The author would like to thank Jan Golinski for commenting on an earlier version of this paper.

Abstract:Peirce's "Lesson in Elocution" (written ca. 1892) provides insight into his ideas on continuity and community through his knowledge of performance cultures such as theatre, elocution, rhetoric, and declamation. This unpublished manuscript constitutes the extant part of an application Peirce drafted to the Episcopal Church's General Theological Seminary for the position of elocution instructor. Continuing Henry C. Johnson, Jr.'s account (published in Transactions [2006] vol. 42, no. 4) of the Lesson as evidence of Peirce's religious practices, this (...) article explores the Lesson as demonstration of his performance knowledge and experience. What would Peirce have brought as philosopher and scientist to the teaching of elocution? Conversely, what did his performance knowledge bring to his work on continuity and community? Outlining significant differences between Peirce's semiotic approach and that of the Seminary's then-current instructor, Francis Thayer Russell, the article argues, employing selected performance theory concepts, that performance often operates in semiosis itself, as Peirce defined it. (shrink)

: Once cast aside as of no value, Charles S. Peirce manuscript 1570 "The First of Six Lessons . . ." and its context, provides uniquely valuable access to Peirce's religious practice (as distinct from his theology). Chronically unemployed, Peirce seized an opportunity to put in a bid for a vacant post in elocution at the Episcopal Church's major (and only "official") theological seminary, The General Theological Seminary in New York City. Peirce had on occasion appealed to nearby members (...) of the Episcopalian hierarchy seeking patronage for his scholarly work—to no avail. In this case, however, he was encouraged and aided by the current scholarly vicar of his own parish. The incumbent had pursued advanced education abroad and was also active in the seminary's affairs. And, of course, Peirce was confident about his expertise in elocution, which "General's" Dean claimed as well. Both the contextual narrative and the substantive theological content of his "lesson" are a rich resource for insights into the much vexed (if too often muddled) question of his lifelong commitment to a faith stemming from his earlier conversion to trinitarianism. (shrink)

THE METAPHOR OF THE “LINE OF RESISTANCE” AND THE LAW OF CONTRADICTION This essay presents the “idea of God” as a metaphor of the line of resistance – as used in Umberto Eco’s writings. This metaphor is understood in the sense of pure negativity. The pure negative, the pure “not,” is very different from the God of revealed religion. The idea of God is not a proof of the existence of God, but only a device of elocution – in (...) order to give an appropriate name to the thing. Such interpretation is possible thanks to imputing to this idea the law of contradiction. Keywords: THE LAW OF CONTRADICTION, UMBERTO ECO, METAPHOR OF THE LINE OF RESISTANCE, IDEA OF GOD. (shrink)

In the age of print, the disposition and density of words on the page conveyed specific messages about how texts were supposed to be read. In the current proliferation of electronic supports, “knowledge design” is required to make sure that the process of passing on information becomes an effective transfer of knowledge. The article addresses the cohabitation of print environment and digital environment with reference to the recent debate on the digitization of learning and the so-called “digital colonialism.” The bi-dimensionality (...) of tablets and e-book readers vs. the tri-dimensionality of books and reactions from intellectuals to digital reading and learning are also addressed. Teachers in the age of over-information are now assigned the role of “cultural djs.” A reappraisal of ancient rhetoric in its classic three-part subdivision is therefore needed: invention, disposition, and elocution. (shrink)

Résumé Les musées semblent souvent à la fois immuables et « objectifs » pour ce qui est des relations qu’ils proposent aux œuvres. La constitution des musées procède pourtant d’une histoire qui emprunte directement à la rhétorique des méthodes visant à convaincre, toucher, persuader, voire manipuler à tout prix les personnes à qui on a affaire. Les questions d’invention, de disposition, d’élocution se retrouvent ainsi au musée dans les choix et catégorisations d’œuvres, la muséographie, la médiation, la visite guidée...

In the Classical Quarterly, Vol. XXIII. i, pp. 7–10, Mr. Denniston attempts to revive the ancient and once honoured sport of gloss-chasing. But the day of that perilous pastime has gone, and this latest effort is perhaps less successful than some of its predecessors. In his notes on the De Elocution of Demetrius he hunts and traps the unwary ‘gloss’ in his net of criticism, but unfortunately the snare is faulty, and the ‘catch’ escapes. I propose to discuss each (...) of his suggested ‘glosses’ in his order, basing my arguments against his conclusions— on probabilities; on the usage of Demetrius in this work: § 271. καθλου δ νς λEεως τ σματα κα πκρισιν κα γνα παρει τ λοντι, μλιστα τ διαλελυμον, τοτ' στι δειντητα. (shrink)

