Adjective meaning “argumentative for argument's sake”?
Quite often, the phrase "x for x's sake" is used in English, and so one could describe someone as being "argumentative for argument's sake" to describe someone who is arguing for the sake of arguing. However, is there an adjective that means the same thing? For example, it could be used in the context:
I don't want to be [X], but [argument...]
... indicating that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate.
single-word-requests pejorative-language
edited Jun 13 '14 at 1:44
tchrist♦
108k28290464
asked Jan 11 '12 at 10:13
JezJez
8,3082276116
add a comment |
Quite often, the phrase "x for x's sake" is used in English, and so one could describe someone as being "argumentative for argument's sake" to describe someone who is arguing for the sake of arguing. However, is there an adjective that means the same thing? For example, it could be used in the context:
I don't want to be [X], but [argument...]
... indicating that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate.
single-word-requests pejorative-language
edited Jun 13 '14 at 1:44
tchrist♦
108k28290464
asked Jan 11 '12 at 10:13
JezJez
8,3082276116
@WillHunting: argumentative does not already have a negative connotation. That impression is due to an indiscriminate usage I suppose.
– Kris
Jan 11 '12 at 10:54
2
The standard idiomatic usage is argument for argument's sake, which applies to the proposition being advanced, or the act of advancing it. It's not an attribute of the person making the argument.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 11 '12 at 16:03
In some contexts, words like pedantic or nitpicky might work, but these don't actually mean "argumentative for argument's sake"; rather, they serve to "[indicate] that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate."
– Marthaª
Jan 11 '12 at 17:44
Another fine word, though slightly off the mark, would be pettifogging.
– Zairja
Sep 7 '12 at 20:32
add a comment |
Quite often, the phrase "x for x's sake" is used in English, and so one could describe someone as being "argumentative for argument's sake" to describe someone who is arguing for the sake of arguing. However, is there an adjective that means the same thing? For example, it could be used in the context:
I don't want to be [X], but [argument...]
... indicating that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate.
single-word-requests pejorative-language
edited Jun 13 '14 at 1:44
tchrist♦
108k28290464
asked Jan 11 '12 at 10:13
JezJez
8,3082276116
Quite often, the phrase "x for x's sake" is used in English, and so one could describe someone as being "argumentative for argument's sake" to describe someone who is arguing for the sake of arguing. However, is there an adjective that means the same thing? For example, it could be used in the context:
I don't want to be [X], but [argument...]
... indicating that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate.
single-word-requests pejorative-language
single-word-requests pejorative-language
edited Jun 13 '14 at 1:44
tchrist♦
108k28290464
asked Jan 11 '12 at 10:13
JezJez
8,3082276116
edited Jun 13 '14 at 1:44
tchrist♦
108k28290464
asked Jan 11 '12 at 10:13
JezJez
8,3082276116
edited Jun 13 '14 at 1:44
tchrist♦
108k28290464
edited Jun 13 '14 at 1:44
tchrist♦
108k28290464
edited Jun 13 '14 at 1:44
tchrist♦
108k28290464
108k28290464
asked Jan 11 '12 at 10:13
JezJez
8,3082276116
asked Jan 11 '12 at 10:13
JezJez
8,3082276116
asked Jan 11 '12 at 10:13
JezJez
8,3082276116
8,3082276116
@WillHunting: argumentative does not already have a negative connotation. That impression is due to an indiscriminate usage I suppose.
– Kris
Jan 11 '12 at 10:54
2
The standard idiomatic usage is argument for argument's sake, which applies to the proposition being advanced, or the act of advancing it. It's not an attribute of the person making the argument.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 11 '12 at 16:03
In some contexts, words like pedantic or nitpicky might work, but these don't actually mean "argumentative for argument's sake"; rather, they serve to "[indicate] that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate."
– Marthaª
Jan 11 '12 at 17:44
Another fine word, though slightly off the mark, would be pettifogging.
– Zairja
Sep 7 '12 at 20:32
add a comment |
@WillHunting: argumentative does not already have a negative connotation. That impression is due to an indiscriminate usage I suppose.
– Kris
Jan 11 '12 at 10:54
2
The standard idiomatic usage is argument for argument's sake, which applies to the proposition being advanced, or the act of advancing it. It's not an attribute of the person making the argument.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 11 '12 at 16:03
In some contexts, words like pedantic or nitpicky might work, but these don't actually mean "argumentative for argument's sake"; rather, they serve to "[indicate] that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate."
– Marthaª
Jan 11 '12 at 17:44
Another fine word, though slightly off the mark, would be pettifogging.
– Zairja
Sep 7 '12 at 20:32
@WillHunting: argumentative does not already have a negative connotation. That impression is due to an indiscriminate usage I suppose.
– Kris
Jan 11 '12 at 10:54
@WillHunting: argumentative does not already have a negative connotation. That impression is due to an indiscriminate usage I suppose.
– Kris
Jan 11 '12 at 10:54
2
2
The standard idiomatic usage is argument for argument's sake, which applies to the proposition being advanced, or the act of advancing it. It's not an attribute of the person making the argument.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 11 '12 at 16:03
The standard idiomatic usage is argument for argument's sake, which applies to the proposition being advanced, or the act of advancing it. It's not an attribute of the person making the argument.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 11 '12 at 16:03
In some contexts, words like pedantic or nitpicky might work, but these don't actually mean "argumentative for argument's sake"; rather, they serve to "[indicate] that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate."
– Marthaª
Jan 11 '12 at 17:44
In some contexts, words like pedantic or nitpicky might work, but these don't actually mean "argumentative for argument's sake"; rather, they serve to "[indicate] that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate."
– Marthaª
Jan 11 '12 at 17:44
Another fine word, though slightly off the mark, would be pettifogging.
– Zairja
Sep 7 '12 at 20:32
Another fine word, though slightly off the mark, would be pettifogging.
– Zairja
Sep 7 '12 at 20:32
add a comment |
9 Answers
9
active
oldest
votes
Quarrelsome might be appropriate.
"apt or disposed to quarrel in an often petty manner"
answered Jan 11 '12 at 17:36
tomasattomasat
42623
Nice answer, I've accepted this because a quarrel implies an angry disagreement, not just a civil one.
– Jez
Jan 11 '12 at 19:01
add a comment |
The word you use in your question, argumentative, can be used to express what you want to say. An alternative could be contentious, meaning (for a person) liking to argue.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
IreneIrene
11.7k12845
add a comment |
The type of person you would be is a contrarian, and this word has some currency with Christopher Hitchens. The adjective is contrary, emphasis on the second syllable, as in
the nursery rhyme, but this may be mostly BrE.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:36
cindicindi
4,86162849
1
Alternately, if it's someone who always picks the other side whether or not they really believe in it, they're "playing Devil's advocate", a phrase which historically derives from a role in canonization of Roman Catholic saints where a priest would be charged to try to find mundane explanations for the miracles so that enthusiasm wouldn't lead to someone being canonized incorrectly.
– Sean Duggan
Jan 11 '12 at 14:43
Ditto Sean. To be "contrary" or a "contrarian" means someone who will disagree with others just to be annoying. Like if you say it's good, I'll say it's bad; if you say it's new, I'll say it's old, etc. To be "contentious" or "argumentative" is to like to argue, but this is normally understood as arguing for a position one really believes in, not just always taking the opposite side from the last speaker.
– Jay
Jan 11 '12 at 17:57
add a comment |
Eristic, from classical Greek, means to argue with no goal in mind. As the philosopher Gilbert Ryle points out, "the eristic preoccupation with victory displaces any commitment to truth."
answered Jul 11 '13 at 12:51
Kevin HillKevin Hill
311
Can you cite a reliable reference? I'm finding it confusing that "eristic" means to argue with no goal in mind, but in the context of your example there is a clear goal (victory).
– MetaEd♦
Jul 11 '13 at 13:24
add a comment |
I think applied to a person, argumentative, disputatious, truculent, contentious and many similar words normally mean inclined to argue, in the same way that bullying, intimidating, domineering mean inclined to dominate.
But people of such inclinations don't normally expect/appreciate the same thing being done back to them, whereas OP's “argumentative for argument's sake” (and the example context, putting aside the fact that it involves negation) seem to imply actively seeking a "two-way" disagreement.
I'd call that provocative, in the sense of seeking to provoke a reaction/argument.
answered Nov 1 '12 at 0:53
FumbleFingersFumbleFingers
119k32243423
add a comment |
The Argumentative Indian
Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has written on 'the argumentative Indian', giving currency to the definition of argumentative. [The use here is with a positive connotation of public debate and intellectual pluralism.]
