A brief history of rhetoric

Disciplines > Rhetoric > A brief history of rhetoric

The sophists | The liberal art | Contemporary cynicism | See also

Here's a brief history of rhetoric, from the ancient Greeks onwards.

The sophists
Since Homer in the 8th century BC, wisdom ('sophos') and skill were prized. The
Sophists were originally itinerant poets and teachers who spread learning and culture
wherever they found those ready to pay.
Being (or at least appearing) wise, the sophists were the effective lawyers and advised
on governance and the new Athenian democracy. A rhetorical question is one which
requires no answer, implying the wisdom contained within it.
Over time, the Sophists focused more on eloquent speech and rhetoric, making grand
claims about their ability to answer all questions. This brought them up against 'modern'
thinkers such as Socrates, who did not charge fees and Plato, who portrayed them as
greedy instructors who used fallacious reasoning concealed in decorated language to
deceive and to gain power. Aristotle also helped separate out philosophy as a separate
school, leaving sophism as being largely about the techniques of rhetoric.
Popular opinion thus turned against the sophists and today 'sophism' means the use of
deceptive argument, pulling on emotional strings rather than using rational logic,
appearing smart rather than being smart.

Defining the discipline

Whilst Aristotle denounced the sophists, he also refined rhetoric in 'The Art of Rhetoric',
documenting and defining its rules and methods in the various forms of Aristotelian
argument.
In Rome, Cicero, with his 'Rhetorica ad Herennium' and Quintilian developed rhetoric
further and the five canons of rhetoric was very influential for centuries.
Across the centuries from the Greeks and Romans, various writers continued to explore,
refine and re-define rhetoric, including:

St. Augustine (354-430), in 'De Doctrina Christiana.'

Boethius (~480-524), in his 'Overview of the Structure of Rhetoric.'

Erasmus (~1466-1536)in 'De Duplici Copia Verborum et Rerum.'

Juan Luis Vives (1492-1540) in 'Rhetoricae' and other works.

Thomas Wilson's 'The Arte of Rhetorique' (1553)

The liberal art

Eloquent persuasion became a mainstay of the civilized intellectual as well as the
courtier's preferred mode of speech. From the Romans to the Middle Ages, rhetoric was
taught as a liberal art alongside logic and grammar.
In the post-Roman period, rhetoric was limited to the writing of letters and sermons,
though the verbal form picked up again through proselytizing. It only regained its
former popularity in the Renaissance period.
Rhetoric thus became a mainstay of priests, lawyers, politicians, writers and all who
would persuade, in particular those who addressed a wide audience. Today, there is
hardly a persuasive field which is untouched by its methods.
From the Greek 'rhetor' who addressed juries to modern leaders who address global
audiences, rhetoric is a indeed a powerful tool.

Contemporary cynicism
Today, the use of the word 'rhetoric' sometimes approaches a derogatory form, implying
the use of fancy language to persuade, much as sophism lost credibility amongst the
Greeks, and much for the same reason: when politicians and others use it as a cloaking
mechanism for unpopular or vacuous speech, then others will throw stones not only at
the person but also the method.

The Five Canons of Rhetoric

Disciplines > Argument > The Five Canons of Rhetoric

The Romans, as well as the Greeks were interested in argument and rhetoric. The five
canons of rhetoric appear in Cicero's first century Latin text, Rhetorica ad Herennium,
which contained four books that detail the rhetorical approach of the day, and was
highly influential for many subsequent centuries:
1. Invention: Finding ways to persuade.

2. Arrangement: Putting together the structure of a coherent argument.

3. Style: Presenting the argument to stir the emotions.
4. Memory: Speaking without having to prepare or memorize a speech.
5. Delivery: Making effective use of voice, gesture, etc.

