Meet F.H. van Eemeren, P. Houtlosser. 2. Reasonable Argument Before Aristotle: The Roots of the Enthymeme J.A.E. Bons. 3. Meeting in the House of Callias: an Historical Perspective on Rhetoric and Dialectic E.C.W. Krabbe. 4. Rhetoric and Dialectic: Some Historical and Legal Perspectives H. Hohmann. 5. The Relation Between Dialectic and Rhetoric in a Classical and a Modern Perspective M. Leff. 6. Evaluating Argumentative Discourse from a Rhetorical Perspective: Defining 'Person' and 'Human Life' in Constitutional Disputes over Abortion E. Schiappa. 7. Designing Issues J. Goodwin. 8. Pivotal Issues and Norms in Rhetorical Theories of Argumentation F.J. Kauffeld. 9. Messages, Functional Contexts, and Categories of Fallacy: Some Dialectical and Rhetorical Considerations S. Jacobs. 10. Strategic Maneuvering: Maintaining a Delicate Balance F.H. van Eemeren, P. Houtlosser. The Contributors. Index of Names.
TL;DR: A close examination of the meanings of the word "enthymeme" in Ancient and Byzantine rhetoric shows that the term was far from unambiguous as discussed by the authors, and a survey of its various meanings provides some clues as to how rhetorical theory, as it was and as it is today, might be cast in a different light.
Abstract: A close examination of the meanings of “enthymeme” in Ancient and Byzantine rhetoric shows that the term was far from unambiguous. A survey of its various meanings provides some clues as to how rhetorical theory, as it was and as it is today, might be cast in a different light.
TL;DR: In an ideal situation, with a good procedure and rational judges, logos dominates and in the real situation of Aristotle's time, with an imperfect procedure and irrational judges, ethos and pathos prevail as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In Aristotle's Rhetoric, logos must be conceived as enthymematical argumentation relative to the issue of the case. Ethos and pathos also can take the form of an enthymeme, but this argumentation doesn't relate (directly) to the issue. In this kind of enthymeme, the conclusion is relative to the ethos of the speaker or (reasons for) the pathos of the audience. In an ideal situation — with a good procedure and rational judges — logos dominates and in the real situation of Aristotle's time — with an imperfect procedure and irrational judges — ethos and pathos prevail.