Showing papers on "Rhetorical question published in 1984"

Genre as social action

Abstract: This essay proposes a conception of genre based on conventionalized social motives which are found in recurrent situation‐types. The thesis is that genre must be conceived in terms of rhetorical action rather than substance or form.

The Effects of Rhetorical Organization on ESL Readers.

Abstract: Theoretical as well as empirical research within the framework of schema-theoretical approaches to reading has shown reading comprehension to be an interaction between a text and a reader. More specifically, the interaction involves reader background knowledge of text structure and the hierarchical content structure of the text. In her investigations of both adult and adolescent native readers of English, Meyer (1975, 1977a, 1977b, 1979, 1982; Meyer, Brandt, and Bluth 1980; Meyer and Freedle 1984) has found that certain types of rhetorical organization of expository prose are processed and recalled differently from other types. This article reports the results of a study of the effects of rhetorical organization of different types of expository prose on intermediate ESL readers of different native languages. Results indicate that certain more highly structured English rhetorical patterns are more facilitative of recall for non-native readers in general, but there are interesting differences among the native language groups represented in the study: Spanish, Arabic, and Oriental.

Writing and Reasoning

Abstract: What contribution, if any, does written language make to intellectual development? Why, if at all, should we be concerned with the role of writing in our culture in general, and in our schools in particular? To what extent should we strive, as a recent report from the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching has urged, to make clear and effective writing a "central objective of the school" (Boyer, 1983, p. 91)? If we do, can we assume that we will also be helping students develop the "higher order" intellectual skills, the "skilled intelligence," demanded by the authors of A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983)? Questions such as these provide the context for the present review. At one level, it is widely accepted that good writing and careful thinking go hand in hand. This assumption underlies the concerns of the Council on Basic Education in their critique of the role of writing in American schools (Fadiman & Howard, 1979). The same assumption plays a major role in the agenda for research on writing developed by the National Institute of Education (Whiteman & Hall, 1981) and in the curriculum suggestions offered by advocates of "writing across the curriculum" (Applebee, 1977; Fulwiler & Young, 1982; Martin, D'Arcy, Newton, & Parker, 1976; Marland, 1977; Newkirk & Atwell, 1982). The role of writing in thinking is usually attributed to some combination of four factors: (a) the permanence of the written word, allowing the writer to rethink and revise over an extended period; (b) the explicitness required in writing, if meaning is to remain constant beyond the context in which it was originally written; (c) the resources provided by the conventional forms of discourse for organizing and thinking through new ideas or experiences and for explicating the relationships among them; and (d) the active nature of writing, providing a medium for exploring implications entailed within otherwise unexamined assumptions. If writing is so closely related to thinking, we might expect to begin this review with studies of the contribution of writing to learning and instruction. Yet research on writing has been remarkably slow to examine the ways in which writing about a topic may be related to reasoning. (Braddock, Lloyd-Jones, & Schorer, 1963, provide a good review of the concerns that dominated early studies of writing.) Two different traditions contribute to this reluctance: The first treats the process of writing as the rhetorical problem of relating a predetermined message to an audience that must be persuaded to accept the author's point of view. In this tradition the writing problem is one of audience analysis rather than of thoughtful examination of the topic itself. The second tradition assumes that the process of writing will in some inevitable way lead to a better understanding of the topic under consideration, though how this comes about tends to be treated superficially and anecdotally.

New Testament Interpretation Through Rhetorical Criticism

Abstract: New Testament Interpretation through Rhetorical Criticism provides readers of the Bible with an important tool for understanding the Scriptures. Based on the theory and practice of Greek rhetoric in the New Testament, George Kennedy's approach acknowledges that New Testament writers wrote to persuade an audience of the truth of their messages. These writers employed rhetorical conventions that were widely known and imitated in the society of the times. Sometimes confirming but often challenging common interpretations of texts, this is the first systematic study of the rhetorical composition of the New Testament. As a complement to form criticism, historical criticism, and other methods of biblical analysis, rhetorical criticism focuses on the text as we have it and seeks to discover the basis of its powerful appeal and the intent of its authors. Kennedy shows that biblical writers employed both "external" modes of persuasion, such as scriptural authority, the evidence of miracles, and the testimony of witnesses, and "internal" methods, such as ethos (authority and character of the speaker), pathos (emotional appeal to the audience), and logos (deductive and inductive argument in the text). In the opening chapter Kennedy presents a survey of how rhetoric was taught in the New Testament period and outlines a rigorous method of rhetorical criticism that involves a series of steps. He provides in succeeding chapters examples of rhetorical analysis, looking closely at the Sermon on the Mount, the Sermon on the Plain, Jesus' farewell to the disciples in John's Gospel, the distinctive rhetoric of Jesus, the speeches in Acts, and the approach of Saint Paul in Second Corinthians, Thessalonians, Galatians, and Romans.

