Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In linguistics, discourse analysis, and related fields, an interlocutor is a person involved in a conversation or dialogue. Two or more people speaking to one another are each other's interlocutors. [1] [2] The terms conversation partner, [3] hearer, [4] or addressee [5] are often used interchangeably with interlocutor.
The subjects of the debate topic, typically a government agency, is not the interlocutor; the debate rounds are not addressed to them. Within the topic of the debate, a group that enacts a certain policy action is the policy group; if by an individual, the individual is the policy leader, such as a head of state.
Debate is a process that involves formal discourse, discussion, and oral addresses on a particular topic or collection of topics, often with a moderator and an audience. In a debate, arguments are put forward for opposing viewpoints.
Interlocutor may refer to: Interlocutor (music), the master of ceremonies of a minstrel show; Interlocutor (politics), someone who informally explains the views of a government and also can relay messages back to a government; Interlocutor (linguistics), a participant in a discourse; Interlocutor, in Scots law, an interlocutory order
Discourse is a generalization of the notion of a conversation to any form of communication. [1] Discourse is a major topic in social theory, with work spanning fields such as sociology, anthropology, continental philosophy, and discourse analysis.
The Socratic method (also known as the method of Elenchus or Socratic debate) is a form of argumentative dialogue between individuals based on asking and answering questions. Socratic dialogues feature in many of the works of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato , where his teacher Socrates debates various philosophical issues with an ...
English. Read; Edit; View history; Tools. Tools. move to sidebar hide. ... An interlocutor is someone who informally explains the views of a government and also can ...
In a debate, fulfillment of the burden of proof creates a burden of rejoinder. One must try to identify faulty reasoning in the opponent's argument, to attack the reasons/premises of the argument, to provide counterexamples if possible, to identify any fallacies , and to show why a valid conclusion cannot be derived from the reasons provided ...