Pub Date : 2019-09-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1671704
A. Gross
ABSTRACT A major contribution to rhetorical theory and an important tool of rhetorical criticism, Perelman’s distinction between particular audiences and the universal audience has been misconstrued by his critics and even by Perelman himself. Properly construed, the universal audience is focused on facts and truths and consists of all human beings in so far as they are rational; consequently, discourse addressed to it eschews proofs from character and emotion. In contrast, addresses to particular audiences focus on values; they embrace not only proofs reason, but also those from character and emotion.
{"title":"Misunderstanding the Universal Audience","authors":"A. Gross","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1671704","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1671704","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A major contribution to rhetorical theory and an important tool of rhetorical criticism, Perelman’s distinction between particular audiences and the universal audience has been misconstrued by his critics and even by Perelman himself. Properly construed, the universal audience is focused on facts and truths and consists of all human beings in so far as they are rational; consequently, discourse addressed to it eschews proofs from character and emotion. In contrast, addresses to particular audiences focus on values; they embrace not only proofs reason, but also those from character and emotion.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"290 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1671704","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59925060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-04DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618050
Arthur E. Walzer
{"title":"Editor’s Note","authors":"Arthur E. Walzer","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618050","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"119 - 119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618050","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41925966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618054
Kathleen S. Lamp
ABSTRACT In this essay, I examine two epideictic artifacts from the Roman Principate, The Res Gestae Divi Augusti and the summi viri, arguing Augustus used them to reshape the model of a good leader, in part, by emphasizing contributing to the built environment of the city. Additionally, the public and visual nature of these artifacts made them highly accessible to those outside of the Roman elite, who may have sought social mobility through the imperial bureaucracy allowing for more diverse participation in the Roman government. I close by considering the influence of classical exemplars on U.S. civic spaces.
{"title":"Building Praise: Augustan Rome and Epideictic","authors":"Kathleen S. Lamp","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618054","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this essay, I examine two epideictic artifacts from the Roman Principate, The Res Gestae Divi Augusti and the summi viri, arguing Augustus used them to reshape the model of a good leader, in part, by emphasizing contributing to the built environment of the city. Additionally, the public and visual nature of these artifacts made them highly accessible to those outside of the Roman elite, who may have sought social mobility through the imperial bureaucracy allowing for more diverse participation in the Roman government. I close by considering the influence of classical exemplars on U.S. civic spaces.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"153 - 166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618054","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42881848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618052
Xing Lu
ABSTRACT This paper reviews and compares diverse rhetorical conceptualizations within Chinese rhetorical tradition during the fifth to third century B.C.E. Textual evidence shows that three schools of thoughts, namely Confucianism, Daoism, and Mohism, have contested with and challenged one another on the components and functions of rhetoric. Confucianism is more concerned with the moral character of the speaker while Mohism claims that rhetoric is used for mutual benefit and contains a rational element. Daoism, on the other hand, approaches rhetoric with a transcendental and dialectical outlook. This overview demonstrates the multi-faceted characteristics of ancient Chinese rhetoric.
{"title":"Contestation of Rhetoric within the Chinese Tradition: An Overview of Confucian Moralistic Rhetoric, Daoist Transcendental Rhetoric, and Mohist Utilitarian Rhetoric","authors":"Xing Lu","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618052","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper reviews and compares diverse rhetorical conceptualizations within Chinese rhetorical tradition during the fifth to third century B.C.E. Textual evidence shows that three schools of thoughts, namely Confucianism, Daoism, and Mohism, have contested with and challenged one another on the components and functions of rhetoric. Confucianism is more concerned with the moral character of the speaker while Mohism claims that rhetoric is used for mutual benefit and contains a rational element. Daoism, on the other hand, approaches rhetoric with a transcendental and dialectical outlook. This overview demonstrates the multi-faceted characteristics of ancient Chinese rhetoric.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"125 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618052","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42360870","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618056
Janet M. Atwill, Josie Portz
ABSTRACT This article posits that bringing diversity to histories of rhetoric may require not only revising canons but also “unwriting” the narratives of Western civilization in which canonical figures have been cast. Two conventions of these narratives are of special significance: fixed identities and narrative coherence. Focusing on the cultural contexts of Aelius Aristides’ “Regarding Sarapis,” we suggest that these conventions obscure the cultural differences that were always there.
{"title":"Identity and Difference in Aelius Aristides’ “Regarding Sarapis”","authors":"Janet M. Atwill, Josie Portz","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618056","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article posits that bringing diversity to histories of rhetoric may require not only revising canons but also “unwriting” the narratives of Western civilization in which canonical figures have been cast. Two conventions of these narratives are of special significance: fixed identities and narrative coherence. Focusing on the cultural contexts of Aelius Aristides’ “Regarding Sarapis,” we suggest that these conventions obscure the cultural differences that were always there.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"179 - 193"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618056","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41908341","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618055
R. Terrill
ABSTRACT The value of imitatio as a pedagogical tactic in rhetorical education has been attested to for millennia. But within the context of a culture of diversity, imitation becomes potentially problematic. This essay describes two attitudes toward imitatio that may contribute to modifying the practice in ways that enable it to be recovered for use in contemporary classrooms. The first entails reimagining the relationships between students and their model texts as multivalent conversations rather than dyadic exchanges; the second entails challenging the hierarchies that are implied when students are expected to model their work on texts that are considered superior. These two attitudes encourage the integration of imitatio into a rhetorical education that is essential for the cultivation of a just and engaged twenty-first century citizenship.
