terms of debate

English translation: conceptual framework within which the debate is conducted

GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
English term or phrase:terms of debate
Selected answer:conceptual framework within which the debate is conducted
Entered by: Charles Davis

16:22 Apr 8, 2014
English language (monolingual) [PRO]
International Org/Dev/Coop
English term or phrase: terms of debate
"The increasing internationalization of the economy in recent years has exacerbated these problems. If states (or, at least, most states) no longer wield sufficient power to bring about radical change, the traditional terms of debate about level are anachronistic, and need to be recast in relation to the supranational, national, regional, and local."

Its conditions or working definitions?
MF Kalfat
Local time: 09:02
conceptual framework within which the debate is conducted
Explanation:
To my mind this is the meaning. The terms of debate involve not only how things are discussed but what is discussed: what is included in the debate. They mark out the territory of the debate, as it were: what is included and how it is conceptualised: that is, how the ideas involved are organised into a scheme or structure that allows participants to focus, develop and resolve their areas of disagreement.

In the case before us, the terms of debate involve the question of national versus international levels of action and influence. It is no longer any use just arguing about what nation states should be doing; the conceptual framework of the debate needs to be widened to address a higher or wider international level.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 hrs (2014-04-09 05:53:06 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

With great respect, I don't think that the conceptual framework of the debate is just a different way of saying the way things are discussed; I think it's a distinct idea, which is why I posted it. As I've said, when the terms of debate are changed, it's doesn't just mean that the same matters are discussed in a different way; it often means that concepts that were previously ignored or downplayed are now taken into account or foregrounded. In a formal debate, it would be a matter of debating a different motion, and addressing it from different points of view.
Selected response from:

Charles Davis
Spain
Local time: 09:02
Grading comment
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer



SUMMARY OF ALL EXPLANATIONS PROVIDED
4 +4conceptual framework within which the debate is conducted
Charles Davis
4 +2the usual way of discussing these notions or ideas
Yvonne Gallagher
4criteria for judging the validity of an argument
B D Finch
Summary of reference entries provided
terms of debate
liz askew

  

Answers


48 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +2
the usual way of discussing these notions or ideas


Explanation:
traditional terms of debate about level are anachronistic

so new ways of discussing these things are needed taking

" supranational, national, regional, and local" into account


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 57 mins (2014-04-08 17:20:27 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

so yes, you could say
how the debate is to be defined, what are the themes and viewpoints that may be considered as valid
in other words, it is not necessarily about two opposing views but could encompass many, equally valid ones

However, the ideas up for discussion may need to be redefined ...


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2014-04-08 17:24:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

each type of debate will have different ways of arguing points and different means of arriving at concensus or indeed whether this is required ...
where we are now and where we want to be...

http://chadlupkes.blogspot.ie/2007/07/economic-theory-terms-...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2014-04-08 17:32:27 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://books.google.ie/books?id=Mr_GsUL5AKgC&pg=PA16&lpg=PA1...

Yvonne Gallagher
Ireland
Local time: 08:02
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 16

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  liz askew
4 hrs
  -> Many thanks Liz:-)

agree  Tina Vonhof (X): I agree but I think Charles has provided a better wording.
5 hrs
  -> Thanks! C. had an extra few hours to formulate nicer wording, but Asker had understood it anyway:-)
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
criteria for judging the validity of an argument


Explanation:
These define the scope of the debate, what sort of arguments can be put forward and how one judges the validity of those arguments.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2014-04-08 18:12:53 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

http://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/96ssm.html
"By contrast, the terms of the debate are seldom analysed themselves. In other words, the usual frameworks for drug discourse are typically taken for granted rather than critically examined.

Why is it, for example, that most of the debate about marijuana is about potential physical and social harm and whether the drug should be illegal, decriminalised or legal? Is it possible to imagine instead that the debate could be over the benefits (pain relief, pleasure, greater insights) and regulation of different varieties? Why is it that most of the debate over drugs in sport concerns hazards and fairness? Is it possible to imagine that the debate instead could be over appropriate regimens to maximise safety in sport? At a meta level, why is it that such questions are so seldom asked?

Our aim in this paper is to make the point that debates about drugs are socially constructed. The terms of debates are not "natural"; that is, they are not a simple reflection of the properties of the drug itself. Instead, we argue, debates reflect the nature of society, especially the influence of the groups with the greatest power over the perception and deployment of the drug in question. More precisely, debates reflect a complex process of interaction between social power and the properties of drugs."



B D Finch
France
Local time: 09:02
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: English
PRO pts in category: 8

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
neutral  liz askew: I don't think it is about this at all.
3 hrs
  -> Why not? Though I do think that Charles has expressed it better.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

4 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +4
conceptual framework within which the debate is conducted


Explanation:
To my mind this is the meaning. The terms of debate involve not only how things are discussed but what is discussed: what is included in the debate. They mark out the territory of the debate, as it were: what is included and how it is conceptualised: that is, how the ideas involved are organised into a scheme or structure that allows participants to focus, develop and resolve their areas of disagreement.

In the case before us, the terms of debate involve the question of national versus international levels of action and influence. It is no longer any use just arguing about what nation states should be doing; the conceptual framework of the debate needs to be widened to address a higher or wider international level.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 hrs (2014-04-09 05:53:06 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

With great respect, I don't think that the conceptual framework of the debate is just a different way of saying the way things are discussed; I think it's a distinct idea, which is why I posted it. As I've said, when the terms of debate are changed, it's doesn't just mean that the same matters are discussed in a different way; it often means that concepts that were previously ignored or downplayed are now taken into account or foregrounded. In a formal debate, it would be a matter of debating a different motion, and addressing it from different points of view.

Charles Davis
Spain
Local time: 09:02
Native speaker of: English
PRO pts in category: 4

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  liz askew
40 mins
  -> Thanks, Liz!

agree  Tina Vonhof (X)
2 hrs
  -> Thanks, Tina!

agree  B D Finch: A better way of expressing it.
11 hrs
  -> Thanks very much.

agree  Phong Le
1 day 13 hrs
  -> Thanks, Phong Le :)
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Reference comments


14 mins
Reference: terms of debate

Reference information:
A language readily appreciated by the audience/participants and where there are common understandings

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 15 mins (2014-04-08 16:38:12 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

current terms of debate can also confuse

see

http://uofadebate.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/debate-termino...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 16 mins (2014-04-08 16:39:27 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

if all participants are to understand, best to avoid "jargon", IMHO

liz askew
United Kingdom
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)



Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.

KudoZ™ translation help

The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.


See also:
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search