Instruct: Given a question, retrieve relevant passages that can help answer the question.
Query: When is the dialectical method used?
Dialectic or dialectics (Greek: διαλεκτική, dialektikḗ; related to dialogue), also known as the dialectical method, is at base a discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject but wishing to establish the truth through reasoned arguments. Dialectic resembles debate, but the concept excludes subjective elements such as emotional appeal and the modern pejorative sense of rhetoric.[1][2] Dialectic may be contrasted with the didactic method, wherein one side of the conversation teaches the other. Dialectic is alternatively known as minor logic, as opposed to major logic or critique.
In its most common form, argumentation involves an individual and an interlocutor or opponent engaged in dialogue, each contending differing positions and trying to persuade each other. Other types of dialogue in addition to persuasion are eristic, information seeking, inquiry, negotiation, deliberation, and the dialectical method (Douglas Walton). The dialectical method was made famous by Plato and his use of Socrates critically questioning various characters and historical figures.
The famous dialectical process of thesis-antithesis-synthesis has been controversially attributed to Hegel. 
Regardless of (ongoing) academic controversy regarding the significance of a unique dialectical method in Hegel's writings, it is true, as Professor Howard Kainz (1996) affirms, that there are "thousands of triads" in Hegel's writings. Importantly, instead of using the famous terminology that originated with Kant and was elaborated by J. G. Fichte, Hegel used an entirely different and more accurate terminology for dialectical (or as Hegel called them, 'speculative') triads.
Popper believed that Marxism had been initially scientific, in that Marx had postulated a theory which was genuinely predictive. When Marx's predictions were not in fact borne out, Popper argues that the theory was saved from falsification by the addition of "ad hoc" hypotheses which attempted to make it compatible with the facts. By this means, a theory which was initially genuinely scientific degenerated into pseudoscientific dogma. Popper agreed on the general non-falsifiability of the social sciences, but instead used it as an argument against central planning and all-encompassing historiographical ideologies. Popper devoted much attention to dissecting the practice of using the dialectic in defence of Marxist thought, which was the very strategy employed by V.A. Lektorsky in his defence of Marxism against Popper's criticisms. Among Popper's conclusions was that Marxists used dialectic as a method of side-stepping and evading criticisms, rather than actually answering or addressing them: Hegel thought that philosophy develops; yet his own system was to remain the last and highest stage of this development and could not be superseded. The Marxists adopted the same attitude towards the Marxian system. Hence, Marx's anti-dogmatic attitude exists only in the theory and not in the practice of orthodox Marxism, and dialectic is used by Marxists, following the example of Engels' Anti-Dühring, mainly for the purposes of apologetics – to defend the Marxist system against criticism. As a rule critics are denounced for their failure to understand the dialectic, or proletarian science, or for being traitors. Thanks to dialectic the anti-dogmatic attitude has disappeared, and Marxism has established itself as a dogmatism which is elastic enough, by using its dialectic method, to evade any further attack. It has thus become what I have called reinforced dogmatism.
The little arrow method is an early method for comparing regional dialects. In the little arrows method, researchers begin with a general map of a region, often with traditional linguistic dialect boundaries indicated for reference. Then, informants from several sites are asked how similar they believe the language of other sites is to their own. Sites which participants indicate as being extremely similar are connected by a "little arrow." By gathering responses from several informants and sites, these "little arrows" connect to form networks of related languages. From this information, information on perceptual dialectical boundaries can be drawn. Perceptual dialect categories consist of areas linked together by the "little arrows," and dialect borders are indicated when there are no connections between sites. These informant-perceived categories can then be compared to more traditional linguistic boundaries for further analysis.
Dialect awareness instruction may use the contrastive analysis method to compare and contrast language features.
A translation of "Le Petit Nicolas" by Dominique Caubet uses a phonetic transcription.
Separately, another Latin script transcription method was created by Patrick L. Inglefield and his team of linguists from Peace Corps Tunisia and Indiana University in 1970. Letters in this method can be written in lowercase letters only, and even T and S are not equivalent to t and s as T is used to transcribe /tˤ/ and S is used to transcribe /sˤ/. Moreover, three additional Latin letters are used in this writing method that are 3 (/ʕ/), ø (/ð/) and ħ (/ħ/). Four common English digraphs are used that are dh (/ðˤ/), gh (/ʁ/), th (/tˤ/) and sh (/ʃ/). In order to distinguish the digraphs from the independent letters written like the digraphs, the digraphs are underlined. As for the vowels, they are written as å (glottal stop or /ʔ/), ā (/æ/), ā: (/ɛ:/), a (Short an or /a/), a: (long an or /a:/), i (short i or /i/), i: (long i or /i:/), u (short u or /u/), u: (Long u or /u:/). This method was used in the Peace Corps books about Tunisian Arabic until 1993, when Peace Corps Tunisia became inactive.After years of works on a phonetic transliteration of Tunisian, linguists decided that the transliteration should be mainly syntactic. Timothy Buckwalter created an orthography-based transcription of Arabic texts during his work for Xerox. Buckwalter transcription was created in order to avoid the effect of phoneme simplification of spoken Modern Standard Arabic on the morphological analysis of the language. In 2004, Tunisian linguist Mohamed Maamouri proposed to use the same transliteration for Arabic dialects and mainly Tunisian. This idea was later developed by Nizar Habash and Mona Diab in 2012 into CODA-based Buckwalter transliteration that eliminates phonological simplification in the Arabic dialects through doing comparisons between dialectal structures and their Modern Standard Arabic equivalents.
