Why Argumentation Theory Should Differentiate Types of Claim
Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport › Bidrag til bog/antologi › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Why Argumentation Theory Should Differentiate Types of Claim. / Kock, Christian Erik J.
Conductive Argument : An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning. red. / J.A. Blair; R.H. Johnson. Bind 33 London : College Publications, 2011. s. 62-73.Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport › Bidrag til bog/antologi › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
Kock, CEJ 2011, Why Argumentation Theory Should Differentiate Types of Claim. i JA Blair & RH Johnson (red), Conductive Argument : An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning. bind 33, College Publications, London, s. 62-73.
APA
Kock, C. E. J. (2011). Why Argumentation Theory Should Differentiate Types of Claim. I J. A. Blair, & R. H. Johnson (red.), Conductive Argument : An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning (Bind 33, s. 62-73). College Publications.
Vancouver
Kock CEJ. Why Argumentation Theory Should Differentiate Types of Claim. I Blair JA, Johnson RH, red., Conductive Argument : An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning. Bind 33. London: College Publications. 2011. s. 62-73
Author
Bibtex
@inbook{d76ebe8f7db34032877d66d0346fb1af,
title = "Why Argumentation Theory Should Differentiate Types of Claim",
author = "Kock, {Christian Erik J}",
year = "2011",
month = oct,
day = "20",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781848900309",
volume = "33",
pages = "62--73",
editor = "J.A. Blair and R.H. Johnson",
booktitle = "Conductive Argument",
publisher = "College Publications",
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - Why Argumentation Theory Should Differentiate Types of Claim
AU - Kock, Christian Erik J
PY - 2011/10/20
Y1 - 2011/10/20
M3 - Book chapter
SN - 9781848900309
VL - 33
SP - 62
EP - 73
BT - Conductive Argument
A2 - Blair, J.A.
A2 - Johnson, R.H.
PB - College Publications
CY - London
ER -
ID: 35241820