Showing papers in "Philosophy and Rhetoric in 1978"

Questions and politeness : strategies in social interaction

Abstract: Lists of figures and tables Preface Symbols and abbreviations 1. Introduction Esther N. Goody 2. Towards a theory of questions Esther N. Goody 3. Questions of immediate concern Elinor Ochs Keenan, Bambi B. Schieffelin and Martha Platt 4. Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena Notes References.

On Rhetorical Genre: An Organizing Perspective.

Abstract: From antiquity rhetoricians hâve sought to classify discourse. Whether writers used the Aristotelian species of address or the Ciceronian ends of rhetoric,1 behind the development of such schema hâve been presumptions that examples of discourse can be clustered, that discourse of one kind differs in important ways from discourse of other kinds, and that it is instructive to observe the similarities and differences amongthem. So, in 1965 Edwin Black created categories for classifying instances of rhetorical criticism.2 In the time since Black added the term "generic criticism" to the vocabulary of the rhetorical critic, scholars of the field hâve produced a variety of seemingly unlike "generic" critiques. Taken together, these studies offer no clear picture of what genre is or what methods should be employed by the generic critic. Black's initial studies of the exhortative and argumentative genres,3 as well as the later study by Raum and Measell on polarization,4 classify the type and intensity of language employed by the rhetor. Zyskind, in his very early study of the Gettysburg Address,5 and Mohrmann and Leff, in their recent study of Lincoln's Cooper Union Address,6 use Aristotle's classical genres of forensic, deliberative, and epideictic speaking. Osborn, on the other hand, suggests criticai study of public discourse through investigation of the archetypal metaphor;7 Stelzner's assessment of Nixon' s Cambodia Address serves as an example of archetypal criticism,8 although he does not link his method to Osborn's analysis. Ivie employs motivational analysis to investigate the war messages of presidents.9 Finally, Ware and Linkugel,10 and Harrell, Ware, and Linkugel11 approach generic criticism of apology from a situational basis. In short, "generic" seems to be loosely taken to mean "classificatory," and little has yet emerged to organize and systematize the development of generic criticism.12 We believe that without a clear organizing perspective such a loose concept may suggest a confusing methodological weakness in the conduct of generic criticism.