DOCSLIB.ORG

Epideictic Genre

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Epideictic Genre ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ ژاﻧﺮ « ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات» در ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ و اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم در ﺑﻼﻏﺖ اﺳﻼﻣﻲ داوود ﻋﻤﺎرﺗﻲ ﻣﻘﺪم* داﻧﺸﺠﻮي دﻛﺘﺮي زﺑﺎن و ادﺑﻴﺎت ﻓﺎرﺳﻲ، داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﻓﺮدوﺳﻲ ﻣﺸﻬﺪ، ﻣﺸﻬﺪ، اﻳﺮان درﻳﺎﻓﺖ : 29/3/ 91 ﭘﺬﻳﺮش : 7/15/ 91 دور ة 2 دو ﭼﻜﻴﺪه ، ﺷﻤﺎر ة 1 ﻓﺼﻠﻨﺎﻣﺔ ( اﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻮﺷﺪ اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم را در ﺟﻬﺎن اﺳﻼم، ﺑﺎ آﻧﭽﻪ در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن در ﺑﺎرة ژاﻧﺮ « ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات » ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ - ﺷﺪه، ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ . ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات و دو ژاﻧﺮ دﻳﮕﺮ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻲ، ﻳﻌﻨﻲ « ﻣﺸﺎورات» و « ﻣﺸﺎﺟﺮات» ، ﺳﻪ ژاﻧﺮ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻓﻦ ﭘﻴﺎﭘﻲ 3 ) ، ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ را در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﻣﻲ دﻫﻨﺪ . ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ﻛﺎرﻛﺮدﻫﺎي ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻧﻲ داﺷﺘﻪ و اﻳﻦ ﭘﮋوﻫﺸﻲ ﻛﺎرﻛﺮدﻫﺎ را از ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﺪح و ذم ﻣﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻲ ﺳﺎﺧﺘ ﻪ اﺳﺖ . دو روﻳﻜﺮد ﻛﻠﻲ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن وﺟﻮد دارد ؛ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ روﻳﻜﺮد آﻣﻮزﮔﺎران « رﺳﻤﻲ » ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮن آﻧﺎﻛﺴﻴﻤﻨﺲ، ارﺳﻄﻮ، ﺳﻴﺴﺮون، ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺗﺎﺑﺴﺘﺎن و ﺑﻬﺎر و ﺗﺎﺑﺴﺘﺎن ﻛﻮﻳﻴﻦ ﺗﻴﻠﻴﺎن و ... و دوم روﻳﻜﺮد ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎن اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺧﺎﺻﻲ ﺑﻪ ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات داﺷﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ . در ﺑﺨﺶ اول 1393 و دوم ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، اﻳﻦ دو روﻳﻜﺮد ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺷﺪه و ﺗﻔﺎوت ﻫﺎي آن ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻗﺮار ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ . در ، ﺻﺺ ﺑﺨﺶ دوم ﺑﻪ اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم در ﺟﻬﺎن اﺳﻼم ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻪ و ﻧﺸﺎن داده ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ اﺻﻮل از دو دﺳﺘﻪ 49 - ادﺑﻴﺎت ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ ﻫﺎي ادﺑﻴﺎت ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ 87 ﻣﻨﺒﻊ، ﻗﺎﺑﻞ اﺳﺘﺨﺮاج ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؛ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻣﺘﻮن ﻣﺪرﺳﻲ ﺑﻼﻏﺖ ﻫﻤﭽﻮن ﻧﻘﺪاﻟﺸﻌﺮ از ، ﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﻦ اﻟﺸ ﻌﺮ و آداﺑﻪ ا ﺛﺮ اﺑﻦ رﺷﻴﻖ و ... و دﺳﺘﺔ دوم ﻣﺘﻮﻧﻲ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ارﺗﺒﺎط ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤﻲ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺘﻮن ﺑﻼﻏﻲ ﻧﺪارﻧﺪ اﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﻮرﻳﺖ ﻣﺪح و ذم ﺗﺄ ﻟﻴﻒ ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ . ﺑﺮﺧﻲ از ﻣﻬﻢ ﺗﺮﻳﻦ آﺛﺎر اﻳﻦ دﺳﺘﻪ ﻋﺒﺎرت اﻧﺪ از : اﻟﻈﺮاﺋﻒ و اﻟﻠﻄﺎﺋﻒ و اﻟﻴﻮاﻗﻴﺖ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﻤﻮاﻗﻴﺖ؛ ﺗﺤﺴﻴﻦ اﻟﻘﺒﻴﺢ و ﺗﻘﺒﻴﺢ اﻟﺤﺴﻦ؛ ﺗﺤﺴﻴﻦ و ﺗﻘﺒﻴﺢ، ﻫ ﺮ ﺳﻪ از ﺛﻌﺎﻟﺒﻲ؛ ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺟﺎﺣﻆ ( اﻟﺮﺳﺎﺋﻞ ) و ﺑﺮﺧﻲ آﺛﺎر ﻣﻨﺴﻮب ﺑﻪ او ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ اﻟﻤﺤﺎﺳﻦ و اﻻﺿﺪاد، اﻵﻣﻞ و اﻟﻤﺄ ﻣﻮل و از اﺑﺮاﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻴﻬﻘﻲ ﻛﺘﺎب اﻟﻤﺤﺎﺳﻦ و اﻟﻤﺴﺎوي . ﻫﺪف اﻳﻦ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ اﺛﺒﺎت اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮض اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ آﻧﻜﻪ ﻣﺪح و ذم در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻫﺎي ﺷﻔﺎﻫﻲ (ﺧ ﻄﺎﺑﻪ ) و در ﺟﻬﺎن اﺳﻼم ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻨﻲ ( ﺷﻌﺮ ) اﺧﺘﺼﺎص داﺷﺘﻪ، وﻟﻲ ﺗﻔﺎوت ﭼﻨﺪاﻧﻲ ﻣﻴﺎن اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم در اﻳﻦ دو ﻧﻈﺎم ﺑﻼﻏﻲ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻧﻤﻲ ﺧﻮرد و آﻧﭽﻪ در ﺑﺎرة ﻣﺪح و ذم در ﺟﻬﺎن اﺳﻼم ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه، وﺟﻮه ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات را در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎزﻧﻤﺎﻳﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ. ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ∗ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪة ﻣﺴﺌ ﻮل ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ : E-mail: [email protected] داوود ﻋﻤﺎرﺗﻲ ﻣﻘﺪم ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ ژاﻧﺮ « ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ...» واژﮔﺎن ﻛﻠﻴﺪي: ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات، ﻣﺪح و ذم، ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎن، ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ . 1 . ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ 3 2 1 ژاﻧﺮ « ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات » در ﻛﻨﺎر « ﻣﺸﺎﺟﺮات » «و ﻣﺸﺎورات » ، ﻳﻜﻲ از ﺳﻪ ژاﻧﺮ اﺻﻠﻲ ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﺔ ﻳﻮﻧﺎن و روم ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ﺑﻮده اﺳﺖ . اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ از ﻟﺤﺎظ ﻫﺪف و ﻣﻮﺿﻮع آن، در ﻣﻴﺎن ژاﻧﺮﻫﺎي ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻲ، وﺿﻌﻴﺖ وﻳﮋه اي دارد . ﻫﺪف، ﻣﻮﺿﻮع و ﻧﻮع ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺒﺎن دو ژاﻧﺮ دﻳﮕﺮ، ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻣﺸﺎﺟﺮات و ﻣﺸﺎورات ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎر زﻳﺎدي ﻣﺸﺨﺺ اﺳﺖ؛ ﭼﻨﺎﻧﻜﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﻣﺸﺎﺟﺮات ﭘﺮداﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ دﻋﺎوي ﺣﻘﻮﻗﻲ و دادرﺳﻲ ﻫﺎي ﻗﻀﺎﻳﻲ و ﻫﺪف آن ﻣﺘﻬﻢ ﻳﺎ دﻓﺎع ﻛﺮدن اﺳﺖ و ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺐ اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﻀﺎت ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ . ﻣﺸﺎورات ﻧﻴﺰ ﮔﻔﺘﺎرﻫﺎﻳﻲ را در ﺑﺮﻣﻲ ﮔﻴﺮد ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ و ﻣﺪﻧﻲ ﻣﻲ ﭘﺮدازد؛ ﻫﺪف آن ﺗﺮﻏﻴﺐ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎزداﺷﺘﻦ ﻋﻤﻮم از اﻧﺠﺎم ﻛﺎري اﺳﺖ و ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺒﺎن آن ﻧﻴﺰ از آﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ درﺑﺎرة ﮔﻔﺘﺎر ﺧﻄﻴﺐ، ﻗﻀﺎوﺗﻲ اﻧﺠﺎم دﻫﻨﺪ ، ذﻳﻞ ﻗﻀﺎت ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺑﻨﺪي ﻣﻲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ . اﻣﺎ ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات، ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻲ ﻧﺪارد و ﺗﺎ ﺟﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺪف آن، ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻣﺪح و ذم ﺑﺮآورده ﺷﻮد، ﻫﺮ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻲ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻃﺮح در اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ را ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ داﺷﺖ . ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎن ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ دﻳﺪﮔﺎه ﻫﺎي ﺧﺎﺻﻲ ﻛﻪ درﺑﺎرة ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ و ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ آن داﺷﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ ( ﻛﻪ در اداﻣﻪ ﺑﺪان ﺧﻮاﻫﻴﻢ ﭘﺮداﺧﺖ ) ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﻬﺮه ﺑﺮداري را از اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ داﺷﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ . 4 ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺑﺎزﻣﺎﻧﺪه از اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎﻧﻲ ﭼﻮن ﮔﺮﮔ ﻴﺎس ﻟﺌﻮﻧﺘﻴﻨﻲ ( ﻗﺮن 6 5 ﭼﻬﺎرم ق م. .) اﺳﺖ . دﻳﮕﺮ آﻣﻮزﮔﺎران ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ارﺳﻄﻮ ، آﻧﺎﻛﺴﻴﻤﻨﺲ اﻫﻞ ﻻﻣﭙﺴﺎﻛﻮس ، 8 7 ﺳﻴﺴﺮون ، ﻛﻮﻳﻴﻦ ﺗﻴﻠﻴﺎن و ... ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮﻳﻚ ﺑﻪ وﺟﻬﻲ از ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎن ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ دارﻧﺪ، ﻛﻮﺷﻴﺪه اﻧﺪ در درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﺔ ﺧﻮد ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻔﻲ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﻳﺎ دﺳﺖ ﻛﻢ ﻣﺤﺪودﺗﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺳﻮﻓ ﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎن از اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ اراﺋﻪ دﻫﻨﺪ . اﻣﺎ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎً ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪﻧﺪ ﺗﻌﺎرﻳﻔﻲ ﻛﻪ در درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎي « رﺳﻤﻲ » ﺧﻄﻴﺒﺎن ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن از ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ﺑﻪ دﺳﺖ داده ﺷﺪه، ﻫﻴﭻ ﻳﻚ ﺣﻖ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ را درﺑﺎرة اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ ﮔﺴﺘﺮده و ﻣﺘﻨﻮع ادا ﻧﻤﻲ ﻨﻛﻨ (ﺪ Sheard, 1996: 769) . ﮔﺴﺘﺮة ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻲ اﻳﻦ ژاﻧﺮ و ﻛﺎرﻛﺮد ﻫﺎي آن ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪي ﻣﺘﻨﻮع و وﺳﻴﻊ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در ﻗﺮون وﺳﻄﻲ، ﻣﺮز ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻲ ﻣﻴﺎن ﺷﻌﺮ و ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات وﺟﻮد ﻧﺪاﺷﺖ و اﻧﻮاع ﺷﻌﺮ را ﻧﻴﺰ ذﻳﻞ ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺑﻨﺪي و ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻣﻲ ﻛﺮدﻧﺪ ( ,Kennedy, 1994: 4; Sheard . (1996: 769; Sullivan, 1993: 116 1. 1 Epideictic Genre 2. 2 Forensic Genre 3. 3 Deliberative Genre 4 Gorgias of Leontini 5 Aristotle 6 Anaximenes of Lampsacus 7 Cicero 8 Quintilian 50 ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﻫﺎي ادﺑﻴﺎت ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ دورة 2 ، ﺷﻤﺎرة (1 ﭘﻴﺎﭘﻲ )3 ، ﺑﻬﺎر و ﺗﺎﺑﺴﺘﺎن 1393 وﻳﮋﮔﻲ ﻫﺎي ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات و اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم را از ﺳﻪ دﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ درﺑﺎرة ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮان اﺳﺘﺨﺮاج ﻛﺮد؛ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ، درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎي « رﺳﻤﻲ » ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻘﺼﻮد از آن در دوران ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن، درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ را ﻧﻪ ﻋﺮﺻﻪ اي ﺑﺮاي ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻛﺸﻴﺪن ﻣﻬﺎرت ﻫﺎي ﺳﺨﻨﻮر، ﺑﻠﻜﻪ اﺑﺰاري ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺎزﻧﻤﻮد روﺷﻦ و ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻒ ﻧﺸﺪة واﻗﻌﻴﺎت، در ﻫﺮ ﺳﻪ ژاﻧﺮ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻲ، ﻗﻠﻤﺪاد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ . اﻳﻦ درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎ ﺧﻮد ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎ روﻳﻜﺮدﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻔﺎوﺗﻲ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ، اﻣﺎ ﻓﺼﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮك ﻫﻤﺔ آن ﻫﺎ ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪي ﺑﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻲ واﺣﺪ و ﻛﻮﺷﺶ ﺑﺮاي اﻧﺘﻘﺎل آن ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺐ در ﮔﻔﺘﺎر اﺳﺖ . ﺑﺮﺧﻲ از اﻳﻦ درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎ، ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﺔ ارﺳﻄﻮ، روﻳﻜﺮدي ﻛﺎﻣﻼً ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺎ رﻫﺎي ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻲ دارﻧﺪ و 9 ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ را ﻫﻤﺰاد ﺟﺪل ﻣﻲ داﻧﻨﺪ، و ﺑﺮﺧﻲ دﻳﮕﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺧﻄﻴﺒﺎن روم ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن 10 ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ؛ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ درﺳﻨﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﺠﻬﻮل اﻟﻤﺆﻟﻒ رﺗﻮرﻳﻜﺎ اد ﻫﺮﻧﻴﻮم ، آﺛﺎر ﺳﻴﺴﺮون و ﻛﻮﻳﻴﻦ ﺗﻴﻠﻴﺎن ﻛﻪ روﻳﻜﺮدي ﻋﻤﻞ ﮔﺮاﻳﺎﻧﻪ دارﻧﺪ و از ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﺮاي اﻳﺠﺎد ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮاﺗﻲ در ﺣﻮزه ﻫﺎي ﻣﺪﻧ ﻲ و ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻗﻀﺎﻳﻲ و ﺣﻘﻮﻗﻲ ﺳﻮد ﻣﻲ ﺑﺮﻧﺪ . دوم، رﺳﺎﻟﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ « progymnasmata » «ﻳﺎ ﺗﻤﺮﻳﻦ ﻫﺎي ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺗﻲ» ﻣﺸﻬﻮرﻧﺪ و ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ وﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎن ﺑﺮاي ﻧﻮآﻣﻮزان ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ . ﺳﻮم رﺳﺎﻟﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﺧﺎص درﺑﺎرة ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه و ﺑﻪ ژاﻧﺮ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻲ 11 دﻳ ﮕﺮي ﻧﭙﺮداﺧﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ؛ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ رﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﻨﺎﻧﺪر ﺧﻄﻴﺐ ( ﻗﺮن ﺳﻮم ﻣﻴﻼدي ) ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮان اﻧﻮاع ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ، 12 12 و رﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﻨﺴﻮب ﺑﻪ دﻳﻮﻧﻴﺰﻳﻮس ﻫﺎﻟﻴﻜﺎرﻧﺎﺳﻮس ( ﻗﺮن اول ﻣﻴﻼدي ) ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮان در ﺑﺎب ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات. از آﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ رﺳﺎﻟﻪ ﻫﺎي اﺧﻴﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ روﻳﻜﺮدي ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻲ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ اﺳﺖ، دﻳﺪﮔﺎه ﻫﺎي ﻣﻮﺟﻮد درﺑﺎرة ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮا ت، در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن، را ﻣﻲ ﺗﻮان ﺑﻪ دو دﺳﺘﺔ ﻛﻠﻲ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻛﺮد : دﻳﺪﮔﺎه ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎن و دﻳﺪﮔﺎه آﻣﻮزﮔﺎران رﺳﻤﻲ ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮﻳﻚ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻲ در ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﮔﻴﺮي از روﻳﻜﺮد ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻮﺷﻨﺪ . ﭘﺮﺳﺶ اﺻﻠﻲ اﻳﻦ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ، اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم در ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺣﺪ ﺑﺎ اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم در ﺟﻬﺎن اﺳﻼم ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ دارد؟ ﻓﺮض اﺻﻠﻲ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ اﻳﻦ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﮔﺮ ﭼﻪ ﻣﺪح و ذم در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻫﺎي ﺷﻔﺎﻫﻲ ( ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ) و در ﺟﻬﺎن اﺳﻼم ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻨﻲ ( ﺷﻌﺮ ) اﺧﺘﺼﺎص داﺷﺘﻪ، وﻟﻲ اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم در اﻳﻦ دو ﻧﻈﺎم ﺑﻼﻏﻲ ﭼﻨﺪان ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﻧﻴﺴﺖ . 9 Dialectic 9 10 Rhetorica ad Herennium 11 Menander the Rhetor 4. 12 Dionysius of Halicarnassus 5. 51 داوود ﻋﻤﺎرﺗﻲ ﻣﻘﺪم ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ ژاﻧﺮ « ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ...» در ﻣ ﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺮاي اﺛﺒﺎت اﻳﻦ ﻓﺮض، ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻘﺪم ﻧﻈﺎم ﺑﻼﻏﻲ ﻏﺮب ﺑﺮ ﺑﻼﻏﺖ اﺳﻼﻣﻲ و ﻧﻴﺰ اﻧﺴﺠﺎم ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮي ﻛﻪ در درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎي آﻣﻮزﮔﺎران ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ﺑﻪ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻣﻲ ﺧﻮرد، اﺻﻮل ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات را ﻣﺒﻨﺎ ﻗﺮار داده، در ﻫﺮ ﻣﻮرد دﻳﺪﮔﺎه ﻫﺎي ﺑﻼﻏﻴﺎن ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎن درﺑﺎرة ﻣﺪح و ذم را ﺑﺎ آن ﺳﻨﺠﻴﺪه اﻳﻢ . در اداﻣﻪ ، اﺑﺘﺪا روﻳﻜﺮدﻫﺎي ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﺔ ﻣﺪح و ذم در ﻏﺮب ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ( روﻳﻜﺮد رﺳﻤﻲ و روﻳﻜﺮد ﺳﻮﻓﺴﻄﺎﻳﻴﺎن ﺑﻪ) ﺗﻔﺼﻴﻞ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ داده ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ و در ﺑﺨﺶ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ اﻳﻦ روﻳﻜﺮدﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ اﺻﻮل ﻣﺪح و ذم در ﺟﻬﺎن اﺳﻼم ( در ﻣﺘﻮن ﺑﻼﻏﻲ و ﺟﺰ آن ) ﺧﻮاﻫﻴﻢ ﭘﺮداﺧﺖ . .2 ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات در درﺳﻨﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎي رﺳﻤﻲ ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ : ﻳﻮﻧﺎن و روم ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن دو رﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﺎً ﺟﺎﻣﻊ درﺑﺎرة ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ از ﻳﻮﻧﺎن ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎن ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﻣﺎﻧﺪه اﺳﺖ : رﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ از ارﺳﻄﻮ ( ﻗﺮن ﭼﻬﺎرم ق م. .) و رﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﺮاي اﺳﻜﻨﺪر از آﻧﺎﻛﺴﻴﻤﻨﺲ اﻫﻞ ﻻﻣﭙﺴﺎﻛﻮس ( ﺣﺪود ﻗﺮن ﭘﻨﺠﻢ ق م. .) ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻨﺪ ي ﭘﻴﺶ رﺳﺎﻟﺔ دوم ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻨﺘﺴﺐ ﺑﻪ ارﺳﻄﻮ داﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻲ ؛ﺷﺪ اﻣﺎ اﻣﺮوزه ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﺤﻘﻘﺎن ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ دﻻﻳﻠﻲ از ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺗﻲ ﺗﺮ ﺑﻮدن ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ آن ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﺔ ارﺳﻄﻮ، زﻣﺎن ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪن آن را ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ از ارﺳﻄﻮ ﻣﻲ رﺳﺎﻧﻨﺪ و آﻧﺎﻛﺴﻴﻤﻨﺲ را ﻣﺆﻟﻒ آن ﻗﻠﻤﺪاد ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ، اﮔﺮﭼﻪ در اﻳﻦ ﻣﻮرد ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﻄ ﻌﻴﺘﻲ وﺟﻮد ﻧﺪارد ( Chiron, 2007: 101- 104 ). آﻧﺎﻛﺴﻴﻤﻨﺲ در ﻓﺼﻞ اول اﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎب، ﮔﻔﺘﺎرﻫﺎي ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ را ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﻠﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ دﺳﺘﺔ ﻣﺸﺎورات، ﻣﺸﺎﺟﺮات و ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ ( Anaximenes, 1957: 275) ؛ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮاﻳﻦ در اﻳﻦ رﺳﺎﻟﻪ، ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرت ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ اي از ﮔﻔﺘﺎر ﻫﺎي ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﻣﻮرد ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﻗﺮار ﻣﻲ ﮔﻴﺮد . ﻋﻼوه ﺑﺮ اﻳﻦ، آﻧﺎﻛﺴﻴﻤﻨﺲ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ اﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ژاﻧﺮ، ﺑﺮاي ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻫﻔﺖ ﻧﻮع ﻫﺪف ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎر ﻣﻲ روﻧﺪ : ﺑﺮاﻧﮕﻴﺨﺘﻦ، ﺑﺎزداﺷﺘﻦ، ﺳﺘﺎﻳﺶ، ﻧﻜﻮﻫﺶ، اﺗﻬﺎم، دﻓﺎع و اﺳﺘﻔﺴﺎر ( Ibid ) . ) او در ﻓﺼﻞ ﺳﻮم اﺛﺮ ﻳﺎد ﺷﺪه ، ژاﻧﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺮات ﻳﺎ ﮔﻔﺘﺎرﻫﺎي ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑ ﻪ ﺳﺘﺎﻳﺶ و ﻧﻜﻮﻫﺶ را 13 ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻲ ﻛﻨﺪ «: ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮر ﻛﻠﻲ، ﻧﻮع ﻣﺪﺣﻲ ﻋﺒﺎرت اﺳﺖ از ﺑﺰرگ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻲ اﻫﺪاف، اﻋﻤﺎل و ﺳﺨﻨﺎن ﺷﺎﻳﺴﺘﻪ و ﻧﺴﺒﺖ دادن وﻳﮋﮔﻲ ﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ وﺟﻮد ﻧﺪارد[ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻤﺪوح] ، درﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﻛﻪ ذم، ﻋﻜﺲ اﻳﻦ روﻳﻪ اﺳﺖ و ﻋﺒﺎرت اﺳﺖ از ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻲ وﻳﮋﮔﻲ ﻫﺎي ﺷﺎﻳﺴﺘﻪ و ﺑﺰرگ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻲ وﻳﮋﮔﻲ ﻫﺎ ي ﻧﺎﺷﺎﻳﺴﺖ (» Ibid: 305 ). از دﻳﺪ آﻧﺎﻛﺴﻴﻤﻨﺲ اﻋﻤﺎل ﺷﺎﻳﺴﺘﻪ و ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺳﺘﺎﻳﺶ ﻋﺒﺎرت ا ﻧﺪ از اﻋﻤﺎل 13 Amplification 52 ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﻫﺎي ادﺑﻴﺎت ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ دورة 2 ، ﺷﻤﺎرة (1 ﭘﻴﺎﭘﻲ )3 ، ﺑﻬﺎر و ﺗﺎﺑﺴﺘﺎن 1393 14 « ﻋﺎدﻻﻧﻪ، ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻲ، ﻣﺪﺑﺮاﻧﻪ، اﻓﺘﺨﺎرآﻣﻴﺰ، ﺧﻮﺷﺎﻳﻨﺪ و ﺳﻬﻞ اﻻﺟﺮاء (» Ibid: 305) .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 the Rhetorical Use of Torture in Attic Forensic Oratory VASILEIOS
    The Rhetorical Use of Torture in Attic Forensic Oratory VASILEIOS ADAMIDIS Mailing Address: Flat 2, 43 Burns street, NG7 4DS Nottingham United Kingdom Email address: [email protected] Tel: +44(0)7930520275 1 The Rhetorical Use of Torture in Attic Forensic Oratory ABSTRACT: Come 'regola', la tortura di schiavi innocenti che è stata concordata dai querelantia fini probatori (βάσανος probatori) fu ritenuto dagli oratori lo strumento più efficace per giungere alla verità. Questo paper, con riferimento alla psicologia dell'antica Grecia, spiega perché la menzionata regola fu di cruciale importanza per la retorica. Gli oratori, sulla base della presunta attendibilità dell'istituzione dei βάσανος, furono in grado di sviluppare argomenti basati sulle sfide (πρόκλησις), che possono essere comprese al meglio alla luce della concezione greca, piuttosto che moderna, di razionalità ed azione umana. Di conseguenza, a dispetto dell'incertezza che circonda l'attualità della tortura a fini probatori nell'età degli oratori, l'importanza retorica dei πρόκλησις εἰς βάσανον è innegabile e va esaminata attentamente. KEYWORDS: Basanos (βάσανος), Greek psychology, human motivation, practical reasoning. *** The institution of torture is highly controversial; its morality is extremely dubious and its expediency is, at minimum, questionable. A particular form of torture that seems completely indefensible from a modern perspective is the torture (βάσανος) of innocent slaves for evidentiary purposes in Athenian law. This has been characterised as ‘wanton and purposeless barbarity’1, yet has been explained as a way classical Athenian citizens reinforced their dominant political status and ‘confirm[ed] their own social hierarchy and cohesion’2. The barbarity and putative irrationality of evidentiary βάσανος3, in addition to the lack of evidence proving the actuality of this practice, make its existence, at least in the period of the Attic orators, doubtful4.
