e-journal

Rhetoric and case study research:response to Joni Young and Alistair Preston and to Sue Llewellyn

---

In some respects it is disconcerting to have to respond in defence of a paper which is seen as dangerous, absurd, promiscuous and unsettling, of attacking the wrong enemy and in danger of facilitating the rebirth of old orthodoxies.But then, in other respects, such language is comforting as it serves to emphasize a central point of the paper – that theoretical discourse in accounting, as in any other academic discipline, is largely a rhetorical process.The term “rhetoric” was used in its classical sense, meaning the efficient processing of argument, rather than its later pejorative sense (see Warnock,1992; and Amernic, 1996). It is believed that the use of rhetoric in this sense can open up new ways of thinking and encourage greater scholarship, rather than relying on established modes of theorizing. In short, rhetoric in accounting research is seen as the use of persuasive argument which has purpose and can change things. It is not the clichéd embodiment of irrelevance or cynicism,although we acknowledge that it can include diasyrmus, the disparaging of opposing arguments (McCloskey, 1985); for example, by the use of labels such
as dangerous, absurd, promiscuous and so on.

---

Ketersediaan

Tidak ada salinan data

Informasi Detail

Judul Seri

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal

No. Panggil

-

Penerbit

: MCB University Press., 1996

Deskripsi Fisik

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 9 No. 4, 1996, pp. 119-122

Bahasa

English

ISBN/ISSN

-

Klasifikasi

-

Tipe Isi

-

Tipe Media

-

Tipe Pembawa

-

Edisi

-

Subjek

AKUNTANSI

Info Detail Spesifik

-

Pernyataan Tanggungjawab

Asmawati/Syahrial

Versi lain/terkait

Lampiran Berkas

Komentar

---

Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar