DOCSLIB.ORG

Revising Notions of Poetics and Rhetoric for the First

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revising Notions of Poetics and Rhetoric for the First POETIC RHETORIC: REVISING NOTIONS OF POETICS AND RHETORIC FOR THE FIRST-YEAR COMPOSITION CLASSROOM by TEGGIN SUMMERS (Under the Direction of Christy Desmet) ABSTRACT Derridean notions of rhetoric’s pharmacological influence in writing and the Nietzschean description of poetic’s creative and rhetorical power have not been traditionally acknowledged in the field of composition. This dissertation shows that under Derridean and Nietzschean paradigms, rhetoric and poetics are theoretically inseparable. Viewing rhetoric and poetics as one fluid process holds value for first-year writing: a revised conception of poetic rhetoric challenges traditional humanistic distinctions that offer limited understandings of the roles that rhetoric and poetics play in the formation of meaning. I argue further for a new genre of writing, the poetically rhetorical essay, which would operate paralogically and resist humanist approaches to writing. Poetic rhetoric is best envisioned in the electronic writing environment where the potential within posthumanism and hypertexts provides an ideal framework for the qualities in writing that are at once full of possible meaning and empty of coherent truth. INDEX WORDS: Derrida; essay; first-year composition; humanism; Nietzsche; poetic; poetically rhetorical essay; posthumanism; rhetoric POETIC RHETORIC: REVISING NOTIONS OF POETICS AND RHETORIC FOR THE FIRST-YEAR COMPOSITION CLASSROOM by TEGGIN SUMMERS B.S., Virginia Tech, 2001 M.A., Virginia Tech, 2003 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ATHENS, GEORGIA 2008 © 2008 Teggin Summers All Rights Reserved POETIC RHETORIC: REVISING NOTIONS OF POETICS AND RHETORIC FOR THE FIRST-YEAR COMPOSITION CLASSROOM by TEGGIN SUMMERS Major Professor: Christy Desmet Committee: Michelle Ballif Nelson Hilton Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia December 2008 iv DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my husband, Bob Summers, and my son, Taylor Summers: to Bob, for encouraging me to begin this journey and supporting me along the way, and to Taylor, for having the courtesy of waiting until I was close to finished to make his entry into this world. Together, you provide the light of my life. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge the influences of my professors, Dr. Christy Desmet, Dr. Michelle Ballif, and Dr. Paul Heilker, on the work of this dissertation. The scholarship of these professors has had a profound impact on my own views toward language and learning. The efforts of these professors have contributed to my positive academic experience, and have fueled my productive and illuminating journey, and for that I am deeply grateful. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ v 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 Rhetoric Versus Poetics: Distinctions Worth Revisiting? .............................................. 1 Classical Conceptions of Poetics and Rhetoric ............................................................... 8 Ideological Implications of Humanism ......................................................................... 14 Humanism, Rhetoric, and Poetics ................................................................................. 20 Poetic Rhetoric and Its Revisions of Old Distinctions ................................................. 25 Poetic Rhetoric, First-Year Composition, and the Genre of the Essay ......................... 27 Poetic Rhetoric in the Electronic Environment ............................................................ 38 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 41 2. POETIC RHETORIC AND ITS REVISIONS OF OLD DISTINCTIONS ............. 43 Basic Principles of Poetic Rhetoric ............................................................................... 43 Poetic Rhetoric as a Form of Third Sophistic Rhetoric ................................................ 46 Poetics, Rhetoric, and Logos ......................................................................................... 52 Poetic Rhetoric as it Operates Through Discourse ....................................................... 56 Poetic Rhetoric’s Resistance to a Metaphysics of Presence ......................................... 59 Embracing Poetic Rhetoric Means Accepting a Loss of Subjectivity .......................... 66 Poetic Rhetoric as Creative and Generative .................................................................. 70 Implications of Poetic Rhetoric .................................................................................... 72 vii 3. POETIC RHETORIC IN THE FIRST-YEAR COMPOSITION CLASSROOM .... 75 Poetics, Rhetoric, First-Year Composition, and the Genre of the Essay ...................... 75 Rhetoric and Poetics as Subjugated Other .................................................................... 79 Development of First-Composition: Building Up Walls Between Poetics and Rhetoric ....................................................................................................................................... 84 Deconstructing the Walls Between Poetics and Rhetoric: Poetic Rhetoric in First-Year Composition .................................................................................................................. 98 Pedagogical Considerations of Poetic Rhetoric: The Poetically Rhetorical Essay ..... 105 The Poetically Rhetorical Essay: An Example ........................................................... 125 Final Thoughts on the Poetically Rhetorical Essay .................................................... 130 4. POETIC RHETORIC IN THE ONLINE ENVIRONMENT ................................. 135 An Argument Against Print Typography .................................................................... 135 An Argument in Favor of the Electronic Writing Environment ................................. 141 Reviewing the Disruption of Distinctions Between Rhetoric and Poetics ................. 152 Digital Technologies’ Enactments of Poetic Rhetoric ................................................ 155 Multiple Modes of Poetic Rhetoric ............................................................................. 161 Electronic Essay .......................................................................................................... 174 5. POETIC RHETORIC: POST HUMANISM AND THE COMPOSITION CLASSROOM ................................................................................................................ 181 Challenging Humanist Ideology by Resisting the Rhetoric and Poetic Dichotomy ... 181 Poetic Rhetoric: A Disruption of Oppositions and the Birth of Prosetics .................. 185 Poetic Rhetoric’s Influence on First-Year Composition and the Genre of the Essay . 189 The E-Essay and Poetic Rhetoric in the Electronic Writing Environment ................. 199 viii Beyond Humanism: The Posthuman Qualities of Poetic Rhetoric ............................. 203 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 208 APPENDIX ..................................................................................................................... 216 A “INERTIA” ............................................................................................................ 216 1 1. INTRODUCTION The most immoderate presumption of being able to do anything, as rhetors and stylists, runs through all antiquity in a way that is incomprehensible to us. They control ‘opinion about things’ and hence the effect of things upon men; they know this. A precondition to be sure was that mankind itself was educated in rhetoric. Basically, even today ‘classical’ higher education still preserves a good portion of this antique view, except that it is no longer oral speech but its faded image, writing, that emerges as goal. The most archaic factor in our culture is the view that action through books and the press is what must be learned by education. However, our public’s basic education stands so incredibly lower than in the Hellenistic-Roman world; that is why results can be achieved only by much clumsier and cruder means and everything elegant is either rejected or arouses distrust – or, at best, it has only its own narrow circle. Friedrich Nietzsche, “History of Greek Eloquence” Rhetoric Versus Poetics: Distinctions Worth Revisiting? It might be simple enough to just acknowledge that, in general terms, the poetic represents language arts, in its multitude of forms. If we were to accept this, we might affably agree that rhetoric employs a poetics and that poetics are existent in rhetoric because rhetoric utilizes language arts. I think that this is one acceptable way of viewing those two terms, and it is a way that many people have gone about considering rhetoric and poetics for a long time. This dissertation, however, stands to complicate such descriptions. It notes that we often equate poetics with literature and that over time we have come to see rhetoric and poetics as two distinct fields. Additionally, in this dissertation, I aim to complicate the traditional notions that language is a means to poetic or rhetorical ends as well as the idea that
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What Is Rhetoric?
    What is Rhetoric? Rhetoric – the art of persuading someone through your speech and writing. It is a discourse (form of communication) that aims to improve the capability of writers or speakers to inform, persuade, or motivate a particular audience in certain situations. Origin – ancient Greece became the birthplace of rhetoric (effective speech/writing) in the fifth century B.C. Even Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle were arms deep in theories on the most effective means of persuasion. Examples Martin Luther King, Jr. – “I Have a Dream” Abraham Lincoln – “Gettysburg Address” There are many more famous speakers who use rhetoric. Can you think of other examples? Why is rhetoric in writing so important? Writing more effectively saves time. Things to Consider Audience – Who are you writing to? Purpose – Why are you writing this? What’s the point? Adjust your voice, tone, and persona to accommodate your communication situation. For every writing project, you can best determine what you want to say and how you want to say it by analyzing your rhetorical situation (which is sometimes called your communication situation). Learning to think rhetorically is one of the most important benefits of education! Successful leaders and decision makers are capable of making good decisions because they have learned to examine problems from a rhetorical perspective. Successful writers have learned they can write a more effective document in less time by thinking rhetorically. By simply thinking rhetorically, someone can utilize many mental activities – such as focusing on identifying the needs of a particular audience or situation. Ask yourself: Who’s going to read this? In what way can I persuade my audience? .