Rhetorical traditions and the teaching of writing

Abstract: The argument of this book is that the earliest tradition of Western rhetoric, the classical perspective of Aristotle and Cicero, continues to have the greatest impact on writing instruction--albeit an unconscious impact. This occurs despite the fact that modern rhetoric no longer accepts either the views of mind, language, and world underlying ancient theory or the concepts about discourse, knowledge, and communication presented in that theory. As a result, teachers are depending on ideas as outmoded as they are unreflectively accepted. Knoblauch and Brannon maintain that the two traditions are fundamentally incompatible in their assumptions and concepts, so that writing teachers must make choices between them if their teaching is to be purposeful and consistent. They suggest that the modern tradition offers a richer basis for instruction, and they show what teaching from that perspective looks like and how it differs from traditional teaching.

Writing for Readers: Three Perspectives on Audience.

Abstract: From Aristotle's Rhetoric to the latest composition textbook, we can find broad agreement that the writer's consideration of his (or her) audience exerts an important influence on written communication. Such consensus might lead one to conclude that composition theorists share a unified view of audience, a view inherited from the classical rhetoricians and modified in only minor ways by subsequent studies of rhetoric and communication. A decade or more ago, there may have been such a unified view, and composition teachers may have once been in substantial agreement about what it meant to "teach audience." However, it is becoming clear that the term "audience" has multiple meanings in contemporary work on composition: the term no longer means the same thing to all theorists who talk about the process of writing for readers, and various pedagogical techniques-all purportedly aimed at teaching students about audience-are based on quite different theoretical perspectives.' My aim in this essay is to examine three views of audience which are currently influential in our field. I will call these the "rhetorical," the "informational," and the "social" perspectives. My method of examining each perspective will be four-fold: to offer a brief account of its conception of audience, to examine some of the theoretical assumptions underlying this view, to illustrate the perspective's pedagogical implications, and to propose some objections and limitations to each view. Thus my goal is to present a survey of three current perspectives on audience, exploring the strengths and weaknesses of each but without arguing for the superiority of one view. I hope, in other words, to provide a conceptual framework that will clarify some of the things composition theorists can mean when they talk about the writer's audience.

Rhetorical Patterns in English and Japanese

Abstract: U A study was conducted to investigate differences in U.S. and Japanese students' use of rhetorical patterns in their first language writing and Japanese students' use of their first language patterns in English writing. A total of 676 writing samples was obtained from 226 students representing four groups: U.S. college students (AEA), Japanese advanced ESL students in the U.S. (JEA), and two groups of Japanese college students in Japan-English majors (JEJ) and non-English majors (JJJ). The two groups in the U.S. and the JEJ group wrote in English, while the JJJ group wrote in Japanese. Each student was asked to write three compositionstwo semi-controlled compositions based on pictures and one free composition on an assigned topic-involving narrative and expository modes. The writing samples were examined for two categories: placement of a general statement and type of general statement used. Each of the samples was first coded by native speakers of the two languages as exemplifying one of four rhetorical patterns: 1) General-to-Specific (GS), 2) Specific-toGeneral (SG), 3) General Statement in the Middle (MG), and 4) Omission of a General Statement (OM). The samples were then classified into three major categories of general statements which were established in the course of the analysis: 1) Topic Stating (writers simply restate the given topic), 2) Text Restating (writers summarize or generalize the content of the composition), and 3) Text Relating (writers reveal personal values, beliefs, feelings, and experience in relation to the content of the composition). The study found that the four groups differed from each other in their use of rhetorical patterns and general statement types. U.S. students (AEA) frequently chose the GS pattern; that is, they wrote a general statement first and followed it with specifics. Japanese students writing in Japanese (JJJ) frequently chose the SG pattern; they began with specifics that led to a general statement. The two Japanese groups writing in English showed clearly different tendencies; the JEA group fell between the two culturally

Learning about Writing from Reading

Abstract: Three studies investigated the knowledge gained by students, ranging from grade 3 to graduate level, from exposure to single examples of literary types. Types were suspense fiction, the journalistic restaurant review, and an invented fictional genre. Students of all ages showed evidence of some pick up of rhetorical knowledge, although of limited complexity. The learning process involved is distinguished from that involved in more gradual learning from exposure to literary models.