Invention

Disciplines > Argument > Five canons of rhetoric > Invention

Description | Discussion | See also

Description

Necessity is the mother of invention, and the necessity of persuasion means we must
first discover the best way to persuade in each situation.
Target analysis

The first step of invention is to understand the target(s) of persuasion. Identify who they
are, segmenting them into subgroups as necessary. Identify their needs, interests and
goals around the persuasive situation. Include yourself in this as well!
Information

Secondly, consider what information you need to persuade these people. Do you need
hard evidence? The testimony of others? Photographs?
Presentation

Thirdly, decide how you will present your evidence. In particular consider each
of Logos, Pathos and Ethos. Consider also whether you need a formal setting, such as a
courtroom, or something informal, such as a walk or a discussion in the bar.
Timing

Finally, consider the context, timing and duration of your argument (also known
as kairos). A long argument is necessary in some cases, but will tire people and
'unpersuade' them in others. Sometimes a person is best spoken to in the morning.
Sometimes they are more receptive in the afternoon. A classic time is over a meal.
Discussion

In many situations, we jump in with both feet and try to 'wing it', making things up as
we go along. We often default to our preferred style and use patterns of persuasion that
may have worked for us in the past (or not).
Invention is going slow to go fast. By doing sound research and deep thinking first
about both their and your situation, you have the basis to build a solid argument. You
will also be able to present it in a way that will achieve your persuasive goals.
In the original Latin text, this is 'inventio'.
Arrangement

Disciplines > Argument > Five canons of rhetoric > Arrangement

Description | Discussion | See also

Description

Arranging an argument is like structuring an essay (which is, of course, arranging an

argument).
1. Introduction (exordium)

Start with an introduction that positions both your argument and, if appropriate,
yourself. Provide the context in which you are speaking, including some background
information. Grab their attention, showing that this argument is important to them. Ask
them to listen carefully, as this will be to their advantage.
Also show that you are the best person to be talking with them on this subject. Establish
your credibility. Show that you are really on their side and can be trusted.
2. Statement of fact (narratio)

Present the basic facts of the case, clearly and with enough information that they can be
accepted as independent facts, and not just your observations. Be neutral in your
presentation, taking the part of a witness or a concerned bystander, rather than a person
with a passionate interest in one side of the argument.
In Classical Greek arguments, this stage is also used to demonstrate the speaker's ethos,
or ethical standing.
3. Confirmation (confirmatio)

The next stage is to give the case for your position. Construct a persuasive argument as
to what should be believed and done. This is where the full power and methods of

rhetoric are employed. Use varioustypes of reasoning, create yourself an unassailable

position.
In confirming your position, do take care to align it carefully with the needs, values and
goals of your audience. If you do not do this, they may well ignore you and be building
their own refutatio rather than listening to your case.
4. Refutation (refutatio)

After building up your own castle, the next stage is to attack the stronghold of any
opposing arguments. Using similar reasoning methods, you now take apart any
alternatives to your confirmatio, one brick at a time. When opposing arguments are but
rubble, there is nothing else left to believe but your original argument.
Refuting other arguments need not mean being unkind or unpleasant. You can show
how much you accept and respect the other person or people involved. You can start
with appreciation of them as people and of their reasoning for their case. Then show
how they are sadly mistaken. If possible, show how they can better achieve their needs
through your preferred choices.
5. Conclusion (peroratio)

End your argument with a summary of what you have said, reminding your audience of
the key points along the way. If you want them to do something afterwards (rather than
just agree with you), describe these carefully and ensure you get their full agreement.
Discussion

This is a classic way of arguing: build your position and knock down that of the
opposition, albeit with attention to ethical concerns. It still is relevant today, but can
easily suffer from a them-and-us battle. The most effective way to use this approach is,
as far as you can, to blend in respect and concern for people who oppose you. Seek to
expand the pie so everyone gets more, rather than assume a fixed amount 'I win-you
lose' situation.
In the original Latin text, this is 'dispositio'. Memory