    [Show full text]
  • Ockham's Razor and Chemistry
    Ockham’s Razor and Chemistry * Roald Hoffmann, Vladimir I. Minkin, Barry K. Carpenter Abstract: We begin by presenting William of Ockham’s various formulations of his principle of parsimony, Ockham’s Razor. We then define a reaction mechanism and tell a personal story of how Ockham’s Razor entered the study of one such mechanism. A small history of methodologies related to Ock- ham’s Razor, least action and least motion, follows. This is all done in the context of the chemical (and scientific) community’s almost unthinking accep- tance of the principle as heuristically valuable. Which is not matched, to put it mildly, by current philosophical attitudes toward Ockham’s Razor. What ensues is a dialogue, pro and con. We first present a context for questioning, within chemistry, the fundamental assumption that underlies Ockham’s Ra- zor, namely that the world is simple. Then we argue that in more than one pragmatic way the Razor proves useful, without at all assuming a simple world. Ockham’s Razor is an instruction in an operating manual, not a world view. Continuing the argument, we look at the multiplicity and continuity of con- certed reaction mechanisms, and at principal component and Bayesian analysis (two ways in which Ockham’s Razor is embedded into modern statistics). The dangers to the chemical imagination from a rigid adherence to an Ockham’s Razor perspective, and the benefits of the use of this venerable and practical principle are given, we hope, their due. Keywords: Ockham’s Razor , reaction mechanism , principle of least action , prin- ciple of least motion , principal component analysis , Bayesian analysis .
    [Show full text]
  • Rhetoric in Spain 1/2016 EDITORS: NARCÍS IGLÉSIAS and MARIA ZAŁĘSKA
    ISSN: 2392-3113 Rhetoric in Spain 1/2016 EDITORS: NARCÍS IGLÉSIAS AND MARIA ZAŁĘSKA TOMÁS ALBALADEJO AUTONOMOUS UNIVERSITY OF MADRID [email protected] Cultural Rhetoric. Foundations and perspectives Abstract Cultural rhetoric is proposed as a methodological system to study the relationship between culture and rhetoric and to analyze rhetorical discourses, literary works and texts of other kinds from the point of view of their rhetorical foundations and their perlocutionary force before receivers. It is connected with the cultural dimension of rhetoric and with the rhetorical dimension of culture. It is within the studies in culture, together with semiotics of culture and cultural studies. Key words Rhetoric, Culture, Cultural rhetoric, Discourse, Literature License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Poland. The content of the license is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/pl/ Res Rhetorica, ISSN 2392-3113, 1/2016, p. 17 TOMÁS ALBALADEJO AUTONOMOUS UNIVERSITY OF MADRID [email protected] Cultural Rhetoric. Foundations and perspectives 1. Rhetoric as an art and a discipline. Rhetoric in culture and culture in rhetoric Although rhetoric was born as an instrument to communicate with persuasive aims before courts and it was initially used in the realm of civil law, it entered easily into the fi elds of criminal law and political communication. Rhetoric passed from its native land, Sicily, an island that had been colonized by the Greeks, to Athens, and afterwards from Athens to Rome. Rhetoric is the technique of communication and of oral public discourse that each citizen of these cities who wished to play a public role in society should have learned.
