Traditional and Modern Concepts of Rhetoric: Six Peculiarities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v16i3.396Keywords:
traditional and modern rhetoric, logical and extra-logical components, area of operation, communication, permissible and inadmissible means, general and particular rhetoricAbstract
The article explores the common denominators and differences of traditional and modern understandings of rhetoric. It reveals main tendencies of development of rhetoric as a field of theoretical knowledge and transformations of the problematics. The issue of interrelation between logical-content and extra-logical (psychological, aesthetic, ethical, linguistic, ritual) factors in traditional and modern concepts of rhetoric is discussed. The following thesis is substantiated that in modern concepts of rhetoric both the arsenal of tricks used and the area of operation are expanded to include other forms and manifestations of human communication in line with the individual-to-audience model.
It is argued that, unlike traditional rhetoric, which is largely monologue-based, modern concepts mostly implement rhetoric tricks in negotiation, debate, and competition situations.
The article analyzes the issue of correlation between oral public and direct speech on the one hand, and, on the other, written speech and mediated means of communication in the traditional and modern concepts of rhetoric.
The view is substantiated that in the modern system of rhetoric, much importance is attached to ethical questions, to the issues whether the means used are permissible or inadmissible in terms of effective communication norms.
The relations between the philosophical theory of rhetoric (general rhetoric) and its individual spheres are discussed.
Downloads
References
Aristotle (1929) (MCMXXVI). The Art of Rhetoric. London, New York. Retrieved from: https://ryanfb.github.io/loebolusdata/L193.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1PmS5Td-WGD3jbVdOV78JgZFQk7MrsqTRAXu5j0ilnh3M6Wr3BA-Cqhh0o.
Aristotle (1955) (MCMLV). On Sophistical Refutations. London, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Har-vard University Press. Retrieved from: https://ryanfb.github.io/loebolus-data/L400.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3q-f59UbJXCnJKFL8nLqzplzbFR3g1mE6kb1etUHUzXb39jCDk5FlYaN4.
Aristotle (1960) (MCMLX). Posterior Analytics. Topica. London, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Har-vard University Press. Retrieved from: https://ia600905.us.archive.org/22/items/L391AristotlePosteriorAnalyticsTopica/L391-Aristotle%20Posterior%-20Analytics%20Topica.pdf?
Belokon, L. (2012). Dve ipostasi obshchei ritoriki (Two Hypostasis of General Rhetoric, in Russian). Retrieved from: https://www.proza.ru/2012/04/22/1942.
Bredemeier, K. (2005). Schwarze Rhetorik: Macht und Magie der Sprache. 3. Auflage, München: Wilhelm Goldmann Verlag.
Brutian, G. A. (1992). Ocherk teorii argumentacii (Outline of the Theory of Argumentation, in Russian). Yerevan: NSA RA.
Carnegie, D. (2010). How to Win Friends and Influence People. New York: Pocket Books.
Cicero (1967) (MCMLXVII). De Oratore. In two volumes. (Vol. 1, Books I, II). London, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press. Retrieved from: http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/cicero_de_-oratore.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0BYGZrEtl-vo7WMcKDChM1OvETEhJjtWDyGV5XqCJMnxELNHu9A7GrwMoo.
Diogenes Laertius. (1925) (MCMXXV). Livess of Eminent Philosophers (R. D. Hicks, M. A. Trans.). In two volumes (Vol. 2). London, New York. Retrieved from: https://ryanfb.github.io/loebolus-data/L185.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0k2qXku5-UMTRKTjP00eax2mXtrXgo-KUCyMByCRJYTFXP81MxkrjIAvwk.
Eemeren, van F. H, Grootendorst, R., & Kruiger, T. (1987). Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht-Holland/ Providence-USA? Foris Publication.
Fisher, R., & Uri, W. (1991). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in. New York.
Hintikka J. A., (1989, January). The Role of Logic in Argumentation. The Monist, 72 (1).
Hovhannisyan, H. O. (2019). Banavechi tesut’yun ev arvest: pilisopayakan traktat (The Theory and Art of Dicussion: Philosophical Tractate, in Armenian). Yerevan: YSU Publishing House.
Johnston, H. (1966). The Relevance of Rhetoric to Philosophy and of Philosophy to Rhetoric. Quarterly Journal of Speech, LII(1), 41-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335636609382756.
McLuhen, H. M. (1962). The Gutenberg Galaxy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Mehrabian, A. (2009). Nonverbal Communication. New Brunswik (U.S.A) and London (U.K.).
Mirzoyan, V. A. (2010). Chartasanut’yun (Rhetoric, in Armenian). (4th ed). Yerevan: Iravunk.
Perelman, Ch., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre-Dame-London.
Petrosyan, A. (2003). Gortsarar haghordakcut’yun (Business Communication, in Armenian). Yrevan: Tigran Mets.
Povarnin, S. I. (1990). Spor. O teorii i praktike spora. V zhurnale “Voprosy filosofii” (Controversy. On the Theory and Practice of the Controversy, in Russian). Questions of Philosophy, 3, 57-133.
Schopenhauer, A. (n.d.) Eristische Dialektik. In: Handschriftlicher Nachlass (pp. 71-107). Hrsg.v. Ed. Grisebach. Bd. 2. Leipzig: Druck und Verlag von Fhilipp Reclam jun.
Steshov, A. V. (1991). Kak pobedit’ v spore. O kul’ture polemiki (How to Win in Discussion. About the Culture of Polemic, in Russian). Leningrad: Lenizdat.
Toffler, A. (1980). The Third Wave. New York: Morrow.
Waismann, F. (1966). How I See Philosphy. In A. J, Ayer (Ad.), Logical Positivism (pp. 345-380). Toronto, Ontario. Retrieved from: https://issuu.com/episte-mologiasabado/docs/ayera.j.logical-positivism.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 WISDOM , Hovhannisyan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial (CC BY-NC). CC BY-NC allows users to copy and distribute the article, provided this is not done for commercial purposes. The users may adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material giving appropriate credit, and providing a link to the license. The full details of the license are available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