Disciplines > Argument > Five canons of rhetoric > Memory

Description | Discussion | See also

Description

When you are going to persuade someone of something, take time to remember enough
of the argument to be able to present the full story without hesitation or omissions. If
you want to spellbind them, you must fully learn the spell.
You seldom need to learn everything by heart, but it can be a very good idea to at least
learn your opening lines by heart and then know very clearly all of the points of your
argument.
If you have problems remembering things, do not worry, help is at hand. There are
many practical memory methods described within this website.
The secret of speaking is often in the rehearsal. Even great orators spend much time
behind closed doors perfecting each of their speeches. The more important the speech,
the more time you should put into its preparation, including a full dress rehearsal (or
two).

Discussion
When an actor performs in a play, they do not read from the script. To do so would spoil
the performance terribly. They would not be able to use their hands and body fully. They
would look like a person reading from a piece of paper, rather than a person who
transforms the audience to a separate reality.
Persuading is like acting. The performance depends on you not having to spend time
thinking about what to say -- your spare cognitive effort should be spend on shaping it
to the situation, going with the flow of moment, responding to your audience to ensure
you are in perfect tune.
In the original Latin text, this is 'memoria'.

elivery
Disciplines > Argument > Five canons of rhetoric > Delivery
Description | Discussion | See also

Description
To deliver a good persuasive argument, you have to go beyond words. Communication
means using every means at your disposal, which includes body language as well as
voice tone and texture.
Use emphasis in words and body language to draw attention to key points. Put emotion
into your voice.

You can also make good use of props in your delivery, utilizing images and simple
artifacts, from cups to cupboards. Use props with drama, synchronizing them with key
points of speech. Dramatically bring them out from a hidden place and return them
when they are no long of relevance.

Discussion
By one study at least, words can make up a small proportion of a face-to-face
communication. And by any chalk, much of personal communication occurs through
visual and auditory channels (and sometimes tactile ones too).
In the original Latin text, this is 'actio' and 'pronuntatio'.

Virtues of style
Disciplines > Argument > Virtues of style

These are the five elements of style in writing and speaking that were identified by the
early Greeks as essential methods of creating effective rhetoric. By examining each one,
both the true virtues can be identified and also the vices of style, which are effectively
their opposites.

Correctness: following the rules of language.

Clarity: speaking or writing to be understood.

Evidence: creating internal evocative experiences.

Propriety: using language apt for the situation.

Ornateness: using elegance and impressive style.

Style in language is a very helpful part of persuasion. It is not only the message that
persuades but also the words used and the more subtle connotative meaning. Eloquence
in itself is persuasive, as it indicates an attractive intelligence.

Correctness
Disciplines > Argument > Virtues of Style > Correctness

Description | Example | Discussion | See also

Description
Know and use the rules of language.

Acquire a good vocabulary by reading widely, listening to good speakers and

individual study. Know both the meaning of words and also how to pronounce
them.

Know the parts of speech and understand the rules of syntax whereby these parts
are combined together. Know how to punctuate.

Know the correct usage of the language, where words may be used and where
their meaning is unclear.

Above all, be curious. Keep on wondering about the subtler points of language and
maintain it within your field of interest.

Example
Them is the animals what I was talking of. (incorrect)
Those are the animals about which I was speaking. (correct)

Discussion
Talking correctly shows that you understand the language and that you can say what you
mean. Particularly amongst upper classes, intelligentsia and academics, correct use of
language is also a subtle signal that 'I am well-educated and hence one of you'.
Vices of correctness are very commonplace, including using apostrophe's in plurals (like
this), mispronunciation, poor syntax and so on. The very complexity of the rules of
language makes error not only commonplace but often unrealized. These sentences, no
doubt, contain many such errors.
A time when it is useful to use incorrect language is when you are seeking to
create harmony with the other person by echoing their modes of speech. Some people
('chameleons') do this naturally. As long as it is not seen as parody, this can be an
effective way of bonding with others.
Correctness is also known as Purity.