In 2013, a complete work about the regulations of the use of the Buckwalter transliteration for Tunisian was issued by Ines Zribi and her team from the University of Sfax. In fact, a morphological analysis method and a conventional orthography for Tunisian Arabic using this method were posted by 2014.
However, the method is currently used for computer operations only and it is not used by people, as it involves some ASCII non-alphanumeric graphs as letters, and S, D and T do not correspond respectively to the same phonemes as s, d and t. Furthermore, p does not correspond to /p/ but to ﺓ. Even the modified version of Buckwalter transliteration that was proposed by Nizar Habash et al. in 2007 and that substitute ASCII non-alphanumeric graphs by additional Latin letters did not solve the other problems of the original Buckwalter transliteration. That is why both versions of Buckwalter transliteration were not adopted for daily use in writing Tunisian Arabic and are adopted only for NLP purposes.
The Institute also attempted to reformulate dialectics as a concrete method. The use of such a dialectical method can be traced back to the philosophy of Hegel, who conceived dialectic as the tendency of a notion to pass over into its own negation as the result of conflict between its inherent contradictory aspects. In opposition to previous modes of thought, which viewed things in abstraction, each by itself and as though endowed with fixed properties, Hegelian dialectic has the ability to consider ideas according to their movement and change in time, as well as according to their interrelations and interactions.
The general public can also use Standard Chinese to communicate with mainlanders. When Chams interact with the Hainanese dialect speakers from within Hainan Province, they use the Hainanese dialect, though youngsters generally use Mandarin. Not many can communicate in Li when interacting with the Li, so the Hainanese dialect or Mandarin is often used. In the market place and within the Sanya Municipality, the Cham speakers use Cham among themselves, and when they interact with speakers of other languages, they mostly use the Hainanese dialect. However, in the market places near the government seat of Yanglan Township, the Chams either use the Hainanese dialect or the Mai dialect.
When the United States later took control of Japan's South in World War II, Japanese officials tactically sought to exploit Kagoshima's more northern position, its advancement in shipping technology, and most notably the Satsugū dialect's mutual unintelligibility as a method of cryptographic communication between Japan and Germany. Dozens of international phone calls had been made using the Satsugū dialect, and despite being able to eavesdrop on the conversations being sent back and forth, the United States was unable to determine the language spoken. The use of the Satsugū dialect to further obfuscate communication during both the Second World War and possibly the period of the earlier Satsuma Domain has led to a popular belief that Satsugū was created as an artificial language and promoted for the purpose of being unintelligible in order to thwart enemy spies.
The approach to the reconstruction of Middle Chinese followed by Karlgren and his successors has been to use dialect and Sino-Xenic data in a subsidiary role to fill in sound values for the categories extracted from the rime dictionaries and tables, rather than a full application of the comparative method. All reconstructions of Middle Chinese since Karlgren have followed his approach of beginning with the categories extracted from the rime dictionaries and tables, and using dialect, Sino-Xenic and transcription data to fill in their sound values. Jerry Norman and Weldon South Coblin have criticized this approach, arguing that viewing the dialect data through the rime dictionaries and rime tables distorts the evidence. They argue for a full application of the comparative method to the modern varieties, supplemented by systematic use of transcription data.
Basque has two levels of formality in every dialect, which are hi and zu; Nevertheless, in some areas of Gipuzkoa and Biscay, the respectful form berori is still used by some speakers, just as the familiar xu in some areas of the Eastern Low Navarrese dialect, when addressing children and close friends. Most speakers only use the "zu" form ("zuka" level) and that is the usual one used in methods, slogans... although the "hi" form ("hika") is very common in villages.
The firing up of his country leads us to think that his motivation would have been to glorify the image of Finland. For this reason, he is considered the first Fennoman of Finland. The works of Juslenius, however, were scholarly dissertations which complied with the requirements of academics of the time. The so-called method of dialectics was used in his research, this dialectic configuration counterpoint in the works of Juslenius came from the struggle of two images of Finland. Juslenius appeared to be an advocate of the Finns and he encountered appreciative foreigners on his imaginary soapbox. His mission was to eliminate all of the unfavourable claims against the Finnish people and prove the exact opposite. With the dialectic method, the subject and content were side factors in his research. It was more important to show his scholarliness by using Latin clearly and logically. Finland and its people were the subject of debate in a crowd of others.
