What is rhetoric definition is short. Rhetoric as a science: what is it, meaning, subject, what is it for

Ushakov's Dictionary

Rhetoric

rito rica(or rhetoric), rhetoric, pl. No, wives (Greek rhetorike).

1. The theory of oratory, eloquence ( scientific.). A textbook of classical rhetoric. The rules of rhetoric.

| transfer A rant in which beautiful phrases and words hide its empty content ( books. neod.).

2. Vstarina is the name of the youngest of the three classes of theological seminaries (rhetoric, philosophy, theology).

Pedagogical speech. Dictionary-Reference

Rhetoric

(Greek rhetorike techne from rhetor - speaker) - theory and practical skill of purposeful, influencing, harmonizing speech. R.'s theory, which arose in antiquity (the middle of the 1st millennium BC), syncretically included all the basic disciplines of the humanitarian circle; by the middle of the 19th century. their separation and specialization are completed, and R. loses the status of a theoretical field of knowledge. The development of humanitarian culture from the middle of the XX century. marked by the so-called "rhetorical Renaissance" or "R.'s revival." This concerns, first of all, the theory of R.: linguistics and literary criticism again turn to the classical rhetorical heritage, rethinking it at a new level; Abroad, a modern new R. (neorhetoric) is emerging, beginning to aspire even to the role of a general methodology of humanitarian knowledge (grounds for this are found in the fact that many of the most general theoretical concepts of the humanities arose precisely in classical rhetorical theory). Neorhetoric is related to linguistic pragmatics, communicative linguistics, etc .; these young sciences are in essence the disciplines of the rhetorical circle; their theoretical apparatus also largely goes back to the system of concepts of ancient R.

From the second half of the XX century. abroad there is an interest in rhetorical practice, there are special methods and courses for improving speech communication, listening and understanding, quick reading, etc. In recent years, manifestations of the "rhetorical Renaissance" are noticeable in our country. However, the modern theory of general speech, the subject of which is the general patterns of speech behavior that operate in various situations of communication, and ways to optimize speech communication, in Russian philology is only just beginning to be developed. The same applies to modern private R., on the basis of which it is possible to improve speech communication in the so-called "areas of increased speech responsibility" (such as diplomacy and medicine, pedagogy and jurisprudence, administrative and organizational activities, social assistance, journalism, trade, services etc.).

Lit .: Aristotle. Rhetoric // Antique rhetoric. - M., 1978; Vinogradov V.V. On the language of fiction. - M., 1980; Graudina L.K., Miskevich G.I. Theory and practice of Russian eloquence. - M., 1989; Mi-khalskaya A.K. About the modern concept of the culture of speech // FN - 1990. - № 5; Mikhalskaya A.K. Russian Socrates: Lectures on Comparative Historical Rhetoric. - M., 1996; Neorhetoric: genesis, problems, prospects: Sat. scientific and analytical reviews. - M., 1987; Rhetoric and Style / Ed. Yu.V. Rozhdestvensky. - M., 1984.

A. K. Mikhalskaya 204

Rhetoric

(Greek rhetorike). The theory of expressive speech, theory of eloquence, oratory.

Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language

Rhetoric

Latin - rhetorica.

In Russian written language, the word was first used by Avvakum (17th century), and its spelling was somewhat different from the modern one, it changed several times over the centuries. An ancient Russian word meaning "theory of prosaic speech in general, eloquence in particular" was written and pronounced as "rhetoric", then the shortened "rhetoric" became widely used.

At the beginning of the XX century. the traditional spelling was "rhetoric" (respectively - "retor", "rhetoric").

Related are:

Polish - retoryka.

Derivatives: rhetorician, rhetoric, rhetorical.

Culturology. Reference dictionary

Rhetoric

(Greek rhetorike) - the science of oratory (about fiction in general). Consisted of 5 parts: finding the material, location, verbal expression, memorization and pronunciation. Rhetoric was developed in antiquity (Cicero, Quintilian), developed in the Middle Ages and modern times, in the nineteenth century. merged into the theory of literature.

Rhetoric: Reference Dictionary

Rhetoric

(Old Greek ρητώρίκη)

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

Pedagogical terminological dictionary

Rhetoric

(Greek rhetorike (tekhne) - oratory)

a discipline that studies ways of constructing artistic expressive speech (primarily prosaic and oral), various forms of speech impact on the audience.

R. received its beginning in ancient Greece in the fifth century. BC. In the schools of the sophists (see), a system of educational oratorical exercises was developed - recitations on given topics. The scientific foundations of R. were laid by Aristotle, who regarded R. as the science of the laws of opinion (correlating it with logic, the science of the laws of knowledge). The work of Theophrastus, a disciple of Aristotle, who, in his work On the Syllable, provided an extensive systematized apparatus of rhetorical categories, was of importance for the teaching of R. Teaching in rhetorical schools was based on the study of theory and exemplary works of orators of the 5-4 centuries. BC.

Later, there was a gap between theory and normativity of samples: the theory set the task of R. to entertain presentation, develop a high style, in the samples of Ch. attention was paid to the accuracy of the expression. In the Middle Ages, along with grammar and dialectics (logic), R. was included in the trivium - the lowest stage of the seven liberal arts. In the monastic and cathedral schools of Western Europe, and then at the universities of the DOS. sources of R.'s study were the Latin anonymous "Rhetoric to Herennius" and "On the Finding of Words" by Cicero. R. remained a part of classical education until the 19th century. However, which began already in the 18th century. the discrepancy between the normative school R. and linguistic practice was the reason for the exclusion of R. from the curriculum by the beginning of the 20th century.

