Books, edited volumes and special issues

1. Zufferey, S., Oswald, S. & Gygax, P. 2025. Quand dire c'est influencer. Psychologie de la persuasion. Editions Sciences Humaines.

2. Schumann, J. & Oswald, S. 2024. Pragmatic Perspectives on Disagreement. Special issue of Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 12(1).

3. Lewiński, M, Cepollaro, B., Witek, M. & Oswald, S. (2023). Norms of Public Argument: A Speech Act Perspective. Special issue of Topoi. [open-access]

4. Oswald, S. 2022. Pragmatics and argumentation. Special issue of Languages. [open-access]

5. Oswald, S., Lewiński, M., Greco, S. & Villata, S. 2022. The Pandemic of Argumentation. Cham: Springer. [open-access]

6. Oswald, S., Greco, S., Miecznikowski, J, Pollaroli, C. & Rocci, A. 2020. Argumentation and meaning. Semantic and pragmatic reflexions (Special issue of the Journal of Argumentation in Context 9:1).

7. Pollaroli, C., Greco, S., Oswald, S. Miecznikowski, J. & Rocci, A. 2019. Rhetoric and Language: emotions and style in argumentative discourse (Special issue of the journal Informal Logic 39(4). [open-access]

8. Herman, T., Jacquin, J. & Oswald, S. 2018. Les mots de l’argumentation. Berne: Peter Lang.

9. Oswald, S. & Maillat, D. 2018. Argumentation and Inference. Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg 2017, volume I. London: College Publications. 

10. Oswald, S. & Maillat, D. 2018. Argumentation and Inference. Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg 2017, volume II. London: College Publications.

11. Oswald, S., Herman, T. & Jacquin, J. 2018. Argumentation and Language – Linguistic, Cognitive and Discursive Explorations. Cham: Springer.

12. Herman, T. & Oswald, S. 2014. Rhétorique et cognition. Perspectives théoriques et stratégies persuasives. Rhetoric & Cognition. Theoretical perspectives and persuasive strategies. Berne: Peter Lang. [open-access]

13. Maillat, D. & Oswald, S. 2013. Biases and constraints in communication: argumentation, persuasion and manipulation. Special issue of the Journal of Pragmatics 59(B). 

Articles in peer-reviewed journals

1. Oswald, S. & Herman, T. 2024. “Steve Oswald: Pragmatics and rhetoric”, Argumentation et Analyse du Discours [Online], 32. https://doi.org/10.4000/aad.8310. 

2. Schumann, J. & Oswald, S. 2024. “Pragmatic perspectives on disagreement“. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 12(1): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00094.sch. 

3. Oswald, S. 2023. "The Pragmatics and Argumentation Interface. Editorial". Languages 8(3), 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8030210.  

4. Lewiński, M., Cepollaro, B., Oswald, S. & Witek, M. 2023. "Norms of Public Argument: A Speech Act Perspective". Topoi.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-023-09918-1. 

5. Younis, R., de Oliveira Fernandes, D., Gygax, P., Koszowy, M. & Oswald, S. 2023. "Rephrasing is not arguing, but it is still persuasive: An experimental approach to perlocutionary effects of rephrase". Journal of Pragmatics 210: 12-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.03.010. 

6. Zenker, F., van Laar, J.A., Cepollaro, B., Gâţă, A., Hinton, M., King, C. G., Larson, B., Lewiński, M., Lumer, C., Oswald, S., Pichlak, M., Scott, B. D., Urbański, M. & Wagemans, J. H. M. 2023. "Norms of Public Argumentation and the Ideals of Correctness and Participation". Argumentation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-023-09598-6. 

7. De Oliveira Fernandes, D. & Oswald, S. 2023. "On the Rhetorical Effectiveness of Implicit Meaning—A Pragmatic Approach". Languages 8(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8010006. 

8. Oswald, S. 2023. "Pragmatics for argumentation". Journal of Pragmatics 203: 144-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.12.001. 

9. Oswald, S. 2022. "Insinuation is committing". Journal of Pragmatics 198: 158-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.07.006. 