Need better testimonials?
For especially neutral/ negative connotations, try polemical.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
KrisKris
32.5k541117
3
"Polemical" does not mean argumentative for argument's sake. It means aggressive in argument.
– MetaEd♦
Jan 11 '12 at 15:39
@MetaEd Synonyms: contentious, controversial, disputatious, argumentative (also polemic), quarrelsome, scrappy Antonyms: noncontroversial, safe, uncontroversial [from my reference above.]
– Kris
Jan 12 '12 at 4:44
add a comment |
Arguements are
Giberish
The email I use replaces xxxxxxxxx1602, it was compromised!
answered 13 mins ago
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonaldWarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald
1
New contributor
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
What about cavil or cavilling?
answered Oct 31 '12 at 22:58
nick mathisnick mathis
1
3
This answer would benefit from a little expansion on what cavil means, why you think it would fit, and perhaps a link to a dictionary definition.
– Kit Z. Fox♦
Oct 31 '12 at 23:39
add a comment |
Polemical doesn't mean " .. aggressive in argument", absolutely not. Maybe have a look at Plato and the Socratic method, the Socratic movement for a better understanding of a polemic?
I like "eristic" and "contrary" in the case I needed to find a suitable word for someone who was just being bl@@dy minded in his / her comments and methods with no likely positive nor favourable outcome.
Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face also fits.
answered Jul 26 '18 at 8:50
Tim FisherTim Fisher
1
1
Welcome to English Stack Exchange. Like all Stack Exchange sites this is a Q&A site, not a discussion forum. As such anything posted in the Answer box must answer the Question. Your post seems to be a series of comments on other people's answers.
– AndyT
Jul 26 '18 at 10:04
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f54360%2fadjective-meaning-argumentative-for-arguments-sake%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
9 Answers
9
active
oldest
votes
9 Answers
9
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Quarrelsome might be appropriate.
"apt or disposed to quarrel in an often petty manner"
answered Jan 11 '12 at 17:36
tomasattomasat
42623
Nice answer, I've accepted this because a quarrel implies an angry disagreement, not just a civil one.
– Jez
Jan 11 '12 at 19:01
add a comment |
Quarrelsome might be appropriate.
"apt or disposed to quarrel in an often petty manner"
answered Jan 11 '12 at 17:36
tomasattomasat
42623
Nice answer, I've accepted this because a quarrel implies an angry disagreement, not just a civil one.
– Jez
Jan 11 '12 at 19:01
add a comment |
Quarrelsome might be appropriate.
"apt or disposed to quarrel in an often petty manner"
answered Jan 11 '12 at 17:36
tomasattomasat
42623
Quarrelsome might be appropriate.
"apt or disposed to quarrel in an often petty manner"
answered Jan 11 '12 at 17:36
tomasattomasat
42623
answered Jan 11 '12 at 17:36
tomasattomasat
42623
answered Jan 11 '12 at 17:36
tomasattomasat
42623
answered Jan 11 '12 at 17:36
tomasattomasat
42623
42623
Nice answer, I've accepted this because a quarrel implies an angry disagreement, not just a civil one.
– Jez
Jan 11 '12 at 19:01
add a comment |
Nice answer, I've accepted this because a quarrel implies an angry disagreement, not just a civil one.
– Jez
Jan 11 '12 at 19:01
Nice answer, I've accepted this because a quarrel implies an angry disagreement, not just a civil one.
– Jez
Jan 11 '12 at 19:01
Nice answer, I've accepted this because a quarrel implies an angry disagreement, not just a civil one.
– Jez
Jan 11 '12 at 19:01
add a comment |
The word you use in your question, argumentative, can be used to express what you want to say. An alternative could be contentious, meaning (for a person) liking to argue.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
IreneIrene
11.7k12845
add a comment |
The word you use in your question, argumentative, can be used to express what you want to say. An alternative could be contentious, meaning (for a person) liking to argue.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
IreneIrene
11.7k12845
add a comment |
The word you use in your question, argumentative, can be used to express what you want to say. An alternative could be contentious, meaning (for a person) liking to argue.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
IreneIrene
11.7k12845
The word you use in your question, argumentative, can be used to express what you want to say. An alternative could be contentious, meaning (for a person) liking to argue.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
IreneIrene
11.7k12845
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
IreneIrene
11.7k12845
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
IreneIrene
11.7k12845
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
IreneIrene
11.7k12845
11.7k12845
add a comment |
add a comment |
The type of person you would be is a contrarian, and this word has some currency with Christopher Hitchens. The adjective is contrary, emphasis on the second syllable, as in
the nursery rhyme, but this may be mostly BrE.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:36
cindicindi
4,86162849
1
Alternately, if it's someone who always picks the other side whether or not they really believe in it, they're "playing Devil's advocate", a phrase which historically derives from a role in canonization of Roman Catholic saints where a priest would be charged to try to find mundane explanations for the miracles so that enthusiasm wouldn't lead to someone being canonized incorrectly.