In Russia, the systematic teaching of R. began in the schools of Orthodox brotherhoods on the territory of Southwestern Russia and the Commonwealth in the 16th and 17th centuries. according to Latin textbooks. The Kiev archives preserved 127 textbooks by R. in Latin, dating back to the 17th and 18th centuries, which were used in the classroom at the Kiev-Mohyla Academy. The authors of educational books on R. were: Simeon Polotsky, the Likhud brothers (1698), the teacher R. Georgy Daniilovsky (c. 1720), M.V. Lomonosov (1748) and others. In the late 19th - early 20th centuries. instead of R., the theory of literature began to be taught, under this name from the 70s. 19th century until the 20s. 20th century school normative guides were published that considered gl. artistic written speech.

Elements of pedagogical R. have been preserved in courses of the Russian language and literature to the present day (creative work, practical exercises for the development of oral and written forms of speech and mastering the norms of speech etiquette, etc.).

Since the 50s. In connection with the development of mass communication and information in a number of countries (primarily in the USA, France, and Japan), interest in writing as an independent scientific and educational discipline has reappeared. In Ros. Federation in the 90s. R. as an academic discipline was introduced into secondary general education schools.

(Bim-Bad B.M. Pedagogical encyclopedic dictionary. - M., 2002. S. 241-242)

see also

Dictionary of linguistic terms

Rhetoric

(Old Greek ρητώρίκη)

1) theory and art of eloquence;

2) the science that explores the techniques of expressiveness; stylistically differentiated speech, methods and techniques of debating-polemic speech;

3) under the influence of enantiosemia, the meaning of the word R. developed, including a negative assessment: R. - beautiful, pompous, low-content speech;

4) According to A.A. Volkov: a philological discipline that studies the relationship of thought to the word; R.'s sphere of action is prosaic speech or public argumentation. "Grammar, poetics, lexicography, textual criticism, history of literature, stylistics arose later than rhetoric and for a long time developed as auxiliary or preparatory subjects for the study of rhetoric"; today rhetoric as a philological discipline stands in the ranks of linguistics, stylistics, textual criticism, theory and history of fiction, folklore studies and occupies a place in the system of philological disciplines that is historically and methodologically justified;

R. focuses on the structure of the linguistic personality of the sender and recipient of speech, on the speech technique of argumentation and the method of constructing a purposeful utterance;

R. generalizes the experience of social and linguistic practice, studying the type of linguistic personality and the nature of speech relations that are specific to each cultural and linguistic community;

general R. studies the principles of constructing purposeful speech;

private R. studies specific types of speech;

modern Russian technique of argumentation has deep historical roots: it goes back to the Byzantine ancient culture of public speech and adopted the methods and forms of argumentation of Western European societies;

5) R. is an academic discipline that presupposes the special and literary education of a rhetorician;

R.'s social tasks are:

a) in the education of the rhetorician;

b) the creation of norms of public argumentation, ensuring the discussion of problems that are significant for society;

c) the organization of speech relations in the field of management, education, economic activity, security, law and order;

d) in determining the criteria for assessing public activity, on the basis of which persons capable of holding responsible positions are selected. The science of the art of speech, eloquence, oratory. R. summarizes the experience of masters of the word, sets the rules.

The ancient world. Reference dictionary

Rhetoric

(Greek rhetorike)

the science of the laws of eloquence and their practical application. In ancient Greece, the river. originated in the 5th century. BC, but as a science developed in the III century. BC. In ancient Rome, r. reached its heyday in the 1st century. BC. The Romans learned oratory from the Greeks and borrowed a lot from them. Classical antique p. included 5 main parts: 1) selection and systematization of material; 2) the location of the material and its presentation; 3) verbal expression, word combination and speech style (simple, medium, high); 4) conclusion; 5) pronunciation technique. According to the laws of the river. the speech should consist of the following parts: introduction, presentation of the essence of the case, proof and conclusion.

R. of antiquity is mainly judicial and solemn (ceremonial) speeches. Roman eloquence reached its perfection in the person of Cicero (about 50 of his speeches survived): even today the best orators are compared with Cicero.

Cicero. Three treatises on oratory. M., 1972; Antique rhetoric / Ed. A.A. Tahoe Godi. M., 1978; Kozarzhevsky A.Ch. Antique oratory. M., 1980; Kuznetsova T.I., Strelnikova I.P. Oratory in Ancient Rome. M., 1976.

