Enhancing the Students' Rhetoric Attainments in Teaching of College
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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? . -
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 . -
Descriptive Writing.Pdf
Let's f)escribe Descriptive writing rto: of writing thar i i atempts ro share with the reader j": *n;; m u s, u s e w ord "; with*:i:,r.T* the color, #:j::: age, size, ::: s de a,i n g "::'":J::jshape, scent, sound,^:::rr9,i" materiar, ,""r".l,lttnllrlJTHrfi:ffi temperature' The use of descriptive words and phrases esting and gives rur.., the writing more inter- the reader a tetter understaniing of and settings' problems, characters, Descriptive writing makes the subjeJt.o.n.-utiu"."urnir, when this happens, easier for the readei to ;lffi"#:t become invotved with the characters unoit.i. Read the folrowing exampre of descriptive writing. Then answer the questions. My rittle brother Andrew had a very large, flrffy, brlc-k -{ white blaze dog. The dog,s name was decorated her forehead uno Murphy. onJorrr". r.gr.-uer shiny coat glistened. Murphy was^very smart. By the time she was one yelr_grd, Murphy was already weil things when instructed Her ravorit"iov ::il:lr:f;ffT;:;lrTjfl.iTf# 'u, a sort, red, Murphy tu'1very friendly doug' very quier and serdom tiiendliness' Murphy would lT :l barked or growred. In her t'n to uiyon" who came near. prayful pant leg or sleeve Murphy might tug on your if given the chance. rhor" who play' knew h", uno"rrtood that she just Strangers' however' were often wanted to frightened u, ,rr" ,igrr, ,r this.big, shaggy dog running at rrom this;;"d";:""t ffi'ilTl; lll;Ji3J,,??T::ifl**1iJ.",,l::?; '.'"; Murphy ivas l. -
Literary Terms-Key
Malcolm Literary Terms ________________________ English 11 Name 1. Allegory – A story with 2 levels of meaning: literal and symbolic 2. Alliteration – Repetition of a consonant sound at beginning of words. 3. Allusion – Reference to well-known people, places, events, work of literature, etc. 4. Ambiguity – When a statement contains 2 or more possible meanings. (“I promise I’ll give you a ring tomorrow.”) 5. Ambivalence – The state of having 2 opposing feelings toward a person or thing at the same time. (“Can’t live with you, can’t live without you.”) 6. Analogy – The comparison of a new idea to a well-known idea to aid in comprehension 7. Anecdote – A brief story about an interesting, unusual, or humorous event 8. Antagonist – Character or force in conflict with the main character. (The Joker, The Green Goblin) 9. Antanaclasis – Stylistic repetition of a word utilizing different definitions of the word each time (“We must all hang together, or assuredly we will all hang together.”) 10.Antithesis – The use of phrases with opposite meanings in close conjunction. (“One small step for man; one giant leap for mankind.”) 11.Aphorism – A general truth or observation about life, often witty. (An apple a day keeps the doctor away.) 12.Apostrophe – figure of speech in which the writer directly addresses the reader or an absent/abstract idea. (Build thee more stately mansions, oh my soul.) 13.Aside – In drama, a short passage that an actor speaks to the audience and the other characters pretend they cannot hear. 14.Assonance – repetition of vowel sounds. (Ashley asked for applesauce after her anchovies.) 15.Autobiography – Work of nonfiction in which the author writes about his/her own life. -
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. -
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 .. -
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”). -
Chapter Ii Literature Review and Conceptual Framework
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK This chapter attempts to discuss all literature related to the research. The discussion covers stylistics, figures of speech, function of figures of speech, and Coraline. Some related previous studies are also discussed as references for this research. Conceptual framework is given to show the system of ideas of this research. A. Theoretical Description 1. Stylistics According to Leech and Short (2007: 9) style refers to the way in which language is used in a given context, by a given person, for a given purpose. Style in a literary work such as a novel may show the writer‘s ‗thumbprint‘, a mark of the writer‘s habit in writing his work. For literary works, style can be used to reflect the genres, individuals, period, or language (Lehman, 1996: 303).A linguistic study upon style is called stylistics. Stylistics can also be a method of interpreting a text in which the most important thing for the study is assigned to language (Simpson, 2004: 2) Every analysis of style is an attempt to find the artistic principles underlying a writer‘s choice of language (Leech and Short, 2007: 69). All writers have their own individual qualities. One text may have certain features which made it special to gather its reader. That special feature may not be quite important or necessary on other text. Therefore, it needs different techniques to 32 33 analyze different texts. Researcher has to have consciousness towards analyzing the artistic effect using linguistic details that fit into the text. Then, it is useful to have a list of features which may or may not be significant in a given text to be analyzed. -
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. -
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. -
1 12 AP Literature Glossary of Terms Ms. Sutton ALLEGORY Story Or
12 AP Literature Glossary of Terms Ms. Sutton ALLEGORY story or poem in which characters, settings, and events stand for other people or events or for abstract ideas or qualities. EXAMPLE: Animal Farm; Dante’s Inferno; Lord of the Flies ALLITERATION repetition of the same or similar consonant sounds in words that are close together. EXAMPLE: “When the two youths turned with the flag they saw that much of the regiment had crumbled away, and the dejected remnant was coming slowly back.” –Stephen Crane (Note how regiment and remnant are being used; the regiment is gone, a remnant remains…) ALLUSION reference to someone or something that is known from history, literature, religion, politics, sports, science, or another branch of culture. An indirect reference to something (usually from literature, etc.). AMBIGUITY deliberately suggesting two or more different, and sometimes conflicting, meanings in a work. An event or situation that may be interpreted in more than one way-- this is done on purpose by the author, when it is not done on purpose, it is vagueness, and detracts from the work. ANALOGY Comparison made between two things to show how they are alike ANAPHORA Repetition of a word, phrase, or clause at the beginning of two or more sentences in a row. This is a deliberate form of repetition and helps make the writer’s point more coherent. ANASTROPHE Inversion of the usual, normal, or logical order of the parts of a sentence. Purpose is rhythm or emphasis or euphony. It is a fancy word for inversion. ANECDOTE Brief story, told to illustrate a point or serve as an example of something, often shows character of an individual ANTAGONIST Opponent who struggles against or blocks the hero, or protagonist, in a story. -
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.