{"title":"Rhetorical Imitation and Civic Diversity","authors":"R. Terrill","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618055","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The value of imitatio as a pedagogical tactic in rhetorical education has been attested to for millennia. But within the context of a culture of diversity, imitation becomes potentially problematic. This essay describes two attitudes toward imitatio that may contribute to modifying the practice in ways that enable it to be recovered for use in contemporary classrooms. The first entails reimagining the relationships between students and their model texts as multivalent conversations rather than dyadic exchanges; the second entails challenging the hierarchies that are implied when students are expected to model their work on texts that are considered superior. These two attitudes encourage the integration of imitatio into a rhetorical education that is essential for the cultivation of a just and engaged twenty-first century citizenship.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"167 - 178"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618055","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59924981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618057
Elif Guler, Iklim Goksel
ABSTRACT This study contributes to the conversations on a more globalized and inclusive rhetorical praxis by focusing on how rhetoric was produced and understood by Turks – a group whose history spans centuries since their ancient origins in central Asia. We examine the ways in which Turkic/Turkish rhetoric was practiced and conceptualized in two seminal texts from the pre-Islamic and republican periods of the Turkish rhetorical tradition: the Orkhon inscriptions (8th century) and Atatürk’s Nutuk (1927). The intertextuality of these texts allows us to explore their relationships across time and space as well as mediate rhetorical styles and performances in their discourse.
{"title":"Understanding Turkish Rhetoric in the Intertextuality of Two Seminal Texts: The Orkhon Inscriptions and Atatürk’s Nutuk","authors":"Elif Guler, Iklim Goksel","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618057","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study contributes to the conversations on a more globalized and inclusive rhetorical praxis by focusing on how rhetoric was produced and understood by Turks – a group whose history spans centuries since their ancient origins in central Asia. We examine the ways in which Turkic/Turkish rhetoric was practiced and conceptualized in two seminal texts from the pre-Islamic and republican periods of the Turkish rhetorical tradition: the Orkhon inscriptions (8th century) and Atatürk’s Nutuk (1927). The intertextuality of these texts allows us to explore their relationships across time and space as well as mediate rhetorical styles and performances in their discourse.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"194 - 207"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618057","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48491643","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618060
Clayton L. Terry
In Permanence and Change, Kenneth Burke wrote that rhetorical style is nothing more than ingratiation—an attempt to gain approval by saying the right thing in the right context. Marie Lund’s commen...
{"title":"Marie Lund, An Argument on Rhetorical Style. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press, 2017. 220 pp. $39.98 (paper). ISBN: 978-8771842203.","authors":"Clayton L. Terry","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618060","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618060","url":null,"abstract":"In Permanence and Change, Kenneth Burke wrote that rhetorical style is nothing more than ingratiation—an attempt to gain approval by saying the right thing in the right context. Marie Lund’s commen...","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"223 - 225"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618060","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42689399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618051
Scott R. Stroud
Rhetoric often serves as a way to bridge important differences in the act of persuasion. As a field, rhetoric has worked to include more and more diverse voices. Much more is left to be written, however, on how this admittedly important concept of diversity affects the study and practice of rhetoric. This volume of Advances in the History of Rhetoric serves as a material trace of the American Society for the History of Rhetoric’s recent attempts to highlight diversity in and among rhetorical traditions. It collects essays from those presented at the 2018 symposium on the theme of “Diversity and Rhetorical Traditions.” All of these essays were subjected to additional review to finetune their arguments for this special journal issue. Each displays the perils and promises of engaging diversity as a topic within – and among – rhetorical traditions. Part of the challenge of coming to terms with difference is the confrontation with something, be it a tradition, a thinker, or a text, that challenges one’s own way of understanding the world, possible accounts of it, and our structures of reasoning and justification. Marking something as “different” is better than marking that person, text, or tradition as “wrong” or “misguided.” Coming to terms with – and even simply recognizing – difference is an accomplishment, especially when it’s not followed by dismissal or rejection. We too often default to the familiar – familiar texts and standards of judgment. These tensions over engaging differences in texts and people are the classical challenges facing comparative endeavors and the field that explores diversity among rhetorical traditions–known as comparative rhetoric – has made progress in navigating these demands. Early studies in the rhetorical practices of “non-western cultures” (a term that highlights the normative challenges of difference in naming objects of study) served as important, but imperfect, starting points. For instance, Robert T. Oliver’s 1971 book, Communication and Culture in Ancient India and China, represents one of the first sustained enquiries into the rhetoric of China and India, putatively on their own terms. It was a grand project, ambitious in its aims. Yet in his pursuit of respecting difference in these traditions from the familiar GrecoRoman rhetorical tradition, some have argued that Oliver emphasized a “deficiency model” that emphasized Chinese or Indian rhetorics’ lack of