(IA Lisovy, KA Revyako. The Ancient World in Terms, Names and Titles: Dictionary-Reference Book on the History and Culture of Ancient Greece and Rome / Scientific Ed. AI Nemirovsky. - 3rd ed. - Minsk: Belarus, 2001)

in the ancient world, the science of the laws of eloquence, theory and practice publ. speech. R. owes its origin to widely developed societies, life in c. democrat, city-states (primarily in Sicily and Athens), where issues of state. management and legal disputes were resolved in bunkers. assembly and at court sessions with the involvement of the mean number of citizens. In these conditions, the priority. the task of the speaker. justification by him of his t. sp., the desire to convince the audience with the use of all means of influencing their mind and emotions. About the role played by publ. word in Athens in the 5th - 4th centuries, give an idea of ​​the speech put by Thucydides in the mouth of polit, leaders of the period of the Peloponnesian War, as well as preserved. speeches Lysis, Isocrates, Demosthenes and other Athenian speakers. Theor. tradition associates the substantiation of rhetoric as a science with the names of the Sicilian teachers of eloquence - Tisius and Korak (5th century BC) and their compatriot George, who in 427 conquered the Athenians with his orator and skill. Bol. other senior sophists (Protagoras, Hippias), who considered one of their Ch. merit the ability to "make a weak word strong", that is, find convincing evidence. any thesis. R. opened his first school in Athens by Isocrates, who sought to reinforce the practical training of the speaker with his general education. To the 2nd floor. IV century refers to the 1st normative manual for the speaker, lawsuit - the so-called. "R. to Alexander "Anaximenes (not to be confused with the philosopher!), save. among the works of Aristotle. His own "R.", the cut was based on the laws of logic, ethics and psychology of perception, did not have creatures, influence on the professional development of R.'s questions, to-rye occupied Ch. a place in Theophrastus' treatise "On style" (or "On a syllable"), which has not come down to us, where, no-vid., for the first time, the doctrine of 3 styles of speech (high, medium, simple) was developed and the requirements for its clarity, beauty and "Relevance", that is, compliance with the speaker's task. The crisis of a democrat, city-states and the formation of Hellenes, monarchies (by the 4th-3rd centuries BC) deprives the publ. speeches on questions of states, importance, in connection with which in R., the development of formal technical. aspects of speech, the most detailed classification of the system of proofs, speech figures, etc., which, however, does not interfere with the manifestation of a true taste for the artist. word in Op. Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the anonymous treatise "On the Sublime". The result of the development of dr. R. steel production. Hermogenes (II century AD), focused on the needs of school education.

In lat. lang. the first monument to R. yavl. nebol. treatise “R. to Herennius ”, mistakenly attributed to Cicero, who himself was rather restrained in his attitude to instructions of a technical order, putting forward the ideal of substantive speech and all-round education of the orator on the first plan. From 3 chap. Cicero's treatises on the orator, art in naib, the degree "Orator" (46 BC) is devoted to the systematic presentation of styles. questions R. Establishment of the empire in Rome leads, as in gr. gos-wah, to the fall of the content side of R .: bol. all kinds of declamations intended for fictitious processes and fictional incidents are spreading in rhetoricians and schools. Consideration of the technical side of the speaker, art prevails in the work that completes the development of the theory of R. in Rome. soil, - in the "Education of the speaker" Quintshshana... Numerous. monuments orator, prose preserved. from the period of late antiquity. (speeches of Dion Chrysostom, Libanius, Themistius), but in R.'s theory neither the writers themselves, nor the authors of special. treatises and manuals have not contributed anything fundamentally new. Main its provisions were fully formed by the end of the 1st century. n. NS. and included the division of speeches into political (deliberative), judicial and epidemic (solemn); trad. structure of speeches, ch. arr. judicial (introduction, presentation, proof, refutation, conclusion), the doctrine of the preparation of speech (finding the material, its location, selection of express, means, memorization) and ea pronunciation; theory of styles; detailed classification of speech figures; the requirement for the speaker not only to convince and excite the listener, but also to delight him with the beauty of the sounding word.

(Ancient culture: literature, theater, art, philosophy, science. Dictionary-reference / Ed. By V.N. Yarkho. M., 1995.)

Terminological dictionary-thesaurus on literary criticism

Rhetoric

(from Greek rhetorike, from rhetor - orator) is the science of oratory and, more broadly, of fiction in general. In the XIX century. merged into the theory of literature.

RB: literature and science

Correspondent: poetics

Whole: Theory of Literature

Ass: style, tropes, figures of speech

* "As a special discipline, rhetoric is aimed at comprehending the specifics of the artistic language and the means of its creation. It is designed to explain how and why rhetorical figures - these clichés of artistic thought - transform speech, give it style and quality of artistry" (Yu.B. Borev) ...

"Rhetoric from the very beginning becomes a kind of nervous system of literature" (M. Ya. Polyakov). *

Dictionary of Forgotten and Difficult Words of the 18th-19th Centuries

Rhetoric

and RETORIKA, and , f.

1. Science of eloquence, oratory; educational book on the theory of eloquence.

* As for the Russian language, we only had textbooks, i.e. grammar, syntax and rhetoric... // Saltykov-Shchedrin. Poshekhonskaya antiquity // * *

RHETORICAL.

2. Flatulence of speech.

* This loyalty is false from start to finish. There is a lot of rhetoric in the story, but no logic... // Chekhov. Uncle Ivan // *

3. The title of the junior class of the theological seminary.

* [Pravdin:] And you, Mr. Kuteikin, are you not a scientist? [Kuteikin:] From scientists, your honor! Seminaries of the local diocese. I got to the rhetoric, yes God willing, I turned back... // Fonvizin. Undergrowth // *

Gasparov. Records and extracts

Rhetoric

♦ At school we were taught at the end of the analysis of each work to list its three meanings: cognitive, ideological and educational, and literary and artistic. Actually, this exactly corresponds to the three tasks of rhetoric: docere, movere, delectare (mind, will, feeling).