10. Koszowy, M., Oswald, S., Budzynska, K, Konat, B. & Gygax, P. 2022. "A Pragmatic Account of Rephrase in Argumentation. Linguistic and Cognitive Evidence". Informal Logic 42(1): 49-82. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v42i1.7212. 

11. Wharton, T., Bonard, C., Dukes, D., Sander, D. & Oswald, S. 2021. “Relevance and emotion”. Journal of Pragmatics 181: 259-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.06.001. 

12. Oswald, S. 2020. “Pragmatique cognitive, argumentation et perlocution”. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours 25. https://doi.org/10.4000/aad.4793

13. Schumann, J., Zufferey, S. & Oswald, S. 2020. “The Linguistic Formulation of Fallacies Matters: The Case of Causal Connectives”. Argumentation 35: 361-288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-020-09540-0.

14. Oswald, S., Greco, S., Miecznikowski, J., Pollaroli, C. & Rocci, A. 2020. “Argumentation and meaning”. Journal of Argumentation in Context 9(1): 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.00005.osw.

15. Schumann, J., Zufferey, S. & Oswald, S. 2019. “What makes a straw man acceptable? Three experiments assessing linguistic factors”. Journal of Pragmatics 141: 1-15 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.12.009.

16. Oswald, S. & Rihs, A. 2018. “De l’épistémique au déontique : un usage du conditionnel en contexte argumentatif”. Langue Française 200: 135-146. https://doi.org/10.3917/lf.200.0135.

17. Oswald, S. 2015. “Es muy fácil pasar por alto lo que no se está buscando: herramientas pragmático-cognitivas para el análisis de la influencia comunicativa”. Logos: Revista de Lingüística, Filosofía y Literatura 25 (2), 196-215. https://doi.org/10.15443/RL2519.

18. Oswald, S. & Rihs, A. 2014. “Metaphor as argument: rhetorical and epistemic advantages of extended metaphors”. Argumentation 28(2): 133-159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-013-9304-0.

19. Lewiński, M. & Oswald, S. 2013. “When and how do we deal with straw men? A normative and cognitive pragmatic account”. Journal of Pragmatics 59(B): 164-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.05.001.

20. Maillat, D. & Oswald, S. 2013. “Editorial”. Journal of Pragmatics 59(B): 137-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.08.014.

21. Oswald, S. 2011. “From interpretation to consent: arguments, beliefs and meaning”. Discourse Studies 13(6): 806-814. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1461445611421360e.

22. Saussure, L. de & Oswald, S. 2009. “Argumentation et engagement du locuteur: pour un point de vue subjectiviste”. Nouveaux cahiers de linguistique française 29: 215-243.

23. Maillat, D. & Oswald, S. 2009. “Defining manipulative discourse: the pragmatics of cognitive illusions”. International Review of Pragmatics 1(2): 348-370. https://doi.org/10.1163/187730909X12535267111651.

24. Saussure, L. de & Oswald, S. 2008. “L’engagement comme notion cognitive associée au destinataire”. L’analisi linguistica e letteraria XVI(1): 475-488.

25. Morency, P., Oswald, S. & Saussure, L. de. 2008. “Explicitness, implicitness and commitment attribution: a cognitive pragmatic approach”. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 22: 197-219. https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.22.10mor.

26. Oswald, S. 2007a. “Towards an interface between pragma-dialectics and relevance theory”. Pragmatics & Cognition 15(1): 179-201. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.15.1.12osw.

27. Oswald, S. 2007b. “Argumentation and cognition: can pragma-dialectics interplay with pragma-semantics?”. CADAAD Journal 1: 148-165.

