Scholarlink

<p>The relationship of Aristotle’s <i>Rhetoric</i> with the new rhetorics of the 20th century remains an issue among contemporary theorists of argumentation. In the <i>New Rhetoric</i>, Chaim Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca seem to be discontent with the approaches some contemporary rhetoricians take to the purpose of rhetoric, advocating instead for what they term “adherence,” which awaits to be clarified or even reconceptualized in many ways. We will revisit this foundational term to the NRP from the perspectives of “persuasion,” “identification,” “judgment,” and “modification.” These terms are taken to be most representative of the rhetorical theories in development, signifying the shift from a focus on the speaker’s intention to one on the audience’s reception. But we do not take these theories to be reducible to one term or another. By drawing upon Kenneth Burke’s concept of identification, we contend that wherever there is meaning, there is rhetoric, and wherever there is rhetoric, there is modification. Rhetoric modifies the changes of meaning in the audience’s cognitive environment.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Judgment, Adherence, and Modification: A New Rhetorical Perspective

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月24日

查看全文
  • Christopher W. Tindale,
  • Jianfeng Wang

摘要

The relationship of Aristotle’s Rhetoric with the new rhetorics of the 20th century remains an issue among contemporary theorists of argumentation. In the New Rhetoric, Chaim Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca seem to be discontent with the approaches some contemporary rhetoricians take to the purpose of rhetoric, advocating instead for what they term “adherence,” which awaits to be clarified or even reconceptualized in many ways. We will revisit this foundational term to the NRP from the perspectives of “persuasion,” “identification,” “judgment,” and “modification.” These terms are taken to be most representative of the rhetorical theories in development, signifying the shift from a focus on the speaker’s intention to one on the audience’s reception. But we do not take these theories to be reducible to one term or another. By drawing upon Kenneth Burke’s concept of identification, we contend that wherever there is meaning, there is rhetoric, and wherever there is rhetoric, there is modification. Rhetoric modifies the changes of meaning in the audience’s cognitive environment.