♦ (TV) "Rhetoric - wherever a person first thinks and then speaks, Aristotle is more rhetorical than Plato, and Socrates was the only Greek non-rhetorician."

♦ I got a call from an unfamiliar voice: "I am so and so ("oh, I know, of course, I read it"), I defend my doctorate, do not refuse to be an opponent". The topic is close to me, there are few specialists, I agreed. Time, as always, is running out. After reading the work, I overcame my phone fear and called him: "I will speak the nicest words, I cannot say only one thing - that this is a scientific work; I hope that my rhetorical experience will be enough for the academic council not to notice this, but think about whether you should take another opponent". He thought for half a minute and said: "No, I rely on you". There was enough rhetorical experience, the vote was unanimous

♦ (From the diary of M. Shkapskaya in RGALI). Olga Forsh was waiting for the tram, missed four, jumped into the fifth; it was removed by a young policeman, who said: "You, citizen, are not so young as you are unreasonable." She walked away, moved, and only then realized that he had simply told her an old fool.

♦ It is in vain to think that this is the ability to say what you really do not think. This is the ability to say exactly what you think, but so that they are not surprised or indignant. The ability to say one's own words in other people's words is exactly what Bakhtin, a hater of rhetoric, has been doing all his life. The muses in the prologue to Theogonia say:

We know how to tell many lies

Like the truth,

But we also know how to speak the truth.,

When we want.

Published "History of World Literature", I wrote the introduction to the antique section. N. from the editorial board in a vivid speech demanded to attribute that Greece created a type of Promethean man, who became a beacon for progressive mankind of all times. I listened, remained silent and wrote the opposite - that Greece created the concept of law, world and human, which is above all, etc., - but using the vocabulary typical of N-y. And N., and everyone on the editorial board was completely satisfied. Anyone who wants to can read in Volume I of IVL.

Kinosemiotic terms

RHETORIC

(Greek rhetorikē) Theory of oratory. See also in the understanding of K. Metz.

Rhetoric in the understanding of Y. Lotman - Y. Lotman writes: Rhetoric, one of the most traditional disciplines of the philological cycle, has now received a new life. The need to connect the data of linguistics and poetics of the text gave rise to neorhetoric, which in a short time gave rise to an extensive scientific literature. Without touching upon the problems arising in this case in their entirety, let us single out the aspect that we need in the further presentation. A rhetorical utterance, in the terminology we have adopted, is not some simple message, on which adornments are superimposed on top, when removed, the main meaning is preserved. In other words. A rhetorical utterance cannot be expressed in a non-territorial way. The rhetorical structure lies not in the sphere of expression, but in the sphere of content. In contrast to a non-territorial text, a rhetorical text, as already noted, we will call one that can be represented in the form of a structural unity of two (or several) subtexts, encrypted using different, mutually untranslatable codes. These subtexts can represent local orderings, and, thus, the text in its different parts will have to be read using different languages ​​or act as different words, uniform throughout the text. In this second case, the text assumes a double reading, for example, everyday and symbolic. Rhetorical texts will include all cases of counterpoint collision within the unified structure of various semiotic languages. The RHETORICA of a baroque text is characterized by a collision within a whole area, marked by a different measure of semioticism. In the clash of languages, one of them invariably appears as a natural (non-language), and the other as an emphatically artificial one. In the baroque temple wall paintings in the Czech Republic, you can find the motive: an angel in a frame. The peculiarity of the painting is that the frame imitates an oval window. And the figure sitting on the windowsill hangs one leg, as if crawling out of the frame. The leg that does not fit inside the composition is sculpted. It is attached to the drawing as a continuation. Thus, the text is a pictorial and sculptural combination, and the background behind the figure's back imitates the blue sky and appears to be a breakthrough in the space of the fresco .. The protruding volumetric leg breaks this space in a different way and in the opposite direction. The entire text is built on the game between real and unreal space and the clash of languages ​​of art, of which one is a natural property of the object itself, and the other is an artificial imitation of it. The art of classicism required the unity of style. The baroque change of local orderings seemed barbaric. All text along the entire length should be evenly organized and encoded in a single way. This does not mean, however, a rejection of the rhetorical structure. The rhetorical effect is achieved by other means - the multilayer linguistic structure. The most common case is when the object of the image is encoded first by theatrical, and then by poetic (lyrical), historical or pictorial code. In a number of cases (this is especially typical for historical prose, pastoral poetry and painting of the 18th century), the text is a direct reproduction of the corresponding theatrical exposition or stage episode. In accordance with the genre, such an intermediary text-code can be a scene from a tragedy, comedy or ballet. For example, Charles Coypel's canvas Psyche, abandoned by Cupid, reproduces the ballet scene in all the conventions of the spectacle of this genre in the interpretation of the 18th century. (Yu. Lotman Semiosphere St. Petersburg, Art - St. Petersburg, 2000, pp. 197-198). See also .

P.S. From this text it is clear that Yu. Lotman reduces the suddenly popular RHETORICA (NEORITORICA) to the well-known ELECTICS, or SYMBIOSIS of artistic means. In contrast, Christian Metz provides a more meaningful explanation for the keen interest of semiologists in medieval rhetoric. See the following term.

