{"title":"“午夜法官的案例”和多观众话语:首席大法官马歇尔和马布里·v·麦迪逊","authors":"William L. Benoit, J. M. D'Agostine","doi":"10.1080/10417949409372928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rhetorical theory and criticism offer scant advice on approaching multiple audiences, despite that fact that much discourse addresses heterogeneous audiences. This analysis of Chief Justice Marshall's Supreme Court opinion in the case of Marbury v. Madison illustrates the use of separation and incorporation (a form of integration) in a multiple audience situation. It also offers insight on a landmark case in the development of our tripartite system of government.","PeriodicalId":212800,"journal":{"name":"Southern Journal of Communication","volume":"23 7","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“The case of the midnight judges” and multiple audience discourse: Chief Justice Marshall and Marbury V. Madison\",\"authors\":\"William L. Benoit, J. M. D'Agostine\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10417949409372928\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Rhetorical theory and criticism offer scant advice on approaching multiple audiences, despite that fact that much discourse addresses heterogeneous audiences. This analysis of Chief Justice Marshall's Supreme Court opinion in the case of Marbury v. Madison illustrates the use of separation and incorporation (a form of integration) in a multiple audience situation. It also offers insight on a landmark case in the development of our tripartite system of government.\",\"PeriodicalId\":212800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Southern Journal of Communication\",\"volume\":\"23 7\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Southern Journal of Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949409372928\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Journal of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949409372928","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
“The case of the midnight judges” and multiple audience discourse: Chief Justice Marshall and Marbury V. Madison
Rhetorical theory and criticism offer scant advice on approaching multiple audiences, despite that fact that much discourse addresses heterogeneous audiences. This analysis of Chief Justice Marshall's Supreme Court opinion in the case of Marbury v. Madison illustrates the use of separation and incorporation (a form of integration) in a multiple audience situation. It also offers insight on a landmark case in the development of our tripartite system of government.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
