Abstract language: language expressing a quality apart from a specific object or event; opposite of concrete language.

Ad hominem: "against the man"; attacking the arguer rather than the argument or issue.

Ad populum: "to the people"; playing on the prejudices of the audience.

Analogy: a comparison in which a thing is inferred to be similar to another thing in a certain way because it is similar to the thing in other ways.

Appeal to tradition: a proposal that something should continue because it has traditionally existed or been done that way.

Argument: a process of reasoning and advancing proof about issues on which conflicting views may be held; also, a statement or statements providing support for a claim.

Audience: those who will hear an argument; more generally, those to whom a communication is addressed.

Authoritative warrant: a warrant based on the credibility or trustworthiness of the source.

Authority: a respectable, reliable source of evidence.

Backing: the assurances upon which a warrant or assumption is based.

Begging the question: the arguer proves his conclusion while assuming it to already be true. The premise for his argument is based on the truth of his conclusion. In other words, the argument assumes to be true what it is supposed to be proving.

Cause and effect: reasoning that assumes one event or condition can bring about another.

Claim: the conclusion of an argument; what the arguer is trying to prove.

Claim of fact: a claim that asserts something exists, has existed, or will exist, based on data that the audience will accept as objectively verifiable.

Claim of policy: a claim asserting that specific courses of action should be instituted as solutions to problems.

Claim of value: a claim that asserts some things are more or less desirable than others.

Cliche: a worn-out expression or idea, no longer capable of producing a visual image or provoking thought about a subject.

Comparison warrant: a warrant based on shared characteristics and circumstances of two or more things or events; an analogy is a type of comparison, but the things or events being compared in an analogy are not of the same class.

Concrete language: language that describes specific, generally observable, persons, places, or things; in contrast to abstract language.

Connotation: the overtones that adhere to a word through long usage.

Credibility: the audience's belief in the arguer's trustworthiness; see also age.

Data: see evidence.

Deduction: reasoning by which we establish that a conclusion must be true because the statements on which it is based are true; see also syllogism.

Definition: an explanation of the meaning of a term, concept, or experience; may be used for clarification, especially of a claim, or as a means of developing an argument.

Definition by negation: defining a thing by saying what it is not.

Enthymeme: A syllogism in which one of the premises is implicit.

Ethos: the qualities of character, intelligence, and goodwill in an argument that contribute to an audience's acceptance of the claim.

Euphemism: a pleasant or flattering expression used in place of one that is less agreeable but possibly more accurate.

Evidence: facts or opinions that support an issue or claim; may consist of statistics, reports of personal experience, or views of experts.

Extended definition: a definition that uses several different methods of development.

Fact: something that is believed to have objective reality; a piece of information regarded as verifiable.

Factual evidence: support consisting of data that is considered objectively verifiable by the audience.

Fallacy: an error of reasoning based on faulty use of evidence or incorrect inference.

False analogy: assuming without sufficient proof that if objects or processes are similar in some ways, then they are similar in other ways as well; see analogy.

False Dilemma: simplifying a complex problem into an either/or dichotomy.

Faulty emotional appeals: basing an argument on feelings, especially pity or fear--often to draw attention away from the real issues or conceal another purpose.

Faulty use of authority: failing to acknowledge disagreement among experts or otherwise misrepresenting the trustworthiness of sources.

Generalization: a statement of general principle derived inferentially from a series of examples.

Hasty generalization: drawing conclusions from insufficient evidence.

Induction: reasoning by which a general statement is reached on the basis of particular examples.

Inference: an interpretation of the facts.

Major premise: see syllogism.

Minor premise: see syllogism.

Motivational appeal: an attempt to reach an audience by recognizing their needs and values and how these contribute to their decision making.

Motivational warrant: a type of warrant based on the needs and values of an audience.

Need: in the hierarchy of Abraham Maslow, whatever is required, whether psychological or physiological, for the survival and welfare of a human being.

Non sequitur: "it does not follow"; using irrelevant proof to buttress a claim.

Picturesque language: words that produce images in the minds of the audience.

Policy: a course of action recommended or taken to solve a problem or guide decisions.

Post hoc: mistakenly inferring that because one event follows another they have a causal relation; from post hoc ergo propter hoc ("after this, therefore because of this"); also called "doubtful cause."

Proposition: see claim.

Qualifier: a restriction placed on the claim to state that it may not always be true as stated.

Refutation: an attack on an opposing view in order to weaken it, invalidate it, or make it less credible.

Reservation: a restriction placed on the warrant to indicate that unless certain conditions are met, the warrant may not establish a connection between the support and the claim.

Sign warrant: a warrant that offers an observable datum and an indicator of a condition.

Slanting: selecting facts or words with connotations that favor the arguer's bias and discredit alternatives.

Slippery slope: predicting without justification that one step in a process will lead unavoidably to a second, generally undesirable step.

Slogan: an attention-getting expression used largely in politics or advertising to promote support of a cause or product.

Statistics: information expressed in numerical form.

Stipulative definition: a definition that makes clear that it will explore a particular area of meaning of a term or issue.

Straw man: disputing a view similar to, but not the same as, that of the arguer's opponent.

Style: choices in words and sentence structure that make a writer's language distinctive.

Substantive warrant: a warrant based on beliefs about the reliability of factual evidence.

Support: any material that serves to prove an issue or claim; in addition to evidence, it includes appeals to the needs and values of the audience.

Syllogism: a formula of deductive argument consisting of three propositions: a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.

Thesis: the main idea of an essay.

Toulmin model: a conceptual system of argument devised by the philosopher Stephen Toulmin; the terms claim, support, warrant, backing, qualifier, and reservation are adapted from this system.

Two wrongs make a right: diverting attention from the issue by introducing a new point, e.g., by responding to an accusation with a counter-accusation that makes no attempt to refute the first accusation.

Values: conceptions or ideas that act as standards for judging what is right or wrong, worthwhile or worthless, beautiful or ugly, good or bad.

Warrant: a general principle or assumption that establishes a connection between the support and the claim.

*Reproduced from Elements of Argument, Rottenberg.