Clarity

Disciplines > Argument > Virtues of Style > Clarity

Description | Example | Discussion | See also

Description
Speak or write with a constant focus on helping the other person understand what you
are trying to convey. Make it easy for them to understand.
Use simple forms of the language, simple sentences and so on.

Example
Eschew obfuscation. (not clear)
Avoid making things unclear. (clearer)
Be clear. (even clearer)

Discussion
Clarity is similar to Correctness in that it does seek to follow the rules of language, yet
you can be correct and very obscure. Obscurity occurs when you are using uncommon
words and archaic forms of the language that, although correct, are difficult to
understand.
'Plain English' is a movement that seeks to spread clarity in speech and, particularly,
writing.
Vices of clarity include using complex sentences and uncommon
words in a deliberate attempt to assert authority by
causing confusion. A common form of losing clarity is where there is
ambiguity, such that multiple meanings may be given (again, this can
be a deliberate device).

Evidence

Disciplines > Argument > Virtues of Style > Evidence

Description | Example | Discussion | See also

Description
To convince people, you should not only seek to make them understand: for real
conviction, you should reach to their emotions by vivid description.
Use sensory language that evokes internal sensory experiences. Thus use 'looks like' to
trigger visual senses, 'sounds like' to trigger auditory senses, etc.
Amplify what you say, exaggerating emotional topics. Enhance with adjectives,
also with adverbs and other parts of speech. Use power words to trigger emotion.

Example
There was utter chaos and the children were terrified.
It was high up, if you see what I mean.
It looked roughly like dark brown tree-bark.

Discussion
'Evidence', as described in this classical usage, means evocation of emotion through
descriptions so vivid that they can 'see' and 'experience' the evidence and hence
experience the emotions associated with this.
Decisions always have an emotional content, particularly at the point of emotion. Thus
paying attention to emotions is an important part of changing minds. Evoking emotions
also decreases rationality in the decision process. Whereas for clarity you will use the
logic of Logos, for the emotional target of evidence you will work with Pathos.
Vices of evidence include uncontrolled internal experiences that lead people away from
your intended purpose. You can also cause such mixtures of internal experience that the
only result is confusion.

Propriety
Disciplines > Argument > Virtues of Style > Propriety
Description | Example | Discussion | See also

Description
Be careful in your words that they are apt and fit well with one another and also that
they match the situation and create a decent sense of decorum.
Be moderate in what you say. Neither exaggerate beyond reason nor hide your light
under a bushel.
Be considerate of other people and their sensitivities to particular forms of language.

Example
I've had a f***ing good idea. (not a lot of propriety)
I have had a very good idea. (better - less cause of offence)
I have had a an idea. (even better - less boastful)

Discussion
Propriety is generally context-sensitive, and what is apt in one situation will lack
propriety in another.
Vices of propriety include the use of boorish, crude language, particularly in polite
company (and also when you are not absolutely sure of the company you are in).

Ornateness
Disciplines > Argument > Virtues of Style > Ornateness
Description | Example | Discussion | See also

Description
Use decoration and elaborations within your words that impress and delight your
audience.
Use figures of speech (similies, metaphors, etc.) to stimulate and connect with other
ideas.
Lengthen sentences that weave and turn simple words into beautiful garments of
eloquence.

Example
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O, no! it is an ever-fixed mark,
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come;
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
William Shakespeare, Sonnet 116

Discussion
Ornateness is, to a large extent, the opposite of Clarity, although both are created with
the audience foremost in mind. The difference is in the intent and, to some extent, the
audience.
The intent of ornateness is either to delight or to impress. The audience may simply
enjoy the words alone, regardless of who is speaking them (such as in a theatrical
performance). The goal may also be to impress the audience not so much with the words
but of the speaker (or writer) who presents them. In changing minds this may well be a
useful step along the way to establish credibility, though excessive decoration that
intends only to seek approval quickly loses its appeal.
Vices of ornateness appear either in flat, lifeless style or crass decoration that lacks
eloquence and flow. Beginners and those who have reached a low plateau tend to be
clumsy in their usage of words, either using the wrong words (such as Malapropism) or
creating an overly ornate text wherein the meaning becomes lost.