Rhetoric in the understanding of K. Metz - Christian Metz writes: "Is the" grammar "of cinema RHETORIC or grammar? large units The doctrine of "disposition" (dispositio) * (or large syntagmatics), which constitutes one of the main parts of classical RHETORIC, consists in prescribing a certain combination of indefinite elements: any legal speech should consist of five parts (introduction, exposition, etc.) , but the duration and internal composition of each of them are arbitrary.Almost all figures of "cinematic grammar" - that is, a set of units: 1) sign (as opposed to "differential"), 2) discrete, 3) large sizes, 4) specific to cinema and common for films - they obey the same principle. not simultaneously codified (= by the very fact of alternation) and sign (since this alternation means simultaneity), but the duration and internal composition of the combined elements (that is, alternating images) remain completely arbitrary. And yet, it is here that one of the greatest difficulties of cinema semiotics arises, since Rhetoric in its other aspects is grammar, and the essence of cinema semiotics lies in the fact that RHETORIC and grammar here turn out to be indivisible, as Pierre-Paolo Pasolini rightly emphasizes. "(Sat" The structure of the film "M., Raduga, 1984, K. Metz's article" Problems of denotation in a feature film "p., 109-110).

Note:

the doctrine of "disposition" (dispositio) * - The doctrine of "disposition" is one of three parts of classical rhetoric: 1) inventio - selection of arguments and evidence, 2) dispositio - development of the order of presentation of arguments and evidence, 3) elocutio - the doctrine of verbal expression (Approx. M. Yampolsky).

P.S. From the above, at least, it is clear why Christian Metz needed venerable Rhetoric: he tries to define the essence of cinematic grammar, and does not, like Yu. Lotman, only engage in terminological re-designation.

Philosophical Dictionary (Comte-Sponville)

Rhetoric

Rhetoric

♦ Rhétorique

The art of discourse (as opposed to eloquence as the art of speech) aimed at persuasion. Rhetoric subordinates the form with all its possibilities of persuasion to the content, that is, thoughts. For example, such forms as chiasm (***), antithesis or metaphor, by themselves, do not prove anything and are not able to serve as an argument for anything, but as an auxiliary means they can help in persuasion. Therefore, one should not abuse rhetorical devices. Rhetoric tending towards self-sufficiency ceases to be rhetoric and turns into sophistry. Rhetoric is necessary, and only smug people can think that rhetoric is easy to do without. The best minds of mankind did not disdain rhetoric. Take Pascal or Rousseau: brilliant mastery of oratorical techniques did not prevent each of them from becoming a genius writer and thinker. True, we admit that Montaigne looks more advantageous against their background - he is more direct, more inventive and more free. He was much less eager to convince anyone of his innocence, he was quite enough truth and freedom. However, it cannot be said that he completely dispensed with rhetoric - he simply knew how to preserve his independence from rhetoric better than others. As they say, first learn the craft, and then forget that you learned it.

Type of parallelism; the arrangement of parts of two parallel members in the reverse order ("We eat to live, not live to eat").

Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language (Alabugin)

Rhetoric

AND, f.

1. The theory of oratory, eloquence.

* Study rhetoric. *

2. transfer Excessive elevation of presentation, bombast.

* Speak without rhetoric and loud phrases. *

|| adj. rhetorical, th, th.

* Rhetorical question. *

Explanatory translation dictionary

Rhetoric

theory of expressiveness of speech, theory of eloquence, oratory.

Rhetoric: Reference Dictionary

Rhetoric

(Old Greek ρητώρίκη)

1) Theory and art of eloquence;

2) the science that explores the techniques of expressiveness; stylistically differentiated speech, methods and techniques of debating-polemic speech;

3) under the influence of enantiosemia, the meaning of the word R. developed, including a negative assessment: R. - beautiful, pompous, low-content speech;

4) According to A.A. Volkov: a philological discipline that studies the relationship of thought to the word; R.'s sphere of action is prosaic speech or public argumentation. “Grammar, poetics, lexicography, textual criticism, history of literature, stylistics arose later than rhetoric and for a long time developed as auxiliary or preparatory subjects for the study of rhetoric”; today rhetoric as a philological discipline stands in the ranks of linguistics, stylistics, textual criticism, theory and history of fiction, folklore studies and occupies a place in the system of philological disciplines that is historically and methodologically justified; R. focuses on the structure of the linguistic personality of the sender and recipient of speech, on the speech technique of argumentation and the method of constructing a purposeful utterance; R. generalizes the experience of social and linguistic practice, studying the type of linguistic personality and the nature of speech relations that are specific to each cultural and linguistic community; general R. studies the principles of constructing purposeful speech; private R. studies specific types of speech; modern Russian technique of argumentation has deep historical roots: it goes back to the Byzantine ancient culture of public speech and adopted the methods and forms of argumentation of Western European societies;

5) R. is an academic discipline that presupposes the special and literary education of a rhetorician; R.'s social tasks are: a) in the education of the rhetorician; b) the creation of norms of public argumentation, ensuring the discussion of problems that are significant for society; c) the organization of speech relations in the field of management, education, economic activity, security, law and order; d) in determining the criteria for assessing public activity, on the basis of which persons capable of holding responsible positions are selected. The science of the art of speech, eloquence, oratory. R. summarizes the experience of masters of the word, sets the rules.

encyclopedic Dictionary

Rhetoric

(Greek rhetorike),

1. the science of oratory and, more broadly, of fiction in general. It consisted of 5 parts: finding the material, location, verbal expression (teaching about 3 styles: high, medium and low and about 3 means of elevating style: selection of words, combination of words and stylistic figures), memorization and pronunciation. Rhetoric was developed in antiquity (Cicero, Quintilian), developed in the Middle Ages and in modern times (in Russia, MV Lomonosov). In the 19th century. the doctrine of verbal expression merged with poetics and became part of the theory of literature called stylistics. All R. 20th century the broad (general literary, linguistic and even philosophical) significance of the effective speech communication is being revived.
2. Musical rhetoric is a musical theoretical teaching of the Baroque era, associated with a view of music as a direct analogy of oratory and poetic speech. Includes the same parts as literary rhetoric; their content was expressed in a system of specific musical techniques (see Art. Figure).