    [Show full text]
  • Deconstruction and Rhetorical Strategies
    appendix Deconstruction and Rhetorical Strategies Shared Rhetorical Background Whereas the main differences between the three modes of deconstruction were high- lighted in the concluding chapter, this Appendix draws attention to their most crucial common ground. All the literary strategies that are applied to deconstruct imperial rep- resentation are based on rhetorical strategies. We have seen this implicitly throughout the study; this Appendix will make the rhetorical strategies explicit. It complements the conclusion offered in the last chapter by looking at the results of this study from a strictly rhetorical perspective and by asking which general rhetorical strategies under- lie the techniques of deconstruction analysed in this book (in particular in chapters 4, 7, and 10). Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cassius Dio, who all received rhetorical training and were familiar with the theory and practice of rhetoric, adapt rhetorical measures in vari- ous ways, but the underlying principles—the rhetorical operations—are the same. My analysis of historiographical strategies deployed against Nero and Domitian as rhetorical strategies builds on the branch of scholarship that has shown that Roman historiography cannot be separated from rhetoric.1 The study of connections between historiography and rhetoric most often takes the form of analysing speeches in his- toriographical works. My approach is broader: I read historiography and biography as persuasive genres that aim to make their accounts plausible. Their presentation is also directed against other versions of the same topics and personalities, especially in the form we find them in panegyrical discourse. To achieve plausibility for its own version of Nero and Domitian, historiography draws on genuinely rhetorical devices.
    [Show full text]
  • Enhancing the Students' Rhetoric Attainments in Teaching of College
    Sino-US English Teaching, July 2019, Vol. 16, No. 7, 300-305 doi:10.17265/1539-8072/2019.07.003 D DAVID PUBLISHING Enhancing the Students’ Rhetoric Attainments in Teaching of College English Intensive Reading ZHANG Rong-gen Shanghai Publishing and Printing College, Shanghai, China Beginning with various definitions of rhetoric, the paper gives a survey of some common English rhetoric figures found in College English intensive reading, such as metaphor, simile, transferred epithet, allusion, hyperbole, personification, metonymy, antithesis, onomatopoeia, double negative, inversion, rhetoric question, parady, transferred negation, and the like. By elaborating the functions of those rhetoric figures, the paper attempts to enhance the students’ rhetoric attainments and arouse their interest in learning English. Keywords: rhetoric attainments, rhetoric figures, College English teaching Introduction Some students often complain that the teaching of College English intensive reading course is so monotonous. It is really the case. How can a tasteless person feel his delicious food? And a certain rhetoric attainment is the prerequisite for the student to enjoy this “delicious food” of College English intensive reading course. The category of rhetoric is quite broad, one of which definitions is given by Aristotle as the art of public speaking by means of persuasion (Aristotle, 1954, pp. 2-12); and Hartwell extends the definition of rhetoric as the art of using words in speaking or writing (Hartwell & Bentley, 1982, pp. 1-15). That is to say, rhetoric contains both the art of public speaking and the method of composition. According to Chen Wangdao, a modern Chinese rhetorician, rhetoric includes both active rhetoric and passive rhetoric.
    [Show full text]
  • Occam's Razor in Science: a Case Study from Biogeography
    Biology and Philosophy (2007) 22:193–215 Ó Springer 2006 DOI 10.1007/s10539-006-9027-9 Occam’s Razor in science: a case study from biogeography A. BAKER Department of Philosophy, Swarthmore College, 500 College Avenue, Swarthmore, 19081, USA (e-mail: [email protected]) Received 22 June 2004; accepted 16 March 2006 Introduction There is a widespread philosophical presumption – deep-rooted and often unarticulated – that a theory whose ontology exceeds that of its competitors is at a prima facie disadvantage. This presumption that ontologically more parsi- monious theories are preferable appears in many guises. Often it remains im- plicit. Sometimes it is invoked as a primitive, self-evident proposition that cannot be further justified or elaborated upon (for example at the beginning of Good- man and Quine’s 1947 paper,1 and in Quine’s remarks about his taste for ‘‘clear skies’’ and ‘‘desert landscapes’’). Other times it is elevated to the status of a ‘‘Principle’’ and labeled as such (for example, the ‘‘Principle of Parsimony’’). However, perhaps it is best known by the name ‘‘Occam’s (or Ockham’s) Razor.’’ The question I wish to address in this paper is whether Occam’s Razor is a methodological principle of science. In addition to being a significant issue in its own right, I am also interested in potential connections between attitudes towards parsimony in science and in philosophy. Metaphysicians might once have aimed to justify the use of Occam’s Razor in science by appeal to aprioriphilosophical principles. The rise of scientific naturalism in the second half of the 20th Century has undercut this style of approach.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. Contrastive Rhetoric Robert B