– Sean Duggan
Jan 11 '12 at 14:43
Ditto Sean. To be "contrary" or a "contrarian" means someone who will disagree with others just to be annoying. Like if you say it's good, I'll say it's bad; if you say it's new, I'll say it's old, etc. To be "contentious" or "argumentative" is to like to argue, but this is normally understood as arguing for a position one really believes in, not just always taking the opposite side from the last speaker.
– Jay
Jan 11 '12 at 17:57
add a comment |
The type of person you would be is a contrarian, and this word has some currency with Christopher Hitchens. The adjective is contrary, emphasis on the second syllable, as in
the nursery rhyme, but this may be mostly BrE.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:36
cindicindi
4,86162849
1
Alternately, if it's someone who always picks the other side whether or not they really believe in it, they're "playing Devil's advocate", a phrase which historically derives from a role in canonization of Roman Catholic saints where a priest would be charged to try to find mundane explanations for the miracles so that enthusiasm wouldn't lead to someone being canonized incorrectly.
– Sean Duggan
Jan 11 '12 at 14:43
Ditto Sean. To be "contrary" or a "contrarian" means someone who will disagree with others just to be annoying. Like if you say it's good, I'll say it's bad; if you say it's new, I'll say it's old, etc. To be "contentious" or "argumentative" is to like to argue, but this is normally understood as arguing for a position one really believes in, not just always taking the opposite side from the last speaker.
– Jay
Jan 11 '12 at 17:57
add a comment |
The type of person you would be is a contrarian, and this word has some currency with Christopher Hitchens. The adjective is contrary, emphasis on the second syllable, as in
the nursery rhyme, but this may be mostly BrE.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:36
cindicindi
4,86162849
The type of person you would be is a contrarian, and this word has some currency with Christopher Hitchens. The adjective is contrary, emphasis on the second syllable, as in
the nursery rhyme, but this may be mostly BrE.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:36
cindicindi
4,86162849
edited Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
user2683
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:36
cindicindi
4,86162849
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:36
cindicindi
4,86162849
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:36
cindicindi
4,86162849
4,86162849
1
Alternately, if it's someone who always picks the other side whether or not they really believe in it, they're "playing Devil's advocate", a phrase which historically derives from a role in canonization of Roman Catholic saints where a priest would be charged to try to find mundane explanations for the miracles so that enthusiasm wouldn't lead to someone being canonized incorrectly.
– Sean Duggan
Jan 11 '12 at 14:43
Ditto Sean. To be "contrary" or a "contrarian" means someone who will disagree with others just to be annoying. Like if you say it's good, I'll say it's bad; if you say it's new, I'll say it's old, etc. To be "contentious" or "argumentative" is to like to argue, but this is normally understood as arguing for a position one really believes in, not just always taking the opposite side from the last speaker.
– Jay
Jan 11 '12 at 17:57
add a comment |
1
Alternately, if it's someone who always picks the other side whether or not they really believe in it, they're "playing Devil's advocate", a phrase which historically derives from a role in canonization of Roman Catholic saints where a priest would be charged to try to find mundane explanations for the miracles so that enthusiasm wouldn't lead to someone being canonized incorrectly.
– Sean Duggan
Jan 11 '12 at 14:43
Ditto Sean. To be "contrary" or a "contrarian" means someone who will disagree with others just to be annoying. Like if you say it's good, I'll say it's bad; if you say it's new, I'll say it's old, etc. To be "contentious" or "argumentative" is to like to argue, but this is normally understood as arguing for a position one really believes in, not just always taking the opposite side from the last speaker.
