This paper consists of a detailed analysis of how the participants in a debate build their emotional position during the interaction and how such a position is strongly related to the conclusion they defend. In this case study, teenage Mexican, students, arguing about access to drinking water, display extensive discursive work on the emotional tonality given to the issue. Plantin’s (2011) methodological tools are adopted to follow two alternative emotional framings produced by disagreeing students, starting from a common, highly negative, thymic tonality. Through the analysis of four parameters (distance to the problem; causality/agentivity; possibility of control and conformity to the norms) we describe how the emotional dimension of schematization ( Grize 1997 ) is argumentatively relevant. In authentic discourse, it is impossible to separate emotion from reason. The conclusion section discusses the implications for the design of argumentation-based pedagogical activities.

中文翻译：

---

情绪定位作为争论的认知资源

本文详细分析了辩论中的参与者如何在互动过程中建立他们的情绪立场，以及这种立场如何与他们所捍卫的结论密切相关。在这个案例研究中，墨西哥青少年学生就获得饮用水的问题进行了争论，他们就该问题的情感调性展开了广泛的讨论。Plantin (2011) 的方法论工具被采用来遵循由不同意见的学生产生的两种不同的情感框架，从一个常见的、高度消极的、胸腺的音调开始。通过对四个参数（与问题的距离；因果关系/能动性；控制的可能性和规范的一致性）的分析，我们描述了图式化的情感维度（Grize 1997）在论证上是如何相关的。在真实的话语中，将情感与理性分开是不可能的。结论部分讨论了对基于论证的教学活动设计的影响。