Previous chapter Rhythm in Public Speech – Aristotle's Rhetoric In his Rhetoric, Aristotle addresses an important question that was left open in The Politics—that of language in public sphere—and this leads him to consider rhythm in speech and subsequently loosen a little more the Platonic definition of rhythm. In Book 3, after having dealt with proof, Aristotle focuses on the manner of expressing oneself, elocution, “for it is not sufficient to know what one ought - Sur le concept de (...) rythme – Nouvel article. (shrink)

Cet article offre une analyse succincte des œuvres critiques de Ramus contre les deux grands rhéteurs de l’ancienne Rome, Cicéron et Quintilien, les Brutinae Quaestiones in Oratorem Ciceronis de 1547 et les Rhetoricae Distinctiones in Quintilianum de 1549. Ces œuvres se présentent comme des commentaires textuels, mais elles ne constituent pas une contribution substantielle à l’étude philologique des deux traités antiques. Elles semblent plutôt avoir pour but de montrer que, selon Ramus, la rhétorique ne concerne que l’élocution et l’action, et (...) que la séparation stricte des arts du Trivium au niveau de la théorie est la seule méthode appropriée pour les enseigner. (shrink)

Si les figures continuent à faire l'objet de l'attention des linguistes, c'est dans le cadre toujours restreint de l'élocution, en dépit d'ouvertures vers la pragmatique, qui minimisent le détail du fait grammatical. Cette étude les aborde dans une perspective non seulement de rhétorique générale mais aussi de linguistique et de philosophie du langage, ce qui conduit à soulever la question même de leur définition. Elle s'appuie sur une conception souple du langage, considéré non comme un code, mais comme un processus (...) qui admet le flou et l'approximation. Les figures ne constituent pas un écart repérable par rapport à une norme, au demeurant introuvable, mais des agencements de faits grammaticaux qui prennent leur sens dans le contexte où ils se trouvent. On passe ainsi de la notion de figure à celle de configuration, ce qui est loin d'être une simple question de terminologie. Il ne s'agit donc pas de proposer une énième liste de figures aux noms savants, mais de mettre en évidence le jeu de mécanismes inscrits dans le logos, qui, en liaison avec l'ethos du locuteur et le pathos de l'interlocuteur, contribuent à la négociation de la distance entre individus à propos d'une question, où Michel Meyer voit l'essentiel de la rhétorique. C'est une nouvelle théorie des figures qui est proposée : loin d'en faire des écarts, elle les inscrit dans le fonctionnement ordinaire du langage. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Rhetoric in History as Theory and Praxis: A Blast from the PastThomas B. FarrellPhilosophies of history have fallen on hard times. Grand comic metanarratives were the first casualty, auguring ironically in the futility of their own pronouncements. Positive and negative teleologies were next to fall. But if finalized themes and Utopian schemes are not exactly in vogue, it remains the case that history—as systematic documentation and reminiscence about the (...) past—is and must be ongoing. This is transparently because things that matter continue to happen: with ideas, cultures, nature itself. And even if we never really learn from history, all other things being equal, history has shown that it is helpful to keep careful records. In an age that personalizes nearly everything, it is easy enough to recognize the familiar dissociation of act and accountability on a personal scale. What may appear as nothing more serious than petty truancy for a person may become amnesia, revisionism, and much worse when the zone of accountability is widened, the deeds are deepened, the stakes are increased. In each case, the argument is the same: identification through a sort of opaque empathy. In short, you had to be there.I intend this essay to be a meditation on some of the ways my amorphousarea of study, rhetorical theory, finds itself implicated with history, some possible avenues it may open for invention and judgment in history. Time permitting, I will also hazard a speculation on that great chimera [End Page 323] that dangles before fields of scholarship and historical projects alike: that of progress.Aristotle’s famous definition of rhetoric, “that its function is not to persuade but to see the available means of persuasion in each case” (1991, 35), begins my inquiry in a productively ambiguous way. For one thing, the definition locates the function of rhetoric directly within the sphere of human history, through the terms available and in each case. For unless we believe that means of persuasion are fixed and that cases are eternally recurring, what the rhetorician “sees” must vary with the times. A second note maybe in order here. For Aristotle’s term for seeing, theoresai, also happens to be the Greek root term for what we call “theory.” In its most fundamental sense, then, the ocular-centered aesthetic of Greek tradition gives us theory as a mode of “seeing.” I could add at this point that this “seeing” needs to be shared with others and that there are many ways of “seeing,” but this maybe a less-than-productive ambiguity, given my aims here.Instead, I wish to consider three distinct construals of what sort of practice rhetoric is, along with some implications of these construals for the place of rhetoric as theory and practice in human history. These three construals are rhetoric as productive art, rhetoric as constitutive art, and rhetoricas inventional art.We begin with the conception