Barthes' rhetoric
Disciplines > Rhetoric > Barthes' rhetoric
Metabolas | Parataxes | See also

Roland Barthes explored rhetoric through the lens of semiotics and the study of images.
He wrote that rhetoric is "a technique, an art in the classical sense of the word, the art of
persuasion."

Metabolas
Metabolas is based in the substitution of one expression for another, for example as in
metaphor and metonymy.
Any word has complex cultural connotations and when one word is substituted for
another, the replacing word brings a host of ideas and alternative meaning, inviting the
listener to replace the original word's meaning, at least in part, with these new concepts.
In practice, when a person hears a substitution, they may well be initially confused and
hence actively seek new meaning in order to keep what is said within the bounds of
understanding and thus comfort.

Parataxes
Parataxes is based on management and modification of the relationship between items
in a phrase or sentence, for example changing things around or adding new emphasis.
A sentence is a complex package of meaning that has accepted grammatical form and
structure. When this is modified in novel ways, again the listener must think about what
new meaning is being presented or implied.

Durand's rhetoric

Disciplines > Rhetoric > Durand's rhetoric

Nature of the operation | Nature of relationship | In combination | See also

Jaques Durand analyzed thousands of adverts to understand the use of rhetorical figures
in visual contexts. The principles he identified are also applicable in other situations.
Durand defined rhetoric as 'the art of fake speech', in which rhetoric is used to transition
from 'proper' and figurative language. He takes a Freudian viewpoint seeing the use
figurative language in satisfying forbidden desires, and rhetorical figures as mock
violations of a norm.
He divides rhetorical figures into two classifications, similar to Barthes' approach:
Those which modify the operation of a sentence or phrase and those which

modify relationships, and the related substitutionand exchange.

Nature of the operation

Operations start with a simple proposition and modify certain elements by the use
of addition or suppression.
Addition

Items are added to a the phrase in order to change the overall meaning. For
example adjectives and adverbs modify nouns and verbs, for example by exaggeration.
Other additions include contrasts that highlight target items.
Repetition is a particular form of addition, where the item added is the same (in some
form) as something already there.
Suppression

Suppression is an opposite of addition in that involves the suppression, exclusion or

other removal or hiding of elements of the phrase or sentence.
Substitution

Substitution is a combination of the above two principles, being the suppression of one
element followed by the addition of a new element.
Exchange

Exchange consists of two reciprocal phrases, as in 'We eat to live, not live to eat'. These
may also include substitution.
Nature of relationship

The relationship or connection of items within the phrase may be figuratively

constructed using one or more of:

Identity: using the 'same' relationship

Similarity: having something in common

Difference: having distinctly contrasting elements

Opposition: having conflicting elements

False similarity: as in paradox and ambiguity

In combination

Combining relationships and rhetorical operations as above, these can be linked to

specific figures as below:

Rhetorical operations

Relation
between
elements

Addition

Suppression

Substitutio
n

Exchange

Identity

Repetition

Ellipsis

Hyperbole

Inversion

Allusion

Hendiadys

Similarity
- of form

Rhyme

- of content

Simile

Difference

Circumlocution Metaphor

Homology

Accumulation Suspension

Metonymy

Asyndeton

- of form

Zeugma

Dubitation

Periphrasis Anacoluthon

- of content

Antithesis

Reticence

Euphemism Chiasmus

Opposition

False
similarity
- Ambiguity

Antanaclasis Tautology

Pun

- Paradox

Paradox

Antiphrasis Antilogy

Preterition

Antimetabole