– Jay
Jan 11 '12 at 17:57
1
1
Alternately, if it's someone who always picks the other side whether or not they really believe in it, they're "playing Devil's advocate", a phrase which historically derives from a role in canonization of Roman Catholic saints where a priest would be charged to try to find mundane explanations for the miracles so that enthusiasm wouldn't lead to someone being canonized incorrectly.
– Sean Duggan
Jan 11 '12 at 14:43
Alternately, if it's someone who always picks the other side whether or not they really believe in it, they're "playing Devil's advocate", a phrase which historically derives from a role in canonization of Roman Catholic saints where a priest would be charged to try to find mundane explanations for the miracles so that enthusiasm wouldn't lead to someone being canonized incorrectly.
– Sean Duggan
Jan 11 '12 at 14:43
Ditto Sean. To be "contrary" or a "contrarian" means someone who will disagree with others just to be annoying. Like if you say it's good, I'll say it's bad; if you say it's new, I'll say it's old, etc. To be "contentious" or "argumentative" is to like to argue, but this is normally understood as arguing for a position one really believes in, not just always taking the opposite side from the last speaker.
– Jay
Jan 11 '12 at 17:57
Ditto Sean. To be "contrary" or a "contrarian" means someone who will disagree with others just to be annoying. Like if you say it's good, I'll say it's bad; if you say it's new, I'll say it's old, etc. To be "contentious" or "argumentative" is to like to argue, but this is normally understood as arguing for a position one really believes in, not just always taking the opposite side from the last speaker.
– Jay
Jan 11 '12 at 17:57
add a comment |
Eristic, from classical Greek, means to argue with no goal in mind. As the philosopher Gilbert Ryle points out, "the eristic preoccupation with victory displaces any commitment to truth."
answered Jul 11 '13 at 12:51
Kevin HillKevin Hill
311
Can you cite a reliable reference? I'm finding it confusing that "eristic" means to argue with no goal in mind, but in the context of your example there is a clear goal (victory).
– MetaEd♦
Jul 11 '13 at 13:24
add a comment |
Eristic, from classical Greek, means to argue with no goal in mind. As the philosopher Gilbert Ryle points out, "the eristic preoccupation with victory displaces any commitment to truth."
answered Jul 11 '13 at 12:51
Kevin HillKevin Hill
311
Can you cite a reliable reference? I'm finding it confusing that "eristic" means to argue with no goal in mind, but in the context of your example there is a clear goal (victory).
– MetaEd♦
Jul 11 '13 at 13:24
add a comment |
Eristic, from classical Greek, means to argue with no goal in mind. As the philosopher Gilbert Ryle points out, "the eristic preoccupation with victory displaces any commitment to truth."
answered Jul 11 '13 at 12:51
Kevin HillKevin Hill
311
Eristic, from classical Greek, means to argue with no goal in mind. As the philosopher Gilbert Ryle points out, "the eristic preoccupation with victory displaces any commitment to truth."
answered Jul 11 '13 at 12:51
Kevin HillKevin Hill
311
answered Jul 11 '13 at 12:51
Kevin HillKevin Hill
311
answered Jul 11 '13 at 12:51
Kevin HillKevin Hill
311
answered Jul 11 '13 at 12:51
Kevin HillKevin Hill
311
311
Can you cite a reliable reference? I'm finding it confusing that "eristic" means to argue with no goal in mind, but in the context of your example there is a clear goal (victory).
– MetaEd♦
Jul 11 '13 at 13:24
add a comment |
Can you cite a reliable reference? I'm finding it confusing that "eristic" means to argue with no goal in mind, but in the context of your example there is a clear goal (victory).
– MetaEd♦
Jul 11 '13 at 13:24
Can you cite a reliable reference? I'm finding it confusing that "eristic" means to argue with no goal in mind, but in the context of your example there is a clear goal (victory).
– MetaEd♦
Jul 11 '13 at 13:24
Can you cite a reliable reference? I'm finding it confusing that "eristic" means to argue with no goal in mind, but in the context of your example there is a clear goal (victory).
– MetaEd♦
Jul 11 '13 at 13:24
add a comment |
I think applied to a person, argumentative, disputatious, truculent, contentious and many similar words normally mean inclined to argue, in the same way that bullying, intimidating, domineering mean inclined to dominate.
But people of such inclinations don't normally expect/appreciate the same thing being done back to them, whereas OP's “argumentative for argument's sake” (and the example context, putting aside the fact that it involves negation) seem to imply actively seeking a "two-way" disagreement.