Deconstruction and Circumvention

Abstract: The literature–philosophy distinction Jonathan Culler has recently argued that we should not think of deconstruction as “an attempt to abolish all distinctions, leaving neither literature nor philosophy, but only a general, undifferentiated textuality.” He explains that a distinction between literature and philosophy is essential to deconstruction's power of intervention: to the demonstration, for example, that the most truly philosophical reading of a philosophical work – a reading that puts in question its concepts and the foundations of its discourse – is one that treats the work as literature, as a fictive rhetorical construct whose elements and order are determined by various textual exigencies. Conversely, the most powerful and apposite readings of literary works may be those that treat them as philosophical gestures by teasing out the implications of their dealings with the philosophical oppositions that support them. I think this passage shows that we ought to distinguish two senses of “deconstruction.” In one sense the word refers to the philosophical projects of Jacques Derrida. Taken this way, breaking down the distinction between philosophy and literature is essential to deconstruction. Derrida's initiative in philosophy continues along a line laid down by Nietzsche and Heidegger. He rejects, however, Heidegger's distinctions between “thinkers” and “poets” and between the few thinkers and the many scribblers. So Derrida rejects the sort of philosophical professionalism which Nietzsche despised and which Heidegger recovered. This does indeed lead Derrida in the direction of “a general, undifferentiated textuality.” In his work, the philosophy-literature distinction is, at most, part of a ladder which we can let go of once we have climbed up it.

Representing Macbeth: A Case Study in Visual Rhetoric

Abstract: The creative process of finding appropriate design solutions to visual problems would become more accessible and more probable, and could be enriched if designers were more conscious of the underlying system of concept formation. Instead, they seem to use it intuitively. In adapting contemporary semiotic and rhetoric theory, the following study of Macbeth posters endeavours to present an operational model of concept formation that is often identified with the creative process. Semiotics, the doctrine of signs, explains the principles that underlie the structure of signs and their utilization within messages, and rhetoric, the art of persuasion, suggests ways to construct appropriate messages. Speaking out on concept formation and the problems involved in designing a poster for a theater play, J. Shadbolt, the designer, remarked: "The psychological problem was what slowed down the process. I would read the actual play, consider carefully its overall impact, and then try to convey with the totality of my design something of that precise import. It's easy to make an elegant decoration, but quite another thing to evoke exact implication."1 Shadbolt's remark addresses some fundamental problems in the design activity, and directs special attention to the following questions: How is meaning created visually in design? What is the routing that leads from the text of a play (or any other statement) to a concept and its visualization in a poster (or a book cover or trademark)? What is the nature of the relationship between the figurative image and the text? These questions are all related to the process of signification, that is, the coding dimension that precedes all message transfer and communicative interaction. To find answers to these questions and to illuminate the process of arriving at a design solution, this article will examine the relevance of rhetoric to design and explore some of its basic principles. The semiotic structure of coding and the rhetorical characteristic that governs the visual appearance of a poster will also be discussed. In addition, the operational potential of rhetorical procedure for design in conjunction with the outcome of a recent case study is demonstrated.

Rhetorical theory as heuristic and moral: A pedagogical justification

Abstract: The essay reviews current conceptions of rhetorical theory which see it as following a social science model. Difficulties of accounting for rhetorical experience as described by Becker's mosaic model are also reviewed. Because rhetorical theory cannot be explained by social science models, and because of the problems raised by Becker's model, the essay proposes that rhetorical theory and its supporting criticism be regarded primarily as pedagogical, with students as its primary audience.

