Theories and Movements
From RhetorClick
(→Rogerian Rhetoric) |
(→Semiotics) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| - | == Semiotics == | + | == [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics ''Semiotics''] == |
[[Ferdinand de Saussure]], 1857-1913: [[signified and signifier are core of semiotics]] | [[Ferdinand de Saussure]], 1857-1913: [[signified and signifier are core of semiotics]] | ||
Revision as of 17:11, 12 April 2012
This page discusses key rhetorical movements and the theories associated with those movements.
Contents |
Belletristic/Elocution
Semiotics
Ferdinand de Saussure, 1857-1913: signified and signifier are core of semiotics
Roland Barthes, 1915-1980: author and scriptor, neutral and novelistic writing
Mikhail Bakhtin, 1895-1975: Polyphony, Unfinalizability, Carnival and Grotesque, Chronotope, Heteroglossia ("The Dialogic Imagination"), Speech genres
Literary Criticism
I. A. Richards, 1893-1979: father of New Criticism
New Rhetorics
Kenneth Burke, 1897-1993: Dramatistic Pentad (act, scene, agent, agency, purpose), Definition of Man as symbol-using animal
Chaim Perelman, 1912-1984: New Rhetorics
Donald C. Bryant, 1905-1987: definitions of rhetoric
Rogerian Rhetoric
Rogerian rhetoric is derived from the theories of Carl Rogers. Rogers originally developed his ideas as a method of therapy that was centered around understanding the person being treated. Initially called non-directive therapy, this system became the foundation for Rogers' broader ideas of the self and learning. These ideas have been applied across disciplines, heavily influencing one branch of rhetorical studies.
Rogerian rhetoric then, is the idea that persuasion is most effective when the positions on all side of the argument are understood, and a connection is made between the people involved. Terms such as non-combative and person-centered are some of the theory's watch-words.
Rogerian rhetoric typically consists of 4 main stages:
- An introduction to the problem and a demonstration that the opponent's position is understood.
- A statement of the contexts in which the opponent's position may be valid.
- A statement of the writer's position, including the contexts in which it is valid.
- A statement of how the opponent's position would benefit if he were to adopt elements of the writer's position. If the writer can show that the positions complement each other, that each supplies what the other lacks, so much the better (Brent)
Jim W. Corder, 1929-1998: argument as emergence toward the other
Douglas Brent: Rogerian Rhetoric as an alternative to Traditional Rhetoric
Post-Structuralism
Michel Foucault, 1926-1984: author-function
Pedagogical Studies
Lisa S. Ede, b. 1947: Distinctions Between Classical and Modern Rhetoric
Andrea A. Lunsford, b. 1942: Distinctions Between Classical and Modern Rhetoric
Writing and Technology
Cynthia L. Selfe: Influential Role in "Computers in the Composition Classroom"
Richard J. Selfe Jr.: Computer Interface as Representation of Oppression of Diverse Cultures
Dennis Baron, b. 1944:
Conservatism
Richard Weaver, 1910-1963: man's nature is fourfold (rational, emotional, ethical, religious), God and Devil Terms, Noble Rhetoric, Anti-Nominalism
Uncategorized
Stephen Toulmin, 1922-2009: Toulmin Model of Argument
Robert L. Scott, b. 1928: Epistemic Rhetoric
Richard Ohmann, b. 1931:
S. Michael Halloran, b. 1939: Rhetoric in Existentialist Literature
Sorapure et al.?
Palmquist et al.?
Bill Hart-Davidson and Steven D. Krause:
Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle:
?: Semanticism