of rhetoric as productive art. Simply put, this means that rhetoric makes things, prototypically speeches. Such a conception, like the other two I will be discussing, has ebbed and flowed throughout the long history of rhetorical tradition. The Sophists, when not purporting to teach virtue, did profess their competence in instructing other show to create persuasive documents. Such a preoccupation also appears in rhetorics of belles lettres and elocution. Today it can be found in modern composition curricula and in the rather different world of the professional speechwriter.There have been very few attempts to link an exclusively productive art conception of rhetoric to Aristotle and still fewer successful attempts. To view the matter this way, one would need to think of the Rhetoric and the Poetics as essentially parallel documents (one makes poems; the other, speeches). One would also have to ignore a wealth of disconfirming evidence. Nonetheless, Alan G. Gross is able to write (in the aptly titled collection Rereading Aristotle’s “Rhetoric”), “‘What did Aristotle mean by rhetoric?’ At this juncture, I can do little more than reiterate my claim that rhetoric is a productive art, and only a productive art” (2000, 35). George Kennedy, the translator of our earlier passage, sees the matter rather differently: “What [End Page 324] kind of... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Philosophy and Rhetoric 33.2 (2000) 137-153 [Access article in PDF] Metaphor and the Making of Sense: The Contemporary Metaphor Renaissance William Franke Metaphor has gained a new lease on life through the revival of rhetoric in recent decades. For promoters of "la nouvelle rhétorique," such as Gérard Genette and Roland Barthes, rhetoric came to coincide with a total science of language that is practically coextensive with all social and (...) human knowledge, while in the Anglo-Saxon world, Wayne Booth, in the wake of Kenneth Burke, repristinated rhetoric as, not just a technical discipline, but a moral one, and, in fact, an all-embracing criticism of the humanities. 1 The fortunes of metaphor have revived and flourished in tandem with those of rhetoric as a whole. Over the more than two millennia of a progressive eclipse of rhetoric, during which it shrank from its original primacy as the master art of persuasion in law, literature, and politics and, moreover, as the general framework of culture, to the status of an ancillary art of elocution of exclusively formal import, metaphor was eventually confined to being just one particular instance within the schemes of classifications of tropes. It became an affair of style, an ornament of decorative discourse, as rhetoric came to be identified with mere elocutio and was no longer essentially also inventio--the finding of arguments, in which metaphor's role is actually paramount--and dispositio--the ordering of discourse into its syntactic parts, such as exordium, narration, discussion, peroration. As the originally tripartite art and science of rhetoric was amputated of two of its main divisions in the classical model established on the basis of Aristotle's three-book treatise, 2 metaphor became a merely formal enhancement and lost its roles as substantive and structuring for knowledge and discourse.The decline of interest in philosophical, Aristotelian rhetoric had much to do with metaphor's reduction to a merely technical or decorative device. But with the recent widening practically without limit of the terrain of rhetoric, and particularly with its restoration to its original standing as a philosophical discipline comprehending the substance of argument, metaphor [End Page 137] has once again acquired cognitive status and, moreover, has tended to become the name for figurative language in general and even, emblematically, for the rhetorical or rhetoricity as such. Where the power of rhetoric to reshape cognitive meaning and even to reinvent, or at least reconfigure, reality was once again recognized as irresistible throughout all the realms of discourse, the source and unity of this power seemed to require a name, and more often than not metaphor--on account of the transformative, inventive power associated particularly with it--has been adopted to serve this purpose.Today, under the aegis of metaphor, the power of figurative language, arguably the originating power at the source of all language and even of an articulated world as such, has newly become an object of research and general theoretical speculation. This extension of the concept of metaphor is bound up with a renewed view of figurative language in general as not only a substantive bearer of the content of discourse, but also as ontologically constitutive of the world, as operative at the origins of things and their identities. It has become possible to view all language as being metaphorical, and accordingly metaphorical operations of transfer and redefinition have been recognized as being the very essence of language and of all that comes to articulation through it. Furthermore, as witnessed by burgeoning publications and conferences, metaphor has become a topic onto which practically all the classic philosophical problems of ontology and epistemology are projected and appear in a new, specifically linguistic, light. 3This new ascendency of metaphor is certainly not uninflected or uncontested, even within the camps of the new rhetoricians. Genette, in "La rhétorique restreinte" (1972), resists the "inflation of metaphor" to become the trope of tropes and the figure of figures in a wide range of writers epitomizing modern poetics--particularly Marcel Proust, Roman Jakobson, and Michel Deguy (1969). Genette argues against reduction of... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Philosophy and Rhetoric 33.3 (2000) 221-242 [Access article in PDF] Reigning in the Court of Silence: Women and Rhetorical Space in Postbellum America Nan Johnson [Figures]Nervous, enthusiastic, and talkative women are the foam and sparkle, quiet women the wine of life. The senses ache and grow weary of the perpetual glare and brilliancy of the former, but turn with a sense of security and repose to the mild, mellow (...) glow irradiating the sphere of the latter. We associate all ideas of rest with quiet women. They are soul-divinities reverently guarding their sacred trusts in the Court of Silence. When she speaks, her words are aptly chosen and fitly spoken. She is wise and thoughtful, but loving and meek. "Still waters run deep," but not in the world-applied sense; babbling rills do not wear their channels deep, but streams of calmest flow have hidden depths undreamed of, unsuspected.--Anonymous, "Quiet Women" 461In an article entitled "Quiet Women," which appeared in The Ladies' Repository in 1868, an anonymous author argues that "quiet women are the wine of life." Capturing the deep cultural longing of the postbellum period for the icon of the American woman as angel of the hearth, this portrait deifies the quiet woman and demonizes the other possibilities: the enthusiastic woman, the talkative woman, the brilliant woman, and the babbling woman. The mild and mellow queen of the "Court of Silence" is graceful, calm, and, most important of all, silent. In this characterization, an idealized woman is defined as necessarily rhetorically meek. By worshiping "the quiet woman," influential proponents of public opinion such as The Ladies' Repository reinscribed for a postbellum readership a definition of true womanhood that equated silence with feminine virtue and enthusiastic vocality with its opposite. The argument that the rhetorical conduct of the "wise and thoughtful" woman could be contrasted instructively with the trivial and ultimately inconsequential rhetorical behavior of loud and talkative women is one that was made in so many cultural conversations of the postbellum period that it achieved the power of an ideological trope. 1 [End Page 221]Efforts to regulate women's rhetorical behavior intensified rather than abated in the decades following the Civil War as women pursued education, the right to vote, property rights, and mobility in public life. In conduct literature, a genre that proliferated during the postbellum period, the preferred construction of the "quiet" woman was a mainstay in an ideological agenda that supported the generally held nineteenth-century view that character and the nature of one's rhetoric are mutually revealing. Like other types of self-help materials marketed in the last decades of the century, such as elocution manuals and letter-writing guides, conduct manuals included among their vast tables of contents the matters of how and where one ought to speak. In their coverage of deportment in all areas of life, conduct manuals promised the aspiring middle-class American an education in the home in the culturally valuable skills of public speaking and writing. 2 The collective enterprise of the parlor rhetoric movement and conduct literature in particular was to offer happiness and success to those who would follow certain rules. Enormously popular in the postbellum period and well into the turn of the century, conduct manuals argued a conservative gender agenda that appealed to the middle-class readers of a nation who seemed eager to accept the idea that correct deportment in daily life could help to restore the social calm the postwar nation longed for. Although by the 1880s the American public had well in mind notable examples of women, such as Lucretia Mott, Sojourner Truth, Frances Willard, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who had assumed powerful reformist voices in the causes of abolition, temperance, and women's rights, the rhetorical space these women occupied in shaping political and cultural life was viewed as the exception rather than the rule. 3 In spite of the high profile rhetorical careers of a handful of women, or, perhaps, because of them, postbellum America wondered uneasily just how public women's lives... (shrink)

Ce texte se propose d'examiner en quoi le discours oral se différencie de la composition écrite. La logique orale a pour caractéristique principale de recourir à des prémisses ou à des conclusions qui ont déjà valeur de “maxime” pour l'auditeur. Il s'agit donc d'une véritable “mise à l'épreuve” de chaque position. La logique orale touche directement le contenu. Elle s'oppose à la dialectique — elle est liée à une logique formelle — tout en étant complémentaire.

La defensa humanista de la Retórica y la poesía a menudo toman la forma de ataques al lenguaje escolástico[...].Epistolae obscurorum virorum(1515-1517) representa, en la figura de los hombres oscuros, el iletrado monstruo escolástico, cuyo lenguaje está plagado de vicios retóricos y gramaticales y de una total falta de gusto. La poética del texto reside en la violación de las reglas retóricas e ideales formales que se les transmitieron en epistolarios antiguos y humanísticos y en manuales de Retórica[...].El presente estudio ilustra (...) [esta] retórica, examina aspectos morales del estilo y muestra la fecundidad de los vicios retóricos en la elaboración literaria. (shrink)