Book chapters

1. Maillat, D. & Oswald, S. 2024. “Manipulation in exceptional times. Exploiting overwhelming contextual parameters for manipulative purposes”. In Ilie, C. (ed.). Manufacturing Dissent: Manipulation and counter-manipulation in times of crisis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 62-84. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.339.02mai 

2. Herman, T. & Oswald, S. 2022. " 'You want me to be wrong.' Expert ethos, (de-)legitimation, and ethotic straw men as discursive resources for conspiracy theories". In Demata, M., Zorzi, V. & Zottola, A. (eds). Conspiracy Theory Discourses. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.98.05her 

3. Oswald, S., Lewiński, M., Greco, S. & Villata, S. 2022. "Introduction: The Pandemic of Argumentation". In Oswald, S., Lewiński, M., Greco, S. & Villata, S. (eds). The Pandemic of Argumentation. Cham: Springer, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91017-4_1 

4. Oswald, S. 2021. “Pragmática y manipulación”. In Escandell-Vidal, V., Amenos Pons, J. & Ahern, A.  (eds). Pragmática. Madrid: Akal, 408-426.

5. Herman, T. & Oswald, S. 2021. “Everybody knows there is something odd about ad populum arguments”. In Boogaart, R., Jansen, H. & van Leeuwen, M. (eds), The Language of Argumentation, Cham: Springer, 305-323. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52907-9_16.

6. Oswald, S. & Herman, T. 2019. “Give the standard treatment of fallacies a chance! Cognitive and rhetorical insights into fallacy processing”. In van Eemeren, F. & Garssen, B. (eds), From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild. A Variety of Contributions to Argumentation Theory, Cham: Springer, 41-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28367-4_4.

7. Herman, T., Jacquin, J. & Oswald, S. 2018. “Introduction”. In Herman, T., Jacquin, J. & Oswald, S. (eds), Les mots de l’argumentation, Berne: Peter Lang, 7-25.

8. Rihs, A. & Oswald, S. 2018. “Quand l’hypothèse devient vérité: une approche pragmatique de certains effets rhétoriques du conditionnel”. In Herman, T., Jacquin, J. & Oswald, S. (eds). Les mots de l’argumentation. Bern: Peter Lang, 159-181.

9. Oswald, S., Herman, T. & Jacquin, J. 2018. “Introduction”. In Oswald, S., Herman, T. & Jacquin, J. (eds),  Argumentation and language – Linguistic, Cognitive and Discursive Explorations. Cham: Springer, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73972-4_1.

10. Oswald, S. & Maillat, D. 2018. “Deceptive puns: The pragmatics of humour in puns”. In Noemi Padilla, C. (ed.), Perspectivas sobre el significado. Desde lo biológico a lo social. La Serena: Editorial Universidad de la Serena, 145-171.

11. Oswald, S. 2016a. “Rhetoric and cognition. Pragmatic constraints on argument processing”. In Padilla Cruz, M. (ed). Relevance Theory. Recent developments, current challenges and future directions. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 261-285.

12. Oswald, S. 2016b. “Commitment attribution and the reconstruction of arguments”. In Paglieri, F., Bonelli, L. & Felletti, S. (eds). The psychology of argument: Cognitive approaches to argumentation and persuasion. London: College Publications, 17-32.

13. Oswald, S. & Herman, T. 2016. “Argumentation, conspiracy and the Moon: A rhetorical-pragmatic analysis”. In Danesi, M. & Greco, S. (eds). Case studies in discourse analysis. Munich: Lincom Europa, 295-330.[pdf]

14. Oswald, S., Maillat, D. & Saussure, L. de. 2016. “Deceptive and uncooperative verbal communication”. In Rocci, A. & Saussure, L. de (eds). Verbal Communication. Handbook of Communication Science, vol 3. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 509-534. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110255478-026.

15. Herman, T. & Oswald, S. 2014. “Introduction”. In Herman, T. & Oswald, S. (eds). Rhétorique et cognition. Perspectives théoriques et stratégies persuasives. Rhetoric & Cognition. Theoretical perspectives and persuasive strategies. Berne: Peter Lang, 1-20.

16. Oswald, S. 2014. “It is easy to miss something you are not looking for: A pragmatic account of covert communicative influence for (critical) discourse analysis”. In Hart, C. & Cap, P. (eds), Contemporary Studies in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Bloomsbury, 97-120. http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781472593634.ch-004 

17. Oswald, S. & Lewiński. 2014. “Pragmatics, cognitive heuristics and the straw man fallacy”. In Herman, T. & Oswald, S. (eds). Rhétorique et cognition: perspectives théoriques et stratégies persuasives / Rhetoric & Cognition: theoretical perspectives and persuasive strategies. Bern: Peter Lang, 313-343.