Ozhegov Dictionary

RIT O RIKA, and, f.

1. The theory of oratory.

2. transfer Pompous and meaningless speech. Empty p. Fall into rhetoric.

| adj. rhetorical, oh, oh. R. question(reception of oratorical speech, approval in the form of a question).

Efremova's Dictionary

Rhetoric

1. f.
   1. :
      1. Theory and art of eloquence.
      2. An academic subject containing the theory of eloquence.
      3. colloquial A textbook outlining the content of this academic subject.
   2. transfer Effective, beautiful, but low-content speech.
2. f. outdated. The title of the junior class of the theological seminary.

Encyclopedia of Brockhaus and Efron

Rhetoric

(ρητορική τέχνη) - in the original sense of the word - the science of oratory, but later it was sometimes understood more broadly, as a theory of prose in general. European writing gets its origins in Greece, in the schools of the Sophists, whose main task was the purely practical teaching of eloquence; therefore, their R. included many rules pertaining to stylistics and grammar proper. According to Diogenes Laertius, Aristotle attributed R.'s invention to the Pythagorean Empedocles, whose work is unknown to us even by name. From the words of Aristotle himself and from other sources, we know that the first treatise on R. belonged to a student of Empedocles, Corax, the favorite of the Syracuse tyrant Hieron, a political orator and advocate. We find in him an interesting definition: "eloquence is a worker of persuasion (πειθοΰς δημιουργός)"; he is the first to attempt to establish the division of oratory into parts: introduction (προοιμιον), sentence (κατάστάσις), presentation (διήγησις), proof or struggle (άγών), fall (παρέκβασις) and conclusion; he also put forward the position that the main goal of the orator is not the disclosure of the truth, but convincingness with the help of the probable (είκός), for which all kinds of sophisms are extremely useful. The work of Corax has not reached us, but ancient writers tell us examples of his sophisms, of which the so-called crocodile enjoyed particular fame. A student of Corax, Tizius, developed the same system of sophistic evidence and considered the main means of teaching R. to memorize exemplary speeches of judicial orators. Gorgius of Leontius, who was famous in his time, came out of his school, who, according to Plato, "discovered that the probable is more important than the true, and was able in his speeches to present the small to the great, and the great to the small, to present the old as the new and recognize the new as old, and express conflicting opinions on the same subject. " Gorgias's method of teaching also consisted of the study of patterns; each of his students had to know excerpts from the works of the best orators in order to be able to answer the most often raised objections. Gorgius owned a curious treatise "on a decent occasion" (περί τοΰ καιροΰ), which spoke about the dependence of speech on the subject, on the subjective properties of the speaker and audience, and gave instructions on how to destroy serious arguments with the help of ridicule and, on the contrary, respond to ridicule with dignity ... Gorgias contrasted beautiful speaking (εύέπεια) with the statement of truth (όρθοέπεια). He contributed a lot to the creation of rules about metaphors, figures, alliteration, parallelism of parts of a phrase. Many famous rhetoricians emerged from the Gorgias school: Paul of Agrigent, Likimnius, Frazimachus, Even, Fedor of Byzantium; to the same stylistic direction belonged the sophists Protagoras and Prodic and the famous orator Isocrates, who developed the doctrine of the period. The direction of this school can be called practical, although it prepared rich psychological material for the development of general theoretical provisions on the art of oratory and thus facilitated the task of Aristotle, who in his famous "Rhetoric" (translated by N.N. Platonova, St. rules, using purely empirical techniques. Aristotle significantly expanded the area of ​​R., in comparison with the common view of it at that time. "Since the gift of speech," he says, "has the character of universality and finds application in a wide variety of cases and since the action when giving advice, with all kinds of explanations and convictions, given for one person or for entire meetings (with which the speaker deals ) is essentially the same, then R. is just as little, like dialectics, deals with any one definite area: it embraces all spheres of human life.Rhetoric, understood in this sense, is used by everyone at every step; it is equally necessary both in matters concerning the everyday needs of an individual, and in matters of state importance: once a person begins to persuade another person to do something or to dissuade him from something, he must resort to R.'s help, consciously or unconsciously. " Understanding R. in this way, Aristotle defines it as the ability to find possible ways of persuasion in relation to each given subject. Hence, the goal pursued by Aristotle in his treatise is also clear: he wanted, on the basis of observation, to give general forms of oratory, to indicate what the orator should be guided by or, in general, anyone who wants to convince someone of something. Accordingly, he divided his treatise into three parts: the first of them is devoted to the analysis of the principles on the basis of which an orator (that is, anyone who talks about something) can encourage his listeners to do something or divert them from something. anything, can praise or blame anything. The second part talks about those personal qualities and characteristics of the speaker, with the help of which he can instill confidence in his listeners and thus more truly achieve his goal, that is, persuade or dissuade them. The third part deals with the special, technical, so to speak, side of rhetoric: Aristotle speaks here about the methods of expression that should be used in speech, and about the construction of speech. Thanks to the many subtle psychological remarks on the question of the interaction of the speaker and the environment (for example, the meaning of humor, pathos, the impact on young people and the elderly), thanks to an excellent analysis of the power of