 | |
 |
Communication: rhetoric and reasoning
Glossary of termsIntroductionThis Glossary of key terms is designed so that you can add to it. In your reading you will encounter terms and concepts which will be useful to you not only in this subject but throughout your university career.During the weekly activities suggested under the discussion/research topics you will be asked to consider terms such as culture, communication, ethos, pathos, logos, style, register and so on. As you work it is useful to attempt to write your own definition of terms and concepts. You can do this in your Reading journal or you might wish to add to this Glossary. You can create a Glossary by transferring the terms already in this Glossary to your own file and then regularly up dating your personal Glossary as you encounter a term or concept. The Glossary begins with the three terms discourse, genre and rhetoric. Discourse One definition of discourse is this one offered by Harrison (1987): Discourse is social interaction that creates communities of thought and expression. Andrews includes in discourse 'the visual and aural as well as the linguistic: from Hockney (an inveterate explorer of the rhetoric of art) to Madonna, from Wordsworth to weather forecasts' (Andrews page 5). For the purposes of this subject discourse is understood as words, images, sounds and texts of all kinds which groups of people acknowledge as shared ways of expressing thoughts or communicating something about the world. Thus we can talk about the discourse of art, the discourse of chemistry, the discourse of the architect's office. Genre Genre is a term widely use in discussion about texts and writing. The traditional concept of genre described what were recognised as specific categories of writing: the genre of the novel, the genre of the short story, or the genre of science fiction, the genre of business letters (and there are sub-generic categories within these genres too). Genres thus described are used to categorise types of text which seem to have seem to have regularities or similarities in their content or form. Such categorisation creates a taxonomy of texts which can be seen as quite static. Genre has been reconceptualised so that it takes into account texts seen in relation to the social and cultural contexts in which they occur. Texts are part of social action. A genre or text type is seen as a rhetorical action. What this means is that a text (a letter, a report, an anecdote, an advertising image) can be seen as a rhetorical action which takes place in a social context. Any regularity of form, of structure or of content is typical of or regularly used or produced in a particular context. What this means is that a text is written or produced by someone with a message directed to someone else: the text is thus a rhetorical act. The form the text takes depends on the social context and how the text is used and what function it serves. People expect to receive a particular kind of letter from an insurance company. If they received a letter written in the informal style or register of a chatty letter between friends they would immediately be aware that the sender had chosen the wrong genre for the purpose and context. In this subject, for example, you will encounter many genres or forms of text-letters to the editor, an essay (and there are sub-categories such as the academic essay, the popular essay, the political essay), newspaper editorials. Genres are recognisable forms of text used in social contexts. Genres, however, are not static. They change and evolve because they are part of social contexts. Consider for example how formal business letters have changed over even the last fifty years. Carolyn Miller writes about genre as follows: The understanding of rhetorical genre that I am advocating is based in rhetorical practice, in the conventions of discourse that a society establishes as ways of 'acting together'. It does not lend itself to taxonomy, for genres change, evolve and decay; the number of genres current in any society is indeterminate and depends upon the complexity and diversity of the society. The particular features of this understanding of genre are these:
(Miller in Freedman and Medway, editors. (1994). Genre and the New Rhetoric. London: Taylor and Francis, pages 36-37). Register See Language notes, section 4 Rhetoric You will find some interesting discussion of rhetoric in the CR&R Source book (for example, Andrews and Cockcroft and Cockcroft). Andrews writes: Rhetoric is not a term to embrace lightly; it is too pockmarked by a century in which it has been deemed to be associated merely with sophistication (in the less positive sense of that word), cant and emptiness. It has seemed to suggest a state in which language floats free of its context and thus becomes deracinated, superfluous- perhaps inflated - and ultimately meaningless (Andrews, page 2). We are familiar with the phrase 'mere rhetoric' used as a put down for a particular statement or proclamation on an issue (for example a politician's promise). It is easy to dismiss such statements with a glib 'Oh, it's mere rhetoric!'. Thus the term is used pejoratively, suggesting that the case or position as presented lacks integrity or honesty. And as Andrews points out such pejorative use of the term is not new. On the other hand rhetoric has an honourable history as a recognised formal way of considering the relationship between the speaker (or writer) and the listener (or reader) and how a message is communicated between the two. Classical rhetoric which had its roots in Greece and Rome; as described by Aristotle the term related to ways of speaking to persuade (particularly in various kinds of public oratory). He defined three circumstances in which persuasive discourse would operate: in political contexts (political debate); in legal contexts (advocacy); in ceremonial contexts (for example, funerals). The important issue was that the right forms and structures should be invoked to suit the particular occasion. The rhetor (speaker or writer) was meant to offer a recognised form of public speech by which to control interaction with the audience. Aristotle's rhetoric involved structural principles (proofs) by which the rhetor was meant to organise the speech or text. The place of rhetoric and its use changed over time. You can read about the evolution of rhetoric in the readings (see Cockcroft and Cockcroft, Andrews). In this course we see rhetoric as much wider than just particular examples of persuasive discourse. We are concerned with a wide range of texts and with the people who make and receive and respond and react to texts. Andrews comments that there is more to the term rhetoric than the 'surface' understanding commonly held. He writes: Underneath the pockmarked skin, as it were, we see a frame that is alive and strong. The cardinal points of the frame are the speaker(s) or writer(s) or maker(s) such as film-makers, fashion designers); the audience (a term that describes theatre-goers, television-watchers and son, but whose etymology is aural) or reader; and the subject-matter, the 'world' that is to be communicated, however 'real' or fictional or selective that 'world' is mediated by these three agencies and central to the whole business is the 'text' however tightly or loosely defined. (page 2) In addition, our view of rhetoric also takes into account the way the 'text' relates to the context in which is it is produced and in which it is received. Thus we talk of rhetoric as meaning the way writers, speakers (producers of texts) and readers or listeners (receivers of texts) interact. Texts are produced in social and cultural contexts and these texts have meaning only in context. We can focus on how the writer composes, using language to communicate something about the world to a reader. We can focus on what the reader needs to understand and react to what is communicated. We can look at language and images used in communication. We can look at the interaction between texts (intertextuality). We can look at the impact of contexts and situation on text elements, the audience (you the students), the information we need to communicate and the way we write and shape the discourse of the text (the words, icons, the links, the layout, the sequence). We have been engaged in the arts of discourse.
For assistance contact: paul.skrebels@unisa.edu.au |
