<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:creator>Greco, Sara</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>De Cock, Barbara</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2021-01-15</dc:date>
  <dc:description xmlns:ns0="xml" ns0:lang="en">In light of the ongoing public controversy surrounding fashion sustainability, this paper sets out to identify misalignments that relate to the definitions of  sustainable fashion. It does so by examining the discourse of different agents in this polylogical argumentation - fashion companies and the European  Parliament as well as citizens, small brands and NGOs - as revealed through documents and tweets published online. Our findings show  misalignments in the opening stage of the argumentative discussion at the level of explicit and implicit definitions of sustainability as well as in how the  agents responsible are discursively portrayed. We argue that the existence of these misalignments may explain the ongoing controversy surrounding  sustainable fashion: the different actors do not share univocal starting points and representations of this phenomenon. Methodologically, this paper  also advances research on argumentative polylogues, by demonstrating a method for comparing argumentation by different actors using different data  sources.</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>https://susi.usi.ch/global/documents/319289</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://n2t.net/ark:/12658/srd1319289</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://susi.usi.ch/documents/319289/files/Greco_2021_Else_jop.pdf</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:relation>info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.12.019</dc:relation>
  <dc:relation>info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/ark/12658/srd1319289</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
  <dc:rights>CC BY-NC-ND</dc:rights>
  <dc:source>Journal of pragmatics. - 2021, vol. 174, no. March, p. 55-67</dc:source>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns1="xml" ns1:lang="en">Misalignment in the opening stage</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns2="xml" ns2:lang="en">Agentivity</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns3="xml" ns3:lang="en">Definition</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns4="xml" ns4:lang="en">Argumentation analysis</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns5="xml" ns5:lang="en">Polylogue</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns6="xml" ns6:lang="en">Sustainable fashion</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>info:eu-repo/classification/udc/81</dc:subject>
  <dc:title xmlns:ns7="xml" ns7:lang="en">Argumentative misalignments in the controversy surrounding fashion sustainability</dc:title>
  <dc:type>http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>