evidence used in speech, the work of Aristotle has not lost its significance for our time and had a strong influence on the entire subsequent development of European R.: in essence, some of the questions posed by Aristotle could now be the subject of scientific research, and, of course, the same empirical method that Aristotle used should be applied. Having accepted many of Aristotle's positions as dogmatic truths, R., however - both in Greece and, later, in Western Europe - strongly deviated precisely from his method of research, returning to the path of practical instructions followed by the sophists. Among the Greeks, we see two directions after Aristotle: attic, concerned primarily with the precision of expression, and Asian, which set the task of amusing presentation and developed a special high style based on contrasts, replete with comparisons and metaphors. In Rome, the first follower of this Asian trend was Hortensius, and later Cicero joined him, who, however, in some writings also spoke in favor of Atticism, the most elegant representative of which in Roman literature can be considered Caesar. Already at this time, one can see in the works of some rhetoricians the emergence of the theory of three styles - high, middle and low - developed in the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. Cicero owns a considerable number of treatises on oratory (for example, "Brutus", "Orator"), and Roman rhetoric was most fully expressed in the writings of Quintilian; it has never been distinguished by originality. In the era of the struggle between Christianity and ancient paganism, the science of Christian oratory was created (see Homiletics), reaching brilliant development in the 4th and 5th centuries. after R. Kh. In a theoretical sense, it adds almost nothing to what was worked out by antiquity. In Byzantium, the techniques of R. are closest to the Asian direction, and in this form this science is also transmitted to ancient Russia, where we can see excellent examples of its influence in the works of Metropolitan Hilarion and Cyril of Turov. In the West, R. adheres to the instructions of Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian, and these instructions turn into indisputable rules, and science becomes a kind of legislative code. This character is affirmed for European R., especially in Italy, where, thanks to the meeting of the languages ​​of the scientific Latin and the Italian vernacular, the theory of the three styles finds application best of all. Bembo and Castiglione occupy a prominent place in the history of Italian art as stylists, and the legislative trend is especially pronounced in the activities of the della Crusca academy, whose task is to preserve the purity of the language. In the works of, for example, Sperone Speroni, imitation of Gorgias' techniques in antitheses, the rhythmic structure of speech, the selection of consonances is noticeable, and the Florentine Davanzati notes a revival of Atticism. From Italy, this direction is transferred to France and other European countries. A new classicism was created in R., which finds its best expression in Fenelon's Discourse on Eloquence. Any speech, according to Fenelon's theory, should either prove (ordinary style), or paint (middle), or captivate (high). According to Cicero, the oratorical word should approach the poetic one; there is no need, however, to pile up artificial decorations. We must try to imitate the ancients in everything; the main thing is the clarity and correspondence of speech to feeling and thought. Interesting data for the characterization of French R. can be found in the history of the French academy and other institutions that protected traditional rules. Similarly, the development of R. in England and Germany throughout the 18th century. In our century, the development of political and other types of eloquence should have led to the abolition of the conventional, legislative rules of oratory - and R. returns to the path of observation outlined by Aristotle. The concept of science also expands: for example, in Wackernagel, R. encompasses the entire theory of prose and falls into two sections (narrative and instructive prose), and remarks about style are finally excluded from R., since they relate equally to poetry and to prose, and therefore constitute a special department of stylistics. In Russia, in the pre-Petrine period of the development of literature, R. could have application only in the field of spiritual eloquence, and the number of her monuments is absolutely negligible: we have some stylistic remarks in Svyatoslav's Izbornik, an interesting treatise of the 16th century: Speech of the subtleties of the Greek ( published by the Society of Lovers of Ancient Writing) and "The Science of Composing Sermons" by Ioannikiy Golyatovsky. The systematic teaching of rhetoric began in the southwestern theological schools in the 17th century, and textbooks are always Latin, so there is no need to look for original processing in them. The first serious Russian work is Lomonosov's "Rhetoric", compiled on the basis of classical authors and Western European manuals and giving a number of examples in Russian in support of the general provisions - examples extracted partly from the works of new European writers. Lomonosov, in his Discourse on the Use of Church Books, applies the Western theory of three styles to the Russian language. In view of the fact that the field of eloquence in Russia was limited almost exclusively to church preaching, R. coincides with us almost always with homiletics (see); on secular rhetoric, we have extremely few works, and even those are not distinguished by independence, as, for example, the leadership of Koshansky (see). R.'s scientific development in the sense that it is understood in the West has not yet begun in our country.

At the time of its origin in antiquity, rhetoric was understood only in the direct meaning of the term - as the art of an orator, the art of oral public speaking. A broad understanding of the subject of rhetoric is the property of a later time. Now, if it is necessary to distinguish the technique of oral public speaking from rhetoric in a broad sense, the term is used to refer to the former oratorio.