    21 2. Contrastive Rhetoric Robert B. Kaplan This chapter begins by discussing the concept and origins of the term contrastive rhetoric. In a brief description of the writing process, the questions of appropriate topics, acceptable evidence and effective organization are discussed and culturally and linguistically specific ways of describing the world are described. A model for the writing process is presented, focussing on the impact of author, content, audience, purpose, time, place and genre of the writing situation. Finally, effective and ineffective examples of written English are presented and analyzed. Introduction hat is contrastive rhetoric? Partly based on Whorfian ideas of the relation­ ship between language and thought, it is an hypothesis claiming that (while mathematical logic may be universal) the logic expressed through the organization of written text is culture-specific; that is, it posits that speakers of two different languages will organize the same reality in different ways (Kaplan, 1988; 1987). That they should do so seems self-evident, because different languages provide different resources for organizing text. However, this filtering of text logic through language is largely unconscious; that is, learners of an L2: are not aware of the way in which their Ll influences the way they organize text logic, are not aware of the way in which an L2 organizes text logic, and are not aware that there is a difference. As Kellerman notes, "Coping with new ways of 'thinking for speaking [or writing an L2] ... ' means attending to features of context that are either not relevant or are defined differently in the native language ..
    [Show full text]
  • Poetry and Rhetoric: Modernism and Beyond Peter Nicholls New York
    Poetry and Rhetoric: Modernism and Beyond Peter Nicholls New York University In Melville’s chilly masterpiece “Bartleby the Scrivener”, the “pale plaster-of-paris” bust of Cicero that presides over the lawyer’s office is a pointed reminder of the final stage of rhetoric’s decline in the second half of the nineteenth century.1 The Ciceronian tradition is a mere shadow of its former self (the head alone and not the heart remains) and the legal practice overlooked by the bust is occupied not with feats of forensic artistry but with the purely mechanical business of textual transcription.2 The ancient rhetor surveys a scene in which the art of speaking does little more than support a deviously self-serving philanthropy, the lawyer pondering whether by befriending Bartleby he “might cheaply purchase a delicious self-approval”.3 At the time Melville writes, classical rhetoric is witnessing its final decline or “reduction”, as Gerard Genette calls it, a process begun in the Middle Ages as once crucial parts of the rhetorical curriculum gradually fell into disuse: “next [to be lost was] the balance between the ‘parts’ (inventio, dispositio, elocutio), because the rhetoric of the trivium, crushed between grammar and dialectic, soon came to be confined to the study of elocutio, the ornaments of discourse, colores rhetorici.”4 Bartleby, with his formulaic disengagement and his previous experience of the Dead Letter Office, is arguably the prophet of literature’s failure as an authentic public form and of its consequent reduction to empty repetition.5 Both he and Cicero are described as “pale” and fragile, and when the lawyer confronts him with questions about his past, Bartleby, says the lawyer, “kept his glance fixed upon my bust of Cicero”, an object no longer inspiring eloquence but now prompting instead an enigmatic reluctance to speak (“’At present I prefer to give no answer,’ he said”).
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Denunciation of Rhetoric in the "Phaedrus" Author(S): Brad Mcadon Source: Rhetoric Review, Vol
    Plato's Denunciation of Rhetoric in the "Phaedrus" Author(s): Brad McAdon Source: Rhetoric Review, Vol. 23, No. 1 (2004), pp. 21-39 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20176594 Accessed: 22/09/2010 21:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Rhetoric Review. http://www.jstor.org Brad McAdon University of Memphis Plato's Denunciation of Rhetoric in the Phaedrus Contrary to a prevailing view within rhetoric and composition circles thatfinds a positive view of rhetoric in the Phaedrus, / contend that Plato mockingly de nounces rhetoric in the Phaedrus.