    [Show full text]
  • The Appeal to Easiness in Aristotle's Protrepticus
    THE APPEAL TO EASINESS IN ARISTOTLE’S PROTREPTICUS Matthew D. Walker [Uncorrected draft. To be published in Ancient Philosophy 39 (2019). Please cite only the final published version.] Aristotle’s Protrepticus sought to exhort its audience to engage in philosophy (filosofi&a), i.e., the “acquisition and use of wisdom” (kth~si&v te kai_ xrh~siv sofi&av: 6, 40.2-3/B53; cf. 6, 37.7-9/B8).1 The Protrepticus is now lost. But work by D.S. Hutchinson and Monte Ransome Johnson (2005) has confirmed earlier speculation – initiated by Ingram Bywater (1869) – that Iamblichus preserves large passages of the work in his own Protrepticus. Hutchinson and Johnson 2018 argue that significant portions of the Protrepticus also appear in Iamblichus’ De Communi Mathematica Scientia (DCMS), and that the Protrepticus was originally a dialogue. In passages preserved in Chapter 6 of Iamblichus’ Protrepticus (at 40.15-41.2/B55- 56), Aristotle offers three linked arguments for the claim that philosophy is easy. (I number the arguments in the translation that follows.) [1] For, with no pay coming from people to those who philosophize, on account of which [the latter] would have labored strenuously in this way, and with a great lead extended to the other arts, nevertheless their passing [the other arts] in exactness despite running a short time seems to me to be a sign of the easiness about philosophy. [2] And further, everybody’s feeling at home in it and wishing to occupy leisure with it, leaving aside all else, is no small sign that the close attention comes with pleasure; for no one is willing to labor for a long time.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Five
    chapter five STRATEGIES OF PERSUASION IN SOLON’S ELEGIES Maria Noussia As recent works on early or “pre-rhetorical”/“pre-conceptual” rhetoric have shown,1 there is good reason to believe that a practical under- standing of the means of persuasion existed long before the advent of formal rhetoric in the late fifth and early fourth centuries BC. In this paper I will explore the concept of “pre-rhetorical rhetoric” in the ele- gies of Solon.2 There is still no widespread recognition of the rhetorical dimension of Solon’s poetry, despite a certain number of recent studies.3 In order to uncover Solon’s argumentative operation and strategies of persuasion I will rely heavily on Aristotle (and to a much lesser degree, on the late fourth century BC treatise On Rhetoric dedicated to Alexander, which has been transmitted among Aristotle’s works but is generally attributed to the sophist Anaximenes of Lampsacus, and which cen- tres on quick, concise instruction about convincing an audience). As a systematic tract, Aristotle’s Rhetoric allows us to identify a number of effects and devices in earlier texts, even if the writers of those texts did not use Aristotle’s terminology or method of reasoning, and even if not everything is explicable in Aristotle’s terms. Of course Aristotle’s 1 E.g. Walker (2000); Karp (1977); Enos (1993); Cole (1991); Kennedy (1963) 26–51. There is still, however, no textbook on “pre-rhetorical” rhetoric. I am most grateful to C. Carey, M. Fantuzzi, R. Hunter and M. Vetta for stimulating criticism of an earlier draft of this paper as well as to the organizers and the participants of the Nijmegen Conference for much help and criticism before, during and since that occasion.
    [Show full text]
  • Illinois Classical Studies
    View metadata, citation and similarbrought papers to you atby core.ac.ukCORE provided by Illinois Digital... The Proems of Plutarch's Lives PHILIP A. STADTER According to the proverb, "Well begun is half done." Plutarch certainly accepted this principle, for he lavished special care on the openings of his Parallel Lives. In this he was not unusual. Ever since Homer, artists had taken pains with the beginnings of their works. When rhetorical theory became the principal means of discussing literary organization, detailed rules were established governing the proper treatment of formal beginnings, or proems (7tpoo{|iia, Latin exordia). Other prose writers—philosophers, historians, technical writers—borrowed and adapted these theories for their own works. No writer, however, excels Plutarch in the variety, charm, and technical skill of his proems. The very number of the proems in the Parallel Lives^ —more than twenty—makes them a proper subject for study for anyone interested in the form of ancient prose or its use of rhetorical principles. But they are of more than formal interest, since they also reveal the expectations and assumptions of Plutarch and his readers. In them Plutarch expresses his motivations and purposes, and several contain major statements on method. In addition, since proems are especially directed at gaining the interest of the reader, they impUcitly reveal the nature of his audience: their social status, leisure activities, and intellectual interests. The proems to the Lives do not follow the model of other biographical proems, or of historical proems, although there are similarities of topic. In their variety and techniques they often remind one, as might be expected, of the essays of the Moralia.
    [Show full text]
  • John Walsh, Antipater and the Lamian War: a Study in 4Th Century Macedonian Counterinsurgency Doctrine
    The Ancient History Bulletin VOLUME TWENTY-NINE: 2015 NUMBERS 1-2 Edited by: Edward Anson ò Michael Fronda òDavid Hollander Timothy Howe òJoseph Roisman ò John Vanderspoel Pat Wheatley ò Sabine Müller ISSN 0835-3638 ANCIENT HISTORY BULLETIN Volume 29 (2015) Numbers 1-2 Edited by: Edward Anson, Michael Fronda, David Hollander, Sabine Müller, Joseph Roisman, John Vanderspoel, Pat Wheatley Senior Editor: Timothy Howe Editorial correspondents Elizabeth Baynham, Hugh Bowden, Franca Landucci Gattinoni, Alexander Meeus, Kurt Raaflaub, P.J. Rhodes, Robert Rollinger, Victor Alonso Troncoso Contents of volume twenty-nine Numbers 1-2 1 John Walsh, Antipater and the Lamian War: A Study in 4th Century Macedonian Counterinsurgency Doctrine 28 Nikos Karkavelias, The End of the Four Hundred Regime 57 Eloisa Paganoni, Bithynia in Memnon’s Perì Herakleias: A Case Study for a Reappraisal of Old and New Proposals Review Article 80 Thomas Scanlon, Satan’s Business or the People’s Choice: The Decline of Athletics in Late Antiquity NOTES TO CONTRIBUTORS AND SUBSCRIBERS The Ancient History Bulletin was founded in 1987 by Waldemar Heckel, Brian Lavelle, and John Vanderspoel. The board of editorial correspondents consists of Elizabeth Baynham (University of Newcastle), Hugh Bowden (Kings College, London), Franca Landucci Gattinoni (Università Cattolica, Milan), Alexander Meeus (University of Leuven), Kurt Raaflaub (Brown University), P.J. Rhodes (Durham University), Robert Rollinger (Universität Innsbruck), Victor Alonso Troncoso (Universidade da Coruña) AHB is currently edited by: Timothy Howe (Senior Editor: [email protected]), Edward Anson, Michael Fronda, David Hollander, Sabine Müller, Joseph Roisman, John Vanderspoel and Pat Wheatley. AHB promotes scholarly discussion in Ancient History and ancillary fields (such as epigraphy, papyrology, and numismatics) by publishing articles and notes on any aspect of the ancient world from the Near East to Late Antiquity.