For Plato and Aristotle, dialectic involves persuasion, so when Aristotle says that rhetoric is the antistrophe of dialectic, he means that rhetoric as he uses the term has a domain or scope of application that is parallel to, but different from, the domain or scope of application of dialectic. In "Nietzsche Humanist" (1998: 129), Claude Pavur explains that "[t]he Greek prefix 'anti' does not merely designate opposition, but it can also mean 'in place of.'" When Aristotle characterizes rhetoric as the antistrophe of dialectic, he no doubt means that rhetoric is used in place of dialectic when we are discussing civic issues in a court of law or in a legislative assembly. The domain of rhetoric is civic affairs and practical decision making in civic affairs, not theoretical considerations of operational definitions of terms and clarification of thought. These, for him, are in the domain of dialectic.
Chinese number gestures are a method to signify the natural numbers one through ten using one hand. This method may have been developed to bridge the many varieties of Chinese—for example, the numbers 4 () and 10 () are hard to distinguish in some dialects. Some suggest that it was also used by business people during bargaining (i.e., to convey a bid by feeling the hand gesture in a sleeve) when they wish for more privacy in a public place. These gestures are fully integrated into Chinese Sign Language.
The Cirebonese Dermayon dialect is widely used in the area of Indramayu Regency, according to the Guiter's method, the Dermayon dialect have about 30% differences with the Cirebonese language itself. The main characteristic of Dermayon dialect speakers is to use the word ""Reang"" as a term for the word "I" instead of using the word ""Isun"" as those used by Cirebonese language speakers.
Dialectical research may also be thought of as the opposite of empirical research, in that the researcher is working with arguments and ideas, rather than data. Indeed Bertell Ollman (1993) argues that all research is either dialectical or nondialectical. Dialectical research may be applied to a range of problems. For instance, Eli Berniker and David McNabb (2006) argue for the application of dialectical research for the study of organizational processes, and James Page (2008) has used a dialectical research method to develop a philosophy of peace education.
The term "dialect coach" persists as the primary designation for an accent or language coach in the US and Canadian entertainment businesses. However, other designations may also be used. Some dialect coaches will refer to themselves as "dialogue coaches" (or, occasionally, by the historical designation, "dialogue directors"), especially when working on a second language or when offering acting coaching on straight dialogue in the performer's own language or dialect.
Karl Popper has attacked the dialectic repeatedly. In 1937, he wrote and delivered a paper entitled "What Is Dialectic?" in which he attacked the dialectical method for its willingness "to put up with contradictions".[54] Popper concluded the essay with these words: "The whole development of dialectic should be a warning against the dangers inherent in philosophical system-building. It should remind us that philosophy should not be made a basis for any sort of scientific system and that philosophers should be much more modest in their claims. One task which they can fulfill quite usefully is the study of the critical methods of science" (Ibid., p.335).
There is another interpretation of the dialectic, as a method of intuition suggested in The Republic.[9] Simon Blackburn writes that the dialectic in this sense is used to understand "the total process of enlightenment, whereby the philosopher is educated so as to achieve knowledge of the supreme good, the Form of the Good".[10]
Among linguists, the Dialect Grammar has been criticised more than the Dialect Dictionary itself. Wright has been accused of borrowing material from the work of Alexander John Ellis that he had previously criticised. Peter Anderson claimed that Wright did Ellis a "disservice" by criticising the methods used in collecting data, but then using almost identical methods in "English Dialect Grammar" and taking on much of Ellis's data for his own work. Both Peter Anderson and Graham Shorrocks have argued that Wright distorted Ellis's data by using a less precise phonetic notation and using vague geographical areas rather than the precise locations given by Ellis. Helga Koekeritz stated that Wright's information on the Suffolk dialect was almost entirely derived from Ellis, and Warren Maguire has made similar comments about Wright's information on the north-east of England whilst also saying that the Grammar did introduce much new material.
The term "!Kung", or variants thereof, is typically used when considering the dialects to constitute a single language; "Ju" tends to be used when considering them as a small language family. "!Kung" is also sometimes used for the northern/northwestern dialects, as opposed to the well documented "Ju|ʼhoan" dialects in the south(east); however speakers of nearly all dialects call themselves "!Kung". 
For Marx, dialectics is not a formula for generating predetermined outcomes but is a method for the empirical study of social processes in terms of interrelations, development, and transformation. In his introduction to the Penguin edition of Marx's "Capital", Ernest Mandel writes, "When the dialectical method is applied to the study of economic problems, economic phenomena are not viewed separately from each other, by bits and pieces, but in their inner connection as an integrated totality, structured around, and by, a basic predominant mode of production."
The method of internal reconstruction is used to compare patterns within one dialect, without comparison with other dialects and languages, to try to arrive at an understanding of regularities operating at an earlier stage in that dialect. It has also been used to infer information about earlier stages of PIE than can be reached by the comparative method.
In the Transcendental Dialectic, Kant showed how pure reason is improperly used when it is not related to experience. In the Method of Transcendentalism, he explained the proper use of pure reason.