    [Show full text]
  • Meanings of Figures of Speech Used in Tourism Advertising Slogan Texts in the Internet
    PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI MEANINGS OF FIGURES OF SPEECH USED IN TOURISM ADVERTISING SLOGAN TEXTS IN THE INTERNET A THESIS Presented as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Magister Humaniora (M. Hum.) Degree in English Language Studies SISKA BOCHARI Student Number: 096332020 THE GRADUATE PROGRAM IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2011 i PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI ii PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI iii PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY This is to certify that all ideas, phrases, sentences, unless otherwise stated, are the ideas, phrases, and sentences of the thesis writer. The writer understands the full consequences including degree cancellation if she took somebody else's ideas, phrases, or sentences without proper references. Yogyakarta, 17 March 2011 SISKA BOCHARI iv PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma: Nama : Siska Bochari Nomor Mahasiswa : 096332020 Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul: Meanings of Figures of Speech Used in Tourism Advertising Slogan Texts in the Internet beserta perangkat yang diperlukan. Dengan demikian saya memberikan hak kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk
    [Show full text]
  • Aristotle-Rhetoric.Pdf
    Rhetoric Aristotle (Translated by W. Rhys Roberts) Book I 1 Rhetoric is the counterpart of Dialectic. Both alike are con- cerned with such things as come, more or less, within the general ken of all men and belong to no definite science. Accordingly all men make use, more or less, of both; for to a certain extent all men attempt to discuss statements and to maintain them, to defend themselves and to attack others. Ordinary people do this either at random or through practice and from acquired habit. Both ways being possible, the subject can plainly be handled systematically, for it is possible to inquire the reason why some speakers succeed through practice and others spontaneously; and every one will at once agree that such an inquiry is the function of an art. Now, the framers of the current treatises on rhetoric have cons- tructed but a small portion of that art. The modes of persuasion are the only true constituents of the art: everything else is me- rely accessory. These writers, however, say nothing about en- thymemes, which are the substance of rhetorical persuasion, but deal mainly with non-essentials. The arousing of prejudice, pity, anger, and similar emotions has nothing to do with the essential facts, but is merely a personal appeal to the man who is judging the case. Consequently if the rules for trials which are now laid down some states-especially in well-governed states-were applied everywhere, such people would have nothing to say. All men, no doubt, think that the laws should prescribe such rules, but some, as in the court of Areopagus, give practical effect to their thoughts 4 Aristotle and forbid talk about non-essentials.
    [Show full text]
  • János S. Petőfi's Linguistic and Textual Theory and the Recovery of The
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Alicante Francisco Chico Rico, “János S. Petőfi’s Linguistic and Textual Theory and the Recovery of the Historical Thinking about Rhetoric”. In: Margarita Borreguero Zuloaga and Luciano Vitacolonna (eds.), The Legacy of János S. Petőfi: Text Linguistics, Literary Theory and Semiotics. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2019: 110-131 (ISBN: 978- 1-5275-2310-4). János S. Petőfi’s linguistic and textual theory and the recovery of the historical thinking about Rhetoric Francisco Chico Rico (University of Alicante, Spain) Abstract The present paper carries out a study about the possibilities of mutual enrichment resulting from the interrelationship of the Text-Structure World-Structure Theory (TeSWeST, from the German “Text-Struktur Welt-Struktur Theorie”) by János S. Petőfi and the rhetorical model, that is, the explanatory system for the construction and communication of rhetorical discourse within the framework of the so-called rhetorica recepta, traditionally formed by the operations —partes artis or oratoris officia— of inventio, dispositio, elocutio, memoria and actio/pronuntiatio. More specifically, our aim is, on the one hand, to account for the enrichment of TeSWeST from the examination of rhetorical elocutio —an enrichment which also leads us to the need for a redefinition of the traditional rhetorical operations in the light of the components and categories of TeSWeST; and on the other, to try and explain the enrichment of the traditional rhetorical system through the recovery of the rhetorical operation of intellectio —from the review of historic texts dealing with rhetorical theory, such as Institutiones oratorias, by Sulpitius Victor, and De rhetorica liber, by Aurelius Augustinus.
    [Show full text]