DOCSLIB.ORG

Schenkerian Analysis and Occam's Razor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Schenkerian Analysis and Occam's Razor Schenkerian Analysis and Occam’s Razor L. Poundie Burstein In his book Contemplating Music, Joseph Kerman perceptions of skilled listeners, and thus which famously criticized Schenkerian analysis as a may bear empirical investigation. These attitudes positivistic enterprise (1985: 73–74). Schenkerian also accord with the rhetoric found in many scholars largely have seemed hesitant to refute Schenkerian analyses, which typically refer to this accusation, perhaps betraying a reluctance things like prolongations or hidden motivic to deny the notion that Schenkerian analysis has connections as if these items actually reside within objective and experiential grounding. Some have the composition itself, waiting to be brought to even argued that Schenkerian analysis should light by the analyst.4 rightly have an empirical basis.1 However, it is not so clear how one can confi rm Indeed, it has often been suggested that that the connections described in a Schenkerian Schenkerian analysis seeks to describe certain analysis do indeed inhere in the work itself, or how concrete elements found in compositions, one can test whether the more subtle features demonstrating things such as the “coherence cited by Schenkerian analyses are perceived by the or the working-out of long-range implications average educated listener. Adding to the problems […] in the masterpieces of the tonal repertory” in this regard is the murky ontological status of (Schulenberg 1985: 304–5) or “the unity of [a] work what is examined by Schenkerian analysis. If the and the necessity of its constituent moments” compositions studied were performed by digital (Treitler 1989: 32), that it uncovers “connections computers in a strictly prescribed manner and for among tones that are not readily apparent” a clearly defi ned audience, then one might better (Cadwallader and Gagné 1998: 4), as well as the be able to produce analytic predictions of sorts. degree to which a composition may be regarded The notated compositions examined by the typical as tonal (Brown, Dempster, and Headlam 1989: Schenkerian analysis, however, admit a variety of 157). 2 Some have further argued that Schenkerian possible valid realizations in performances that analyses properly should reveal structures that are intended for a variety of types of audiences, are perceived by listeners, and thereby “should and this in turn creates severe diffi culties for predict how suitably qualifi ed auditors might those who attempt to make empirically verifi able respond to features characteristic of tonal music” statements about subtle features that may exist (Brown, Dempster, and Headlam 1989: 157).3 Such in a composition or that may be heard by skilled attitudes promote the notion that Schenkerian listeners. analyses seek to study objective elements that There is another way in which one may view the are present in the pieces themselves or in the goals of Schenkerian analysis, however, one that I 1 See, for instance, Brown 2005; and Brown, Dempster, and Headlam 1989; see also recent discussion in Debellis 2010. 2 Published comments suggesting that Schenkerian analyses seek to describe features that inhere in composition are by no means uncommon; see for instance, the statement in Debellis 2010: 114 that “a central tenet of [Schenkerian] theory is that a piece has a structure of a certain kind” (emphasis added). More often, however, authors tend to state the aims of Schenkerian analysis in a more elliptical fashion. For instance, it is common to fi nd claims that the Schenkerian method is a theory of tonal unity and coherence, without clear specifi cation whether the coherence and unity involved is to be regarded as a feature of the music itself or simply a proposed possible way in which one may experience the music; see, for instance, Salzer 1962: xv; see also discussion of “descriptive” and “suggestive” theories in Temperley 1999 and discussion below. 3 See also Walton 1993: 39, which states that analyses are “…specifi cations of what we hear. The possibility is open that even the Schenkerian deep structure of a piece, or the fact that the foreground and middleground are elaborations of the deep structure, is in fact an unacknowledged part of the content of musical experiences”; see also critique in Keiler 1978. 4 As Steven Rings notes, Schenkerian analyses tend to be “of the ‘theory of the piece,’ or immanent, variety […]. Such an immanent perspective is evident in familiar locutions in Schenkerian discourse, such as ‘The work is a ^3-line’” (Rings 2011: 36). 112 L. Poundie Burstein feel more accurately refl ects its fi nest applications. Does this analysis by Schenker refl ect how According to this alternate view, Schenkerian most skilled musicians hear this excerpt? My analysis is essentially a hermeneutic process, one own experience suggests not. I have discussed that seeks to propose persuasive and eff ective this passage in various undergraduate classes, ways of how a composition may be heard. As graduate classes, doctoral seminars, and work- such, the Schenkerian method functions as shops with students, professors, scholars, and what David Temperley refers to as a “suggestive” performers from around the world, and through theory rather than a “descriptive” theory; that is, this informal empirical survey I have found that it suggests what the analyst believes is a plausible almost nobody comes up with a reading similar and rewarding manner of perceiving a given to what Schenker has proposed. This suggests composition (Temperley 1999).5 For those who that Schenker’s reading does not predict how the can “hear” the work in a manner proposed by a typical qualifi ed auditor perceives this excerpt – Schenkerian reading (that is, for those who can