18. Maillat, D. & Oswald, S. 2011. “Constraining context. A pragmatic account of cognitive manipulation”. In Hart, C. (ed). Critical discourse studies in context and cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 65-80. https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.43.04mai.

Conference proceedings

1. Oswald, S. (forth.). "Commentary on 'The Examination of Peer Review Texts as Arguments from Expert Opinion' ". Argumentation and changing minds: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA). Windsor, ON: OSSA.

2. De Oliveira Fernandes, D. & Oswald, S. (forth.). "Insinuating a personal attack is more effective when the attack is fallacious: some experimental evidence on the relationship between explicitness and fallaciousness." Argumentation and changing minds: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA). Windsor, ON: OSSA.

3. Oswald, S., de Oliveira Fernandes, D. & Wagner-Egger, P. (forth.). "The more you believe in conspiracy theories, the less you consider ad ignorantiam a bad argument: a correlational study." Argumentation and changing minds: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA). Windsor, ON: OSSA.

4. Paz Schmid, B., Hautli-Janisz, A., & Oswald, S. (2024). Factoring in Context for the Automatic Detection of Misrepresentation. In R. Sharma, A. Peñas, & A. Sabir (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on COuntering Disinformation with Artificial Intelligence (CODAI), co-located with the 27th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI) (Vol. 3782, pp. 11–18). CEUR-WS.

5. De Oliveira Fernandes, D., Oswald, S. & Gygax, P. (forth.). “Insinuated vs. Asserted ad hominem: an experimental approach to their rhetorical effectiveness”. Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Argumentation, Rome 2022. London: College Publications.

6. De Oliveira Fernandes, D. & Oswald, S. 2024. “Insinuated vs Asserted Ad Hominem: An Experimental Approach to their Rhetorical Effectiveness on Ethos”. In Boogaart, R., Garssen, B. Jansen, H., Leeuwen, M. van, Pilgram, R. & Reuneker, A. (2024). Proceedings of the Tenth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Sic Sat: Amsterdam, 227-235.

7. Oswald, S. 2018. “Pragmatic inference and argumentative inference”. In Oswald, S. & Maillat, D. (eds). Argumentation and inference. Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg 2017. London: College Publications, 615-629.

8. Ozols, D., Maillat, D. & Oswald, S. 2016. “Repetition as context selection constraint: A study in the cognitive underpinnings of persuasion”. In Mohammed, D. & Lewiński, M. (eds), Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Argumentation, Lisbon, 2015. Vol. I. London: College Publications, 547-566.

9. Oswald, S. 2016a. “What about perlocution? Commentary on Lewiński’s How to conclude practical argument in a multi-party debate”. In Mohammed, D. & Lewiński, M. (eds), Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Argumentation, Lisbon, 2015. Vol. I. London: College Publications, 421-429.

10. Oswald, S. 2016b. “Conspiracy and bias: argumentative features and persuasiveness of conspiracy theories”. In Bondy, P., & Benacquista, L. (eds). Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 18-21 May 2016. Windsor, ON: OSSA, 1-16.

11. Oswald, S. 2016c. “Commentary on “Eliminating Gender-, Racial- and Age-Biases in Medical Diagnostic Reasoning”. In Bondy, P., & Benacquista, L. (eds). Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 18-21 May 2016. Windsor, ON: OSSA, 1-8.

12. Oswald, S. & Hart, C. 2013. “Trust based on bias: Cognitive constraints on source-related fallacies”. In Mohammed, D., & Lewiński, M. (eds). Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22-26 May 2013. Windsor, ON: OSSA, 1-13.

13. Oswald, S. 2013. “Commentary on: Frank Zenker’s “Know thy biases! Bringing argumentative virtues to the classroom””. In Mohammed, D., & Lewiński, M. (eds). Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22-26 May 2013. Windsor, ON: OSSA, 1-7.

PhD thesis

Oswald, S. 2010. Pragmatics of uncooperative and manipulative communication. PhD dissertation, ms., University of Neuchâtel, 423p. [open access]