I'd call that provocative, in the sense of seeking to provoke a reaction/argument.
answered Nov 1 '12 at 0:53
FumbleFingersFumbleFingers
119k32243423
add a comment |
I think applied to a person, argumentative, disputatious, truculent, contentious and many similar words normally mean inclined to argue, in the same way that bullying, intimidating, domineering mean inclined to dominate.
But people of such inclinations don't normally expect/appreciate the same thing being done back to them, whereas OP's “argumentative for argument's sake” (and the example context, putting aside the fact that it involves negation) seem to imply actively seeking a "two-way" disagreement.
I'd call that provocative, in the sense of seeking to provoke a reaction/argument.
answered Nov 1 '12 at 0:53
FumbleFingersFumbleFingers
119k32243423
add a comment |
I think applied to a person, argumentative, disputatious, truculent, contentious and many similar words normally mean inclined to argue, in the same way that bullying, intimidating, domineering mean inclined to dominate.
But people of such inclinations don't normally expect/appreciate the same thing being done back to them, whereas OP's “argumentative for argument's sake” (and the example context, putting aside the fact that it involves negation) seem to imply actively seeking a "two-way" disagreement.
I'd call that provocative, in the sense of seeking to provoke a reaction/argument.
answered Nov 1 '12 at 0:53
FumbleFingersFumbleFingers
119k32243423
I think applied to a person, argumentative, disputatious, truculent, contentious and many similar words normally mean inclined to argue, in the same way that bullying, intimidating, domineering mean inclined to dominate.
But people of such inclinations don't normally expect/appreciate the same thing being done back to them, whereas OP's “argumentative for argument's sake” (and the example context, putting aside the fact that it involves negation) seem to imply actively seeking a "two-way" disagreement.
I'd call that provocative, in the sense of seeking to provoke a reaction/argument.
answered Nov 1 '12 at 0:53
FumbleFingersFumbleFingers
119k32243423
answered Nov 1 '12 at 0:53
FumbleFingersFumbleFingers
119k32243423
answered Nov 1 '12 at 0:53
FumbleFingersFumbleFingers
119k32243423
answered Nov 1 '12 at 0:53
FumbleFingersFumbleFingers
119k32243423
119k32243423
add a comment |
add a comment |
The Argumentative Indian
Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has written on 'the argumentative Indian', giving currency to the definition of argumentative. [The use here is with a positive connotation of public debate and intellectual pluralism.]
Need better testimonials?
For especially neutral/ negative connotations, try polemical.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
KrisKris
32.5k541117
3
"Polemical" does not mean argumentative for argument's sake. It means aggressive in argument.
– MetaEd♦
Jan 11 '12 at 15:39
@MetaEd Synonyms: contentious, controversial, disputatious, argumentative (also polemic), quarrelsome, scrappy Antonyms: noncontroversial, safe, uncontroversial [from my reference above.]
– Kris
Jan 12 '12 at 4:44
add a comment |
The Argumentative Indian
Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has written on 'the argumentative Indian', giving currency to the definition of argumentative. [The use here is with a positive connotation of public debate and intellectual pluralism.]
Need better testimonials?
For especially neutral/ negative connotations, try polemical.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
KrisKris
32.5k541117
3
"Polemical" does not mean argumentative for argument's sake. It means aggressive in argument.
– MetaEd♦
Jan 11 '12 at 15:39
@MetaEd Synonyms: contentious, controversial, disputatious, argumentative (also polemic), quarrelsome, scrappy Antonyms: noncontroversial, safe, uncontroversial [from my reference above.]
– Kris
Jan 12 '12 at 4:44
add a comment |
The Argumentative Indian
Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has written on 'the argumentative Indian', giving currency to the definition of argumentative. [The use here is with a positive connotation of public debate and intellectual pluralism.]
Need better testimonials?
For especially neutral/ negative connotations, try polemical.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
KrisKris
32.5k541117
The Argumentative Indian
Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has written on 'the argumentative Indian', giving currency to the definition of argumentative. [The use here is with a positive connotation of public debate and intellectual pluralism.]
Need better testimonials?
For especially neutral/ negative connotations, try polemical.
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
KrisKris
32.5k541117
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
KrisKris
32.5k541117
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
KrisKris
32.5k541117
answered Jan 11 '12 at 10:41
KrisKris
32.5k541117
32.5k541117
3
"Polemical" does not mean argumentative for argument's sake. It means aggressive in argument.