Speaking “common sense”; about the Soviet threat: Reagan's rhetorical stance

Abstract: This paper examines the symbolic resources employed by Ronald Reagan to characterize his anti‐Soviet policies and increased military expenditures as common‐sense adaptations to a real threat. The pattern of his rhetorical efforts is to establish a basic context of assumptions about Soviet conduct, using the metaphor of savagery and a set of decivilizing vehicles as primary resources. The resulting image is “literalized”; through an interplay of metaphor and evidence in which the trope calls attention to supportive information and discounts inconsistent data. A Presidential persona incarnates the people's voice to lend a further note of rationality to the heroic call for a strong America. Attempts by critics to combat Reagan's rhetoric are frustrated by the absence of a compelling substitute for his image of Soviet barbarism.

Essays on Classical Rhetoric and Modern Discourse

Abstract: Eighteen essays by leading scholars in English, speech communication, educa-tion, and philosophy explore the vitality of the classical rhetorical tradition and its influence on both contemporary dis-course studies and the teaching of writing. Some of the essays investigate the-oretical and historical issues. Others show the bearing of classical rhetoric on contemporary problems in composition, thus blending theory and practice. Com-mon to the varied approaches and view-points expressed in this volume is one central theme: the 20th-century revival of rhetoric entails a recovery of the clas-sical tradition, with its marriage of a rich and fully articulated theory with an equally efficacious practice. A preface demonstrates the contribution of Ed-ward P. J.Corbett to the 20th-century re-vival, and a last chapter includes a bibli-ography of his works.

Premillennial apocalyptic as a rhetorical genre

Abstract: This essay develops a rationale for treating apocalyptic discourse as a rhetorical genre. Situational and substantive‐stylistic characteristics are shown to recur in traditional, religious apocalyptic discourse throughout history as well as in recent discourse concerning religious and civic issues.

The rhetoric of architecture: A semiotic approach

Abstract: Communication and rhetoric are inherent aspects of architecture. Architecture uses signs to communicate its function and meaning. This communication is rhetorical when it induces its perceiver to use or to understand the architecture—from a hot dog stand to a monument. Movements in architecture, such as the Gothic or the International Style, promote certain values and beliefs, and can be studied as rhetorical movements. Like linguistic communication, architecture consists of codes, meanings, semantic shifts, and syntactic units.

Context-dependent transitions in tutoring discourse

Abstract: Successful machine tutoring, like other forms of human-machine discourse, requires sophisticated communication skills and a deep understanding of the student's knowledge. A system must have the ability to reason about a student's knowledge and to assess the effect of the discourse on him. In this paper we describe Meno-tutor, a LISP program that deliberately plans the rhetorical structure of its output and customizes its responses to the level of understanding of the individual student.

Ready to Write: A First Composition Text

Abstract: Presenting paragraph development in clear, teachable steps, Ready to Write prepares high-beginning and low-intermediate students for the fundamental composition skills needed for successful academic work. Through a clear progression of learning tasks, Ready to Write provides these benefits: Presents important organizational principles of good academic writing such as "topic sentences, supporting details, ordering of details, identifying and eliminating irrelevancies, " and "transition words." Helps students apply these organizational principles to major rhetorical forms, among them "comparing and contrasting, describing, reporting, giving information, analyzing, " and "letter writing." Contextualizes writing in real-world tasks such as "letters, reports, exams, articles for newsletters, " and "advertising copy."

The defense of Billie Jean King

Abstract: The revelation that Billie Jean King had engaged in a love affair with her former secretary, Marilyn Barnett, damaged King's role as a prestigious, celebrated persona. King realized that her contemporaries would want a personal response to the circumstance, a response which could justify her conduct. In addition to King's own apologia, two other crucial sources which chose to provide support were her peers and the media. The essay examines the rhetorical roles of the three parties.

The components of written response: A practical synthesis of current views

Abstract: Written responses to student writing continue to play an important part in most composition classes despite increased employment of peers and tutors as sources of informed opinion and despite increasing emphasis on the importance of oral response. How best to respond to students' essays therefore concerns us all, at whatever level we teach. Yet valuable as we believe our penciled comments to be, this timeconsuming, difficult task proves too frequently a confused, unsatisfying experience for us; worse, our efforts prove too often apparently unhelpful to students who, if uninstructed, are alienated, antagonized, by our thought-heavy marginalia and terminal remarks. I suspect many of us, seated before a stack of papers, wonder over late-night coffee if we are doing this job well, if the results are worth the effort. Much of the research done on response remains buried in unpublished dissertations (for accounts of such research, see Jarabek and Dieterich, Knoblauch and Brannon 1981, Lamberg*), and the published material, scattered throughout the professional literature, is not readily available for comprehensive review. Compared to the growing body of literature devoted to other compositional and rhetorical topics, the amount of accessible advice on how to respond productively to student writing is scant. Nevertheless, enough such material of a practical nature exists to warrant attention. What follows is an attempt to summarize and to synthesize some of the guidelines for writing effective comments that this literature suggests, thereby supplementing C. W. Griffin's recent review-essay, which deals exclusively with the components of a theory of evaluation. To bring together and to group under general rubrics the eighty-one items here reviewed may assist the formation of a useful theory of response and may, more immediately, bring greater coherence and consistency to the almost daily act of commenting on student themes.