    [Show full text]
  • Arguing to Convince the Rhetoric of Scientific Discourse
    MONOGRAPH MÈTODE Science Studies Journal (2015). University of Valencia. DOI: 10.7203/metode.6.4615 Article received: 23/02/2015, accepted: 13/03/2015. ARGUING TO CONVINCE THE RHETORIC OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSE TOMÁS ALBALADEJO This paper deals with scientifi c discourse as a rhetorical discourse from the point of view of the structure of the classical parts of oral discourse (and all kinds of discourse). The role of argumentation in discourse, with the perlocutionary goal of convincing the receiver, is studied as the foundation of the rhetorical nature of scientifi c discourse. A scientifi c treatise by Santiago Ramón y Cajal is analysed using the tools provided by rhetoric in order to prove the rhetorical nature of scientifi c discourse. The main contribution of this paper is to establish the crucial role of argumentation in scientifi c discourse and to demonstrate its permeation of the entire discourse. Keywords: rhetoric, rhetorical extension, rhetorical discourse, scientifi c discourse, argumentation. ■ THE EXPANSION OF RHETORIC AS A DISCIPLINE channel and is currently linked to digital discourse, without abandoning any of the former spaces. In It is well known that rhetoric was born in Sicily as this way, it is important in rhetoric to recover the a tool for communication within courts of justice in historical thinking proposed by García Berrio (1984). the fi eld of civil law. Nevertheless, rhetoric was not Despite its birth and development within the fi eld restricted in its early development to that particular of law, rhetoric maintained a close relationship with area of law, but extended to criminal law with a steady pedagogy, psychology and politics since its early days.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucian‟ S Paradoxa: Fiction, Aesthetics, and Identity
    i Lucian‟s Paradoxa: Fiction, Aesthetics, and Identity A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Classics of the College of Arts and Sciences by Valentina Popescu BA University of Iasi June 2009 Committee Chair: Kathryn J. Gutzwiller, Professor of Classics Abstract This dissertation represents a novel approach to the Lucianic corpus and studies paradox, with rhetorical, philosophical, and aesthetic implications, as Lucian‟s distinctive discursive mode of constructing cultural identity and literary innovation. While criticizing paradoxography - the literature of wonders - as true discourse, Lucian creates a novel, avowed false, discourse, as a form of contemplation and regeneration of the Greek literary tradition. Paradoxography is Lucian‟s favorite self-referential discourse in prolaliai, rhetorical introductions, where he strives to earn doxa through paradoxa - paradigms of exoticism applied to both author and work. Lucian elevates paradox from exotic to aesthetic, from hybrid novelty to astonishing beauty, expecting his audience to sublimate the experience of ekplexis from bewilderment to aesthetic pleasure. Lucian‟s construction of cultural identity, as an issue of tension between Greek and barbarian and between birthright and paideutic conquest, is predicated on paradoxology, a first- personal discourse based on rhetorical and philosophical paradox. While the biography of the author insinuates itself into the biography of the speaker, Lucian creates tension between macro- text and micro-text. Thus, the text becomes also its opposite and its reading represents almost an aporetic experience. iii iv To my family for their love, sacrifices, and prayers and to the memory of Ion Popescu, Doina Tatiana Mănoiu, and Nicolae Catrina v Table of Contents Introduction 1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Aus: Zeitschrift Für Papyrologie Und Epigraphik 130 (2000) 13–15 © Dr
    ADRIAN S. HOLLIS THE REPUTATION AND INFLUENCE OF CHOERILUS OF SAMOS aus: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 130 (2000) 13–15 © Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn 13 THE REPUTATION AND INFLUENCE OF CHOERILUS OF SAMOS Commenting on the distinction in Plato, Phaedrus 245 a 5–8 between poets inspired by man¤a1 and those who relied on t°xnh, the fifth-century neo-Platonist Hermias (112, p. 98, 28–30 ed. P. Couvreur, 1901) writes t¤ går ˜moion ≤ Xoir¤lou ka‹ Kallimãxou po¤hsiw prÚw tØn ÑOmÆrou µ Pindãrou; The general view2 seems to be that Hermias refers to Choerilus of Iasus, the court poet of Alexander the Great, ‘incultis qui versibus et male natis / rettulit acceptos, regale nomisma, Philippos’ (Horace, Epist. 2,1, 233–234). Yet the resulting situation is paradoxical: a strong candidate for the title of worst of all poets3 represents poetic t°xnh in conjunction with the master craftsman Callimachus4. To be a poet of t°xnh was hardly the ultimate condemnation, and did not preclude immortal, world-wide fame – at least in Ovid’s judgment of Callimachus5 (Amores 1, 15, 13–14) ‘Battiades semper toto cantabitur orbe: / quamvis ingenio non valet6, arte valet’. It seems to me much more likely that Hermias7 had in mind Choerilus of Samos8. The elder Choerilus flourished about 400 B.C., and originated the genre of Greek historical epic by writing on Xerxes’ invasion of Greece. There is some evidence (Suppl. Hell. 328) of a debate in the fourth and third centuries B.C. over the relative merits of Choerilus of Samos and Antimachus of Colophon; the former’s poetry was still current about A.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Diodorus Siculus. in Twelve Volumes. Vol. VII. Books XV, 20
    1 — — — \ \ THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY FOUNDED BY JAMES LOEB, LL.D. EDITED BY fT. E. PAGE, C.H., LITT.D. tE. CAPPS, PH.D., LL.D. t W. H. D. ROUSE, litt.d. L. A. POST, m.a. E. H. WARMINGTON, m.a., f.r.hist.soc. I DIODORUS OF SICILY VII . ) ifl u 1 r DIODORUS OF SICILY ,v 1 WITH AN ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY CHARLES L. SHERMAN PROFESSOR OF, HISTORY" AND POLITICAL SCIENCE, AMHERST COLLEGE 3D / odoy~uS Sieved s * M rt< IN TWELVE VOLUMES VII books xv. 20-xvi. 65 CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTD j MCMLII CONTENTS PAGE BOOK XV (CHAPS. 20-95) 1 book xvi (chaps. 1-65) 223 INDEX OF names 423 MAPS OF THE AREAS DESCRIBED IN VOL. VII At end, 1. SICILY AND GREECE (FROM DIODORUS III, L.C.L.) 2. EUROPE WESTERN AND SOUTHERN (FROM THE same) ° Printed in Great Britain LITERATURE £9 L 'A 1452846 v <T >1 THE LIBRARY OF HISTORY OF DIODORUS OF SICILY BOOK XV i « , AI0Ai2P0T THE LIBRARY OF HISTORY OF TOT 2IKEAinTOT DIODORUS OF SICILY BIBAIO0HKII2 ISTOPIKHS BOOK XV BIBA02 IIENTEKAIAEKATH 20. When Evander was archon at Athens, the 382/1 b.o. 8’ 1 1 20. ’E7t* (IpyovTOS ' Adr'/vr/cnv EvavSpov 'Pio- Romans elected six military tribunes with consular jialoi KarecrTrjijav avrl rwv VTidrujv %l\capyovs e£, power, Quintus Sulpicius, Gaius Fabius, Quintus Servilius, Publius Kotvrov HoAttlklov, P diov <Dd/3iov, Kotvrov Sep- Cornelius. During their term of 2 office, the Lacedaemonians took possession of the oviAiov, I 1 ottAiov KopvrjAiov ini Se tovtiov Aolks- Cadmeia in Thebes for the following reasons.