unless one relies on a tautology by arguing that perceive a direct analogy between the analytic anybody who reads it diff erently than Schenker is model and the piece at hand) and who fi nd this therefore to be regarded as unqualifi ed (a stance proposed hearing to be a gratifying one, the admittedly that Schenker himself probably would analysis will prove successful. have taken). Consider Schenker’s reading of the theme I have found that the reading most people of the fi nale to Beethoven’s Sonata for Piano in adopt (at least before seeing Schenker’s reading) D Minor, Op. 31, No. 2 (Example 1).6 In citing an is more like what is shown in Example 2. With this analysis by Schenker himself, incidentally, I do not alternate reading, the tonic harmony is prolonged mean to suggest that Schenkerian analysis must from bars 1–12. Accordingly, the IV chord of bar conform to Schenker’s own analytic readings.7 9 does not connect to the V of bar 13. Since this What is called “Schenkerian analysis” represents alternate analysis avoids having a tonic couched a general approach that grew out of Schenker’s within a larger progression from IV to V, it thereby methods and concepts, and that since his time arguably presents a simpler, more direct reading has developed and evolved through a series of than was off ered by Schenker. As such, if one’s goal clarifi cations, misreadings, modifi cations, and in analysis is to demonstrate the tonal coherence extensions. The reason I cite this particular analysis and unity of a passage, or how this passage by Schenker is because I feel that it is an especially might be organically generated, then by applying fi ne example of Schenkerian interpretation, and Occam’s razor this alternate analysis would have that whether one agrees with the interpretation to be regarded as more successful than the put forth here, it exhibits elements that are worthy one put forth by Schenker. After all, it explains of emulation. the passage’s tonal coherence and unity in a As shown in Example 1b, Schenker reads this plausible manner that is at least as consistent as in passage as embraced by an Ursatz replica in which Schenker’s reading, but it does so in a simpler and a Zug from F to D in the upper voice is supported more direct fashion. And if the goal of the analysis by the Stufenkreise I–IV–V–I in D minor. Note is to demonstrate how qualifi ed listeners perceive that Schenker interprets the dominant-to-tonic the work, then the reasons mentioned above succession in bars 11–12 as couched within a larger likewise would support the reading presented in motion from IV to V. Also note that the Roman Example 2 as the better one. numeral V is placed under the bass-note D in the To be sure, there are various melodic, formal, hypermetrically weak bar 12, not under the bass- dynamic, and textural nuances that are concretely note A in bar 13. found in the score itself that could be cited 5 This roughly corresponds to what Debellis (2002: 119) describes as a “view of musical analysis [that] fi nds its value not in explanation but in its cultivation of an enriched mode of hearing on the listener’s part, where the listener hears the music in a new way, or becomes aware of new relationships to hear in it.” 6 Schenker’s analysis is from Schenker 1979, Figure 104.1. I discuss this analysis at length in Burstein 2009. 7 In this sense, the term “Schenkerian analysis” is an unfortunate one, since it wrongly might suggest that such analyses necessarily refl ect Schenker’s own views. Schenker himself likely would have frowned upon this term: he tended to view his theory not as one possible method for understanding music, but rather as the only appropriate method. 113 Schenkerian Analysis and Occam’s Razor Example 1a. Beethoven, Sonata in D Minor, Op. 31, No. 2, III, mm. 1–15. Example 1b.
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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Linguistics and Classical Theories of Rhetoric: Connections and Continuity
    DOI: 10.31703/glr.2020(V-I).01 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/glr.2020(V-I).01 Perkins, M. (2020). Linguistics and Classical Theories of Rhetoric: Connections and Continuity. Global Language Review, V(I), 1-09. doi:10.31703/glr.2020(V-I).01 Mark Perkins* p-ISSN: 2663-3299 e-ISSN: 2663-3841 L-ISSN: 2663-3299 Vol. V, No. I (Winter 2020) Page: 1 – 9 Linguistics and Classical Theories of Rhetoric: Connections and Continuity Abstract: Introduction The Connections between ancient A good beginning may be made by comparing the types of approaches to rhetoric, as found in Plato and questions that the ancients were concerned to answer with Aristotle, the prime ancient theorists of those that preoccupy the moderns, and by considering the rhetoric, and modern linguistic approaches extent to which ethical questions were seen to be integral to to register and genre theory, as in Hallidayan linguistics, show continuity of thought any theory of rhetoric. The ancients, indeed, were concerned across the centuries. They also suggest that with quite different sets of questions from those of today there may be such things as universal (Lloyd 1979). These may be characterised as being of a rhetorical principles as evidenced in various philosophical and social, and formal and technical nature. In schemata. However, ethical considerations the former category are found: “What type of argumentation comprised an essential part of the ancient is employed?”, “What is the relationship of rhetoric with view of rhetoric. A major feature of the truth?”, and “What is its relationship with ethics?” All through modern age is the opportunity to employ ancient history, and modern history until Einstein, it was techniques of persuasion by means of new generally believed that there were certain values that were true technological channels such as social media and blogs.