修辞通常是在说服行为中弥合重要分歧的一种方式。作为一个领域，修辞学已经努力包含越来越多不同的声音。然而，关于多样性这一公认重要的概念如何影响修辞学的研究和实践，还有很多工作要写。这本《修辞学史进展》一书是美国修辞学史学会最近试图强调修辞传统多样性的一个重要线索。它收集了2018年研讨会上以“多样性和修辞传统”为主题的论文。所有这些论文都经过了额外的审查，以调整它们在本期杂志上的论点。每一个都展示了将多样性作为修辞传统内部和之间的主题的危险和承诺。接受差异的部分挑战是与某种东西的对抗，无论是传统、思想家还是文本，都会挑战一个人理解世界的方式、对世界的可能描述以及我们的推理和论证结构。将某件事标记为“不同”总比将该人、文本或传统标记为“错误”或“被误导”要好。接受——甚至只是承认——差异是一种成就，尤其是在没有被解雇或拒绝的情况下。我们经常默认熟悉的文本和判断标准。这些关于文本和人之间差异的紧张关系是比较努力面临的经典挑战，而探索修辞传统多样性的领域——即比较修辞——在满足这些需求方面取得了进展。早期对“非西方文化”（一个强调研究对象命名差异的规范挑战的术语）修辞实践的研究是重要但不完善的起点。例如，罗伯特·T·奥利弗（Robert T.Oliver）1971年出版的《古代印度和中国的传播与文化》（Communication and Culture in Ancient India and China）一书，代表了对中国和印度修辞的第一次持续调查之一，据信是根据它们自己的条件进行的。这是一个宏伟的工程，目标远大。然而，在他追求尊重这些传统与熟悉的希腊罗马修辞传统的差异时，一些人认为奥利弗强调了一种“缺陷模式”，强调了中国或印度修辞缺乏
{"title":"Diversity in and among Rhetorical Traditions","authors":"Scott R. Stroud","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618051","url":null,"abstract":"Rhetoric often serves as a way to bridge important differences in the act of persuasion. As a field, rhetoric has worked to include more and more diverse voices. Much more is left to be written, however, on how this admittedly important concept of diversity affects the study and practice of rhetoric. This volume of Advances in the History of Rhetoric serves as a material trace of the American Society for the History of Rhetoric’s recent attempts to highlight diversity in and among rhetorical traditions. It collects essays from those presented at the 2018 symposium on the theme of “Diversity and Rhetorical Traditions.” All of these essays were subjected to additional review to finetune their arguments for this special journal issue. Each displays the perils and promises of engaging diversity as a topic within – and among – rhetorical traditions. Part of the challenge of coming to terms with difference is the confrontation with something, be it a tradition, a thinker, or a text, that challenges one’s own way of understanding the world, possible accounts of it, and our structures of reasoning and justification. Marking something as “different” is better than marking that person, text, or tradition as “wrong” or “misguided.” Coming to terms with – and even simply recognizing – difference is an accomplishment, especially when it’s not followed by dismissal or rejection. We too often default to the familiar – familiar texts and standards of judgment. These tensions over engaging differences in texts and people are the classical challenges facing comparative endeavors and the field that explores diversity among rhetorical traditions–known as comparative rhetoric – has made progress in navigating these demands. Early studies in the rhetorical practices of “non-western cultures” (a term that highlights the normative challenges of difference in naming objects of study) served as important, but imperfect, starting points. For instance, Robert T. Oliver’s 1971 book, Communication and Culture in Ancient India and China, represents one of the first sustained enquiries into the rhetoric of China and India, putatively on their own terms. It was a grand project, ambitious in its aims. Yet in his pursuit of respecting difference in these traditions from the familiar GrecoRoman rhetorical tradition, some have argued that Oliver emphasized a “deficiency model” that emphasized Chinese or Indian rhetorics’ lack of","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"120 - 124"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618051","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48336195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1080/15362426.2019.1618053
Ryan C. Butterfield
ABSTRACT During China’s Republican Period, scholar and reformer Hu Shi advanced a rhetorical pragmatic project for democratic reform. In this essay, I argue that the dissertation Hu wrote under the advisement of John Dewey, “The Development of Logical Method in Ancient China,” was itself a groundbreaking piece of rhetorical invention that functioned as part of Hu’s project by reinterpreting ancient Chinese classics as the foundations for a model of rhetorical pragmatic argumentation.
{"title":"Hu Shi’s Model of Rhetorical Pragmatic Argumentation","authors":"Ryan C. Butterfield","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2019.1618053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618053","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT During China’s Republican Period, scholar and reformer Hu Shi advanced a rhetorical pragmatic project for democratic reform. In this essay, I argue that the dissertation Hu wrote under the advisement of John Dewey, “The Development of Logical Method in Ancient China,” was itself a groundbreaking piece of rhetorical invention that functioned as part of Hu’s project by reinterpreting ancient Chinese classics as the foundations for a model of rhetorical pragmatic argumentation.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"22 1","pages":"139 - 152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618053","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46402889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：