    [Show full text]
  • Manfred Kraus (Tübingen)
    1 Manfred Kraus (Tübingen) Ethos as a Technical Means of Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory That ethos, or the speaker's character, should be regarded as an efficient means of persuasion in eloquence seems only natural. Much less so, that it should be considered a technicalmeans in the sense that it may be devised, shaped and administered by the speaker's own skili. For we all know that any argument will be rar more convincing when uttered by a person of high reputation, good intelligence, and great reliability. But we would probably regard these factors as given prerequisites rather than as matter open to free manipulation by the orator. Even if we were prepared to acceptthe possibility of same manipulation there, we would at least not consider it desirable. Ancient rhetoricians, tao, recognized that the ethos of the speakerwas an important means of persuasion or "source of conviction'" They, however, from Aristotle onwards, clearly ranked it among 'technical' proofs (TrL<JTELS"EVTEXVOL) which were to be supplied by the logos itself.2 We shall see in the following that Aristotle, in developing his theory on ethos, in same respects departs from the views of bis predecessors, hut that, on the other hand, he was also ahle to draw on earlierconcepts and ideas. In a second step, we shall try to show what became of Aristotle's neatly arranged concept of ethos later on in the course of the history of rhetoric, especially in Cicero and Quintilian. For this purpose, it will be useful, throughout, to remember that three different kinds of characters are, at least potentially, involved in the rhetorical situation: the speaker's (or bis or her client's), the opponent's, and the audience's.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhetoric and Pedagogy
    This is a repository copy of Rhetoric and Pedagogy. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/133340/ Version: Accepted Version Book Section: Heath, MF orcid.org/0000-0001-6757-2087 (2017) Rhetoric and Pedagogy. In: MacDonald, MJ, (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Rhetorical Studies. Oxford University Press , New York , pp. 73-83. ISBN 9780199731596 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199731596.013.005 Heath, MF (2017) Rhetoric and Pedagogy. In: MacDonald, MJ, (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Rhetorical Studies, reproduced by permission of Oxford University Press, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199731596.013.005 Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ M. MacDonald (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Rhetorical Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017) Rhetoric and pedagogy Malcolm Heath Abstract: This article traces the development of rhetorical pedagogy from Homer to late antiquity. It is clear from Homer that effective public speaking was valued in archaic Greece, and seen as a teachable skill.
    [Show full text]
  • Ninus and Metiochus in the School of Rhetoric: the First Greek Novels
    Ninus and Metiochus in the school of rhetoric: the first Greek novels REGLA FERNÁNDEZ-GARRIDO Universidad de Huelva (CIPHCN) The fragmentary novels Ninus1 and Parthenope2 belong within the category of “love novels” and share several features: a) They can be considered “historical”3 because their protagonists correspond to people who actually existed (we have information of them from historical sources such as Ctesias and Diodorus Siculus for Ninus and Herodotus for Parthenope4), although they are obviously fictional. b) They are set in more or less remote times: Parthenope takes place in the 6th century BC, close to the setting of Callirhoe, while Ninus is in a more remote past. c) These novels not only circulated in written form, but were also represented in mime and in mosaics as is evident from the testimony of Lucian (On Dance)5 ————— 1 The papyri of this novel are PBerol. 6926, PGen. 85, PSI 1305 and an ostracon, OEdfu 306. For editions and commentaries see Kussl 1991, 15-67; Stephens – Winkler 1995, 23- 71; Kussl 1997; López Martínez 1998b,37-80. 2 The papyri of this novel are PBerol.9588, PBerol. 7927 and PBerol. 21179, which belong to the same papyrus; POxy 435, PMich.Inv.3402v and an ostracon, OBodl 2722. For edi- tions and commentaries, see Maehler 1976; Kussl 1991, 165-167; Stephens-Winkler 1995, 72-100; López Martínez 1998b, 121-144; 132; Alvares-Renner 2001; Hägg-Utas 2003, 23- 45; López Martínez – Ruiz Montero 2016a, 2016b and 2021. 3 About this category, see Hägg 2004, 73-98. For Ninus, see Billault 2004.
    [Show full text]