46 Adina Moshavi convince the addressee to withdraw the directive. Since the argument is not conclusive, the addressee may reject the argument and persist with the directive. In the argument cited above, for example, God does not accept Moses’ refusal and continues to persuade him to accept the mission. * ** Examination of the Gen-2 Kgs corpus shows that many RQs express premises in logical arguments. The argument is nearly always designed to establish a negative modal proposition. Modus tollens and denying the antecedent were identified as accounting for the majority of arguments expressed by RQs. The first type is generally intended to deductively establish its conclusion, while the second serves as a presumptive argument designed to shift the burden of proof to the addressee to show that the conclusion is not true. Premises in modus tollens arguments are expressed by yes-no RQs or content RQs, while denying the antecedent almost always involve yes-no RQs. The conclusion in both types of arguments may be expressed by a yk clause, a “why” RQ, or not at all. Although in theory modus tollens is clearly differentiated from the presumptive argument, in practice the distinction is not as clear-cut. The presumptive modus tollens, which is based on a subjective premise, has the effect of challenging the addressee to justify his position. Both modus tollens and denying the antecedent can be effective means of refusing directives. Hebrew Language Department Adina MOSHAVI Hebrew University Mount Scopus, Jerusalem Israel SUMMARY Rhetorical questions (henceforth RQs) often express a premise in a logical argument. Although the use of RQs in arguments has been widely noted, the modes of reasoning underlying the arguments have not received sufficient attention. The present study investigates argumentative RQs in the prose dialogue in Genesis through Kings in the light of pragmatic argumentation theory. Two logical forms, modus tollens and denying the antecedent, are identified as accounting for the majority of arguments expressed by RQs. The first type is generally intended to deductively establish its conclusion, while the second, formally invalid form is used presumptively to challenge the addressee to justify his position. There is also a presumptive variety of the modus tollens argument, which is based on a subjective premise. Both modus tollens and denying the antecedent have similar linguistic representations and can be effective means of refusing directives.