Glossary

(Difference between revisions)

Jump to: navigation, search

Revision as of 03:58, 8 February 2011

This page is dedicated to key terms from the readings.

Aleatoric: according to chance
Animism: all objects have souls (Aristotle)
Antistrophos: counterpart, companion
Dialectic: two-sided dialogue, formal argumentation system, conversation
Doxa: social knowledge
Episteme: core, truths of the earth knowledge
Emthymeme: uses audience's assumptions, only use 1 premise
Syllogism: logical/deductive, conclusion resting on 2 premises (major, minor, conclusion)
Krisis: point of judgment, moment of decision
Paradeigma: use of example or evidence to prove a point
Pisteis: proofs, persuasive appeals (logos, ethos, pathos); artistic (logical, logos, nonlogical, ethos and pathos) and inartistic (tangible evidence) proofs
Techne: art, craft
Poeis: fine arts

Persuasive Appeals

Logos: the appeal to reason. Logical appeals attempt to persuade the audience using intellect. Most academic arguments rely mainly on logos.
Pathos: the appeal to emotion. When people accept a claim based on how it makes them feels=, they are acting on pathos. A majority of advertisements and arguments in the popular press rely heavily on pathetic appeals. Although the pathetic appeal can be manipulative, it is the cornerstone of moving people to action.
Ethos: The persuasive appeal of one's character, especially how this character is established by means of speech or discourse. Ethotic appeals rely on the trustworthiness of the speaker or writer. Ethos is an effective appeal because when the audience believes that the speaker does not intend to do them harm, they are more likely to trust what is being said.

Representamen: what something represents to you personally (creates in the mind of that person an equivalent sign, or perhaps a more developed sign)
Interpretant: how you perceive the representamen
Object: the action you take

New Criticism: Richards' ideas helped establish this movement, which viewed texts as completely autonomous
Close Reading: Richards shifted the focus from general analysis to a meticulous, word-level method of interpretation, which has greatly influenced modern criticism.
Ambiguity: Richards showed how under-examined ambiguities can lead to misinterpretation of an entire work
Intentional Fallacy: William K. Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley asserted that the author's words, not his intent, should be studied. Richards argued that since an authors mind can never be known, we can only examine her words
Death of the Author: Roland Barthe's essay argues that the author must be disentangled from the text
Affective Fallacy: Wimsatt and Berdsley claimed that evaluating literature by the way it affects the reader is uselessly subjective. Again, literature should be evaluated through its use of language, not outside factors

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 *Intentional Fallacy: William K. Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley asserted that the author's words, not his intent, should be studied.  Richards argued that since an authors mind can never be known, we can only examine her words
 *Death of the Author: Roland Barthe's essay argues that the author must be disentangled from the text
-Affective Fallacy: Wimsatt and Berdsley claimed that evaluating literature by the way it affects the reader is uselessly subjective.  Again, literature should be evaluated through its use of language, not outside factors
+*Affective Fallacy: Wimsatt and Berdsley claimed that evaluating literature by the way it affects the reader is uselessly subjective.  Again, literature should be evaluated through its use of language, not outside factors