    [Show full text]
  • Occam's Razor Vol. 9 - Full (2019)
    Occam's Razor Volume 9 (2019) Article 1 2019 Occam's Razor Vol. 9 - Full (2019) Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/orwwu Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons, Biological and Physical Anthropology Commons, Biology Commons, Comparative Politics Commons, Exercise Science Commons, Forest Biology Commons, Macroeconomics Commons, and the Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation (2019) "Occam's Razor Vol. 9 - Full (2019)," Occam's Razor: Vol. 9 , Article 1. Available at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/orwwu/vol9/iss1/1 This Complete Volume is brought to you for free and open access by the Western Student Publications at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Occam's Razor by an authorized editor of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. et al.: Occam's Razor Vol. 9 - Full (2019) Published by Western CEDAR, 2019 1 Occam's Razor, Vol. 9 [2019], Art. 1 https://cedar.wwu.edu/orwwu/vol9/iss1/1 2 et al.: Occam's Razor Vol. 9 - Full (2019) OCCAM'S RAZOR Published by Western CEDAR, 2019 3 Occam's Razor, Vol. 9 [2019], Art. 1 https://cedar.wwu.edu/orwwu/vol9/iss1/1 4 et al.: Occam's Razor Vol. 9 - Full (2019) V, 05 FORWARD I- z BY EDITOR-IN-CHIEF GRACE DUNBAR-MILLER LU I- z 06 THE RUIN 0 u A NEW TRANSLATION by Margot Lamy LL 0 LU ...I 14 WEIRD DECENTERING ca THE UNNATURAL IN HP LOVECRAFT'S <( I- AT THE MOUNTAIN OF MADNESS by Braden Timss 24 PARADIGMATIC BIO-LOGIC AGAINST BIOLOGY AND TOWARDS TRANSLIFE by Chris Coles 34 THE LINGUISTIC CAPITAL OF AMAZON'S THE MARVELOUS MRS.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhetorical Pragmatics Article Info
    Journal of Advanced Social Research Vol.5 No.5, May 2015, 19-38 Rhetorical Pragmatics Article Info Hussain Hameed Mayuuf University of Babylon College of Education For Human Sciences Received:05.03.2015 Accepted:22.04.2015 Department of English Published online:01.05.2015 [email protected] ISSN: 2231-8275 ABSTRACT This study tackles Rhetorical Pragmatics. It starts with a brief idea about Rhetoric; its relationship with Dialectics, Communication, and pragmatics. The study adopts Leech's model of communication which entails explaining the Interpersonal Rhetoric with its components: the cooperative , politeness, irony and Banter principles. An idea concerning the textual Rhetoric is also presented in section four giving some significant points on its principles. The paper also deals with Rhetorical Pragmatic Strategies, types of arguments, figures of speech and Tropes. The paper ends with a brief idea about Strategic Maneuvering in argumentation. Keywords: Rhetoric, Pragmatics, argument, argumentation, cooperative principle, tropes and strategic maneuvering. 1. Rhetoric 1.1 Historical Background Rhetoric has its roots in the culture of Greece and Rome as a system of persuasive techniques. Rhetoric is defined as "the ability to see, in any given case, the available means of persuasion". Rhetoric is the persuasive use of language. This discipline flourished by the appearance of Aristotle's Rhetoric in the 4th century (BC.) by the work of the famous Roman teachers of rhetoric such as Cicero and Quintilian. Aristotle made a distinction between three main modes of persuasion: (a) Appeal by reason (b) Appeal by ethics (c) Emotional (aesthetical) appeal. This distinction is mirrored in the three-fold division of styles: 1- Logos: persuasion through reasoning.
    [Show full text]
  • Questionable Classification of Figures of Speech As Fundamental to the Need for Powerful Rhetoric in Governance -- /
    Alternative view of segmented documents via Kairos 8 August 2016 | Draft Questionable Classification of Figures of Speech as fundamental to the need for powerful rhetoric in governance -- / -- Introduction Dysfunctionally disparate classifications? Categorization of figures of speech in non-western cultures References Introduction As fundamental to persuasive rhetoric, it is curious, but potentially significant, that the variety of styles of speech is so notably framed by the term figures of speech. As a term which has both aesthetic and geometrical connotations, how are such "figures" to be understood -- especially in relation to imagining the great game of Castalia? This is discussed separately in a paper of which this is effectively an annex Evoking Castalia as Envisaged, Entoned and Embodied (2016). The implications of the following are discussed there in terms of metapoetics and musical-rhetorical figure theory (Musica poetica). Figures of speech are of course fundamental to discourse -- and to the public discourse central to governance, the processes of persuasion through argument, and to confidence building. The phrase "talking things up" is noteworthy in this respect. For Stephen Adams (Poetic Designs: an introduction to meters, verse forms, and figures of speech, 1997): Far from being artificial distortions of language, the figures have developed from patterns that naturally appear when language is used with great emotion and energy. As such they provide one means for identitying patterns that emerge in free verse and help give it formal organization... (p 108) Especially pertinent, at a time when arguments presented in English are challenged by those presented, in Arabic is the reflection on figures of speech by Hussein Abdul-Raof (Arabic Rhetoric: a pragmatic analysis, 2006): The traditional meaning of "figurative" has always involved a contrast with the "proper" meaning of a given word, its supposed meaning, the idea which comes to mind when the word is employed.
    [Show full text]