– MetaEd♦
Jan 11 '12 at 15:39
@MetaEd Synonyms: contentious, controversial, disputatious, argumentative (also polemic), quarrelsome, scrappy Antonyms: noncontroversial, safe, uncontroversial [from my reference above.]
– Kris
Jan 12 '12 at 4:44
add a comment |
3
"Polemical" does not mean argumentative for argument's sake. It means aggressive in argument.
– MetaEd♦
Jan 11 '12 at 15:39
@MetaEd Synonyms: contentious, controversial, disputatious, argumentative (also polemic), quarrelsome, scrappy Antonyms: noncontroversial, safe, uncontroversial [from my reference above.]
– Kris
Jan 12 '12 at 4:44
3
3
"Polemical" does not mean argumentative for argument's sake. It means aggressive in argument.
– MetaEd♦
Jan 11 '12 at 15:39
"Polemical" does not mean argumentative for argument's sake. It means aggressive in argument.
– MetaEd♦
Jan 11 '12 at 15:39
@MetaEd Synonyms: contentious, controversial, disputatious, argumentative (also polemic), quarrelsome, scrappy Antonyms: noncontroversial, safe, uncontroversial [from my reference above.]
– Kris
Jan 12 '12 at 4:44
@MetaEd Synonyms: contentious, controversial, disputatious, argumentative (also polemic), quarrelsome, scrappy Antonyms: noncontroversial, safe, uncontroversial [from my reference above.]
– Kris
Jan 12 '12 at 4:44
add a comment |
Arguements are
Giberish
The email I use replaces xxxxxxxxx1602, it was compromised!
answered 13 mins ago
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonaldWarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald
1
New contributor
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Arguements are
Giberish
The email I use replaces xxxxxxxxx1602, it was compromised!
answered 13 mins ago
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonaldWarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald
1
New contributor
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Arguements are
Giberish
The email I use replaces xxxxxxxxx1602, it was compromised!
answered 13 mins ago
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonaldWarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald
1
New contributor
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Arguements are
Giberish
The email I use replaces xxxxxxxxx1602, it was compromised!
answered 13 mins ago
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonaldWarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald
1
New contributor
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 13 mins ago
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonaldWarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald
1
New contributor
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 13 mins ago
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonaldWarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald
1
answered 13 mins ago
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonaldWarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald
1
1
New contributor
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
WarrenAnd Felyrose McDonald is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
What about cavil or cavilling?
answered Oct 31 '12 at 22:58
nick mathisnick mathis
1
3
This answer would benefit from a little expansion on what cavil means, why you think it would fit, and perhaps a link to a dictionary definition.
– Kit Z. Fox♦
Oct 31 '12 at 23:39
add a comment |
What about cavil or cavilling?
answered Oct 31 '12 at 22:58
nick mathisnick mathis
1
3
This answer would benefit from a little expansion on what cavil means, why you think it would fit, and perhaps a link to a dictionary definition.
– Kit Z. Fox♦
Oct 31 '12 at 23:39
add a comment |
What about cavil or cavilling?
answered Oct 31 '12 at 22:58
nick mathisnick mathis
1
What about cavil or cavilling?
answered Oct 31 '12 at 22:58
nick mathisnick mathis
1
answered Oct 31 '12 at 22:58
nick mathisnick mathis
1
answered Oct 31 '12 at 22:58
nick mathisnick mathis
1
answered Oct 31 '12 at 22:58
nick mathisnick mathis
1
1
3
This answer would benefit from a little expansion on what cavil means, why you think it would fit, and perhaps a link to a dictionary definition.
– Kit Z. Fox♦
Oct 31 '12 at 23:39
add a comment |
3
This answer would benefit from a little expansion on what cavil means, why you think it would fit, and perhaps a link to a dictionary definition.
– Kit Z. Fox♦
Oct 31 '12 at 23:39
3
3
This answer would benefit from a little expansion on what cavil means, why you think it would fit, and perhaps a link to a dictionary definition.
– Kit Z. Fox♦
Oct 31 '12 at 23:39
This answer would benefit from a little expansion on what cavil means, why you think it would fit, and perhaps a link to a dictionary definition.