When dreams collide: Rhetorical trajectories in the assassination of president Kennedy

Abstract: This essay offers yet another answer to the question raised in Kenneth Burke's “Lines Anent An Inquiry.” Dramatistic in method, the essay argues that Lee Harvey Oswald, while he acted alone, was not precisely a “loner” that he saw himself as the leader of a movement, imaginary though it was; that impelled by the rhetorical dynamics of that movement, he murdered in its name; and that the murder and the movement may serve as a paradigm of the form and fate of certain American movements that turned toward terrorism in the years after the assassination.

Rhetorical visions of committed voters: Fantasy theme analysis of a large sample survey

Abstract: This study uses the presidential campaign persuasion and media coverage in the 1980 election to develop and validate a method for making empirical connections between messages and audience responses. The study applies the research method that synthesizes fantasy theme analysis, small sample Q‐sorts, and large sample survey techniques to the shared fantasies and rhetorical visions of voters in a midwestern city. The study documents and describes the extent and nature of five rhetorical visions among committed registered voters in the target city and provides a brief humanistic rhetorical critical analysis of the visions.

The symbolic construction of social realities: A case study in the rhetorical criticism of paradox

Abstract: This essay explores the possibility that a rhetorical figure can create, maintain, and mediate a perspective of reality or worldview. By way of an extended example, the rhetorical figure of paradox is cast as an organizing construct, creating a kind of “order”; or logic among experiences and phenomena typically felt to be at odds with one another. The ways in which a “paradoxical worldview”; can come into existence syntactically, semantically, and pragmatically are specified. In addition, the range of reactions to a paradoxical worldview, for both users and non‐users are described. The essay concludes by identifying prototypes, parameters, and evaluation principles for the analysis of paradoxical worldviews. Thus, this analysis ultimately posits that any rhetorical figure can theoretically generate and control a worldview.

The Primacy of Welfare Rights

Abstract: This paper deals with three topics: (1) types of rights, (2) the development of the terminology of rights, and (3) the question of the primacy of welfare rights. Because these topics are interrelated, my exposition does not observe rigid boundaries among them. There is no pretence at all that any of these subjects is fully covered here; nor is it proposed, except for one writer, to touch upon the contemporary literature on rights, as noteworthy as some of that literature is. In order to gain entrance into the field, on which the writing has grown to massive proportions, I shall begin with an interesting historical phenomenon, some of whose philosophical import I want to explore. I should say at the outset, however, that the general motivation of this paper is the problem of the significance of the language of “rights.” Does it really make a difference, for instance, to speak of the “rights of man” rather than the “common duties of humanity”? Does the term “rights” add anything of special significance or is its only significance rhetorical and ideological? Can we dispense with the language of rights and still say everything we need to say about our moral relations? I confess to a moderate skepticism about the necessity of the language of rights in the last analysis. At any rate, this paper is intended as a contribution, however small, to this problem. The historical phenomenon with which I am going to begin will enable us to bring into focus the issue of the meaning of “rights.”

Communicator attitudes, communicator style, and communication competence

Abstract: This study investigated whether communicator style variables could distinguish among three archetypal attitudes toward communication (rhetorical sensitivity, noble self, rhetorical reflector), whether these attitude types would be perceived as being more or less competent depending on situational variables, and if competent communication was constituted differently for each of the three attitude types. Results indicated that nobel selves were rated as being more impression leaving, dominant, and less friendly than the other two and that rhetorical sensitives and rhetorical reflectors were distinguished from each other in terms of degrees of perceived competence among situations and in terms of the style variables that were seen as contributing to perceptions of communicative competence.