1. 1. Conversational Allegations of Irrelevance; 2. 1.0 Objective of Study; 3. 1.1 Dual Nature of Pragmatic Analysis; 4. 1.2 Disputation Theory; 5. 1.3 Standard Preconceptions of Irrelevance; 6. 1.4 Fallacies of Emotional Distraction; 7. 1.5 Ad Misericordiam Arguments; 8. 1.6 A Contrastive Case Study; 9. 1.7 The Ad Hominem Fallacy; 10. 1.8 Relevant Answers to Questions; 11. 1.9 A Second Case Study of Question-Relevance; 12. 1.10 Function of Questioning in Parliamentary Debate; 13. 2. Propositional Inferences in Disputation; 14. 2.0 Relevance in Games of Dialogue; 15. 2.1 Refutation and Propositional Structure; 16. 2.2 Classical Propositional Logic: Basic Elements; 17. 2.3 Valid Arguments in Classical Logic; 18. 2.4 Astounding Inferences in Classical Logic; 19. 2.5 Relatedness Propositional Logic: Basic Elements; 20. 2.6 Valid Arguments in Relatedness Logic; 21. 2.7 The Astounding Inferences Revisited; 22. 2.8 The Propositional Core of Disputation; 23. 3. Paradoxes, Sophisms and Relatedness; 24. 3.0 The Meaning of Relatedness; 25. 3.1 Act-Sequences and Relatedness; 26. 3.2 Subject-Matter Contents of Propositions; 27. 3.3 Paradoxes and Astounding Inferences; 28. 3.4 Missing Factors; 29. 3.5 Needed Premisses in Inferences; 30. 3.6 Irrelevant Premisses; 31. 3.7 Pluralism of Concepts of Relevance; 32. 3.8 Information Inclusion; 33. 4. Criticisms of Irrelevance in Games of Dialogue; 34. 4.0 Six Types of Criticisms of Irrelevance; 35. 4.1 Varieties of Games; 36. 4.2 Strong and Weak Refutation; 37. 4.3 Symmetrical and Asymmetrical Games; 38. 4.4 Misconception of Refutation; 39. 4.5 Pertinence; 40. 4.6 Question-Answer Relevance; 41. 4.7 Types of Questions and Answers; 42. 4.8 Rules for Responding; 43. 4.9 Types of Relevance Compared; 44. 4.10 Conditionals in Disputation; 45. Notes; 46. References; 47. Index