– Kit Z. Fox♦
Oct 31 '12 at 23:39
add a comment |
Polemical doesn't mean " .. aggressive in argument", absolutely not. Maybe have a look at Plato and the Socratic method, the Socratic movement for a better understanding of a polemic?
I like "eristic" and "contrary" in the case I needed to find a suitable word for someone who was just being bl@@dy minded in his / her comments and methods with no likely positive nor favourable outcome.
Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face also fits.
answered Jul 26 '18 at 8:50
Tim FisherTim Fisher
1
1
Welcome to English Stack Exchange. Like all Stack Exchange sites this is a Q&A site, not a discussion forum. As such anything posted in the Answer box must answer the Question. Your post seems to be a series of comments on other people's answers.
– AndyT
Jul 26 '18 at 10:04
add a comment |
Polemical doesn't mean " .. aggressive in argument", absolutely not. Maybe have a look at Plato and the Socratic method, the Socratic movement for a better understanding of a polemic?
I like "eristic" and "contrary" in the case I needed to find a suitable word for someone who was just being bl@@dy minded in his / her comments and methods with no likely positive nor favourable outcome.
Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face also fits.
answered Jul 26 '18 at 8:50
Tim FisherTim Fisher
1
1
Welcome to English Stack Exchange. Like all Stack Exchange sites this is a Q&A site, not a discussion forum. As such anything posted in the Answer box must answer the Question. Your post seems to be a series of comments on other people's answers.
– AndyT
Jul 26 '18 at 10:04
add a comment |
Polemical doesn't mean " .. aggressive in argument", absolutely not. Maybe have a look at Plato and the Socratic method, the Socratic movement for a better understanding of a polemic?
I like "eristic" and "contrary" in the case I needed to find a suitable word for someone who was just being bl@@dy minded in his / her comments and methods with no likely positive nor favourable outcome.
Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face also fits.
answered Jul 26 '18 at 8:50
Tim FisherTim Fisher
1
Polemical doesn't mean " .. aggressive in argument", absolutely not. Maybe have a look at Plato and the Socratic method, the Socratic movement for a better understanding of a polemic?
I like "eristic" and "contrary" in the case I needed to find a suitable word for someone who was just being bl@@dy minded in his / her comments and methods with no likely positive nor favourable outcome.
Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face also fits.
answered Jul 26 '18 at 8:50
Tim FisherTim Fisher
1
answered Jul 26 '18 at 8:50
Tim FisherTim Fisher
1
answered Jul 26 '18 at 8:50
Tim FisherTim Fisher
1
answered Jul 26 '18 at 8:50
Tim FisherTim Fisher
1
1
1
Welcome to English Stack Exchange. Like all Stack Exchange sites this is a Q&A site, not a discussion forum. As such anything posted in the Answer box must answer the Question. Your post seems to be a series of comments on other people's answers.
– AndyT
Jul 26 '18 at 10:04
add a comment |
1
Welcome to English Stack Exchange. Like all Stack Exchange sites this is a Q&A site, not a discussion forum. As such anything posted in the Answer box must answer the Question. Your post seems to be a series of comments on other people's answers.
– AndyT
Jul 26 '18 at 10:04
1
1
Welcome to English Stack Exchange. Like all Stack Exchange sites this is a Q&A site, not a discussion forum. As such anything posted in the Answer box must answer the Question. Your post seems to be a series of comments on other people's answers.
– AndyT
Jul 26 '18 at 10:04
Welcome to English Stack Exchange. Like all Stack Exchange sites this is a Q&A site, not a discussion forum. As such anything posted in the Answer box must answer the Question. Your post seems to be a series of comments on other people's answers.
– AndyT
Jul 26 '18 at 10:04
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f54360%2fadjective-meaning-argumentative-for-arguments-sake%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
@WillHunting: argumentative does not already have a negative connotation. That impression is due to an indiscriminate usage I suppose.
– Kris
Jan 11 '12 at 10:54
2
The standard idiomatic usage is argument for argument's sake, which applies to the proposition being advanced, or the act of advancing it. It's not an attribute of the person making the argument.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 11 '12 at 16:03
In some contexts, words like pedantic or nitpicky might work, but these don't actually mean "argumentative for argument's sake"; rather, they serve to "[indicate] that your argument is necessary and not intended to irritate."
– Marthaª
Jan 11 '12 at 17:44
Another fine word, though slightly off the mark, would be pettifogging.
– Zairja
Sep 7 '12 at 20:32