Traditional rhetoric (bene dicendi scientia "the science of good speech" as defined by Quintilian) was opposed to grammar (recte dicendi scientia - "the science of correct speech"), poetics and hermeneutics. The subject of traditional rhetoric, in contrast to poetics, was only prose speech and prose texts. Rhetoric was distinguished from hermeneutics by a predominant interest in the persuasive power of the text and only a weakly expressed interest in other components of its content that did not affect the persuasive power.

The methodological difference between rhetoric and disciplines of the rhetorical cycle from other philological sciences lies in the orientation towards the value aspect in the description of the subject and the subordination of this description to applied problems. In Ancient Russia, there were a number of synonyms with a value meaning, denoting the mastery of the art of good speech: benevolence, kindness, eloquence, cunning, chrysostom and finally eloquence... In ancient times, the value element also included a moral and ethical component. Rhetoric was considered not only the science and art of good oratory, but also the science and art of bringing to good, convincing of good through speech. The moral and ethical component in modern rhetoric has survived only in a reduced form, although some researchers are making attempts to restore its meaning. Other attempts are being made - to define rhetoric, completely removing the value aspect from the definitions. There are, for example, definitions of rhetoric as a science of generating utterances (such a definition is given by A.K. Avelichev with reference to U. Eco - Dubois). The elimination of the value aspect of the study of speech and text leads to the loss of the specificity of rhetoric against the background of descriptive philological disciplines. If the task of the latter is to create a complete and consistent description of the subject, which allows further applied use (for example, in teaching a foreign language, creating automatic translation systems), but in itself is neutral in relation to applied problems, then in rhetoric the description itself is built with an orientation on the needs of speech practice. In this regard, educational (didactic) rhetoric plays just as important a role as scientific rhetoric in the system of rhetorical disciplines, i.e. training in the technique of generating good speech and high-quality text.

The subject and objectives of rhetoric.

Differences in the definition of the subject and tasks of rhetoric throughout its history boiled down, in fact, to differences in the understanding of what kind of speech should be considered good and quality... There are two main directions.

The first direction, coming from Aristotle, connected rhetoric with logic and suggested that it be considered good speech convincing, effective speech. At the same time, efficiency also boiled down to persuasiveness, to the ability of speech to win recognition (agreement, sympathy, sympathy) of the audience, to make them act in a certain way. Aristotle defined rhetoric as "the ability to find possible ways of persuading about any given subject."

The second direction also originated in Ancient Greece. Among its founders are Isocrates and some other rhetoricians. Representatives of this trend were inclined to consider it good richly decorated, lush, built according to the canons aesthetics speech. Persuasiveness continued to matter, but it was not the only and not the main criterion for assessing speech. Following F. van Eemeren, the direction in rhetoric originating from Aristotle can be called "logical", and from Isocrates - "literary."

In the era of Hellenism, the "literary" direction was strengthened and ousted the "logical" to the periphery of didactic and scientific rhetoric. This happened, in particular, in connection with a decrease in the role of political eloquence and an increase in the role of ceremonial, solemn eloquence after the fall of democratic forms of government in Greece and Rome. In the Middle Ages, this ratio continued to persist. Rhetoric began to become isolated in the sphere of school and university education, turning into literary rhetoric. She was in a difficult relationship with homiletics, the teaching of Christian church preaching. Representatives of homiletics either turned to rhetoric in order to mobilize its tools for compiling church sermons, then again fenced off from it as from "pagan" science. The predominance of the "decorative-aesthetic" concept of one's own subject deepened the separation of rhetoric from speech practice. At a certain stage, supporters of "literary" rhetoric generally stopped caring about whether their speeches were suitable for effectively convincing someone. The development of the rhetorical paradigm in this direction ended with the crisis of rhetoric in the middle of the 18th century.

The balance of forces changed in favor of the "logical" direction in the second half of the 20th century, when the old rhetoric was replaced by neorhetoric, or new rhetoric. Its creators were primarily logicians. They created a new discipline as a theory of practical discourse. The most significant part of the latter was the theory of argumentation. The sphere of interest of neorhetoric was again declared the effectiveness of the impact and persuasiveness of speech and text. In this regard, neorhetoric is sometimes called the neo-Aristotelian direction, especially when it comes to the neorhetoric of H. Perelman and L. Olbrecht-Tyteka.

Neorhetoric did not reject the results obtained in the mainstream of the "literary" direction. Moreover, some researchers of rhetoric to this day pay primary attention to the aesthetic qualities of speech (supporters of rhetoric as a science of artistic and expressive speech: to some extent, the authors Common rhetoric, V.N. Toporov, etc.). Today we can talk about peaceful coexistence and mutual enrichment of the “logical” and “literary” directions, with the former dominating.

Most of the definitions given to rhetoric by its various researchers over the centuries place the discipline in one of the two directions characterized. New concepts of discipline are reflected in a number of contemporary definitions of rhetoric.

Definitions in line with the "logical" direction: the art of correct speech for the purpose of persuasion; the science of persuasion methods, various forms of predominantly linguistic influence on the audience, given the characteristics of the latter and in order to obtain the desired effect (A.K. Avelichev); the science of the conditions and forms of effective communication (S.I. Gindin); persuasive communication (J. Kopperschmidt); the science of speech actions.

Definition in line with the "literary" direction: Philological discipline, which studies ways of constructing artistic and expressive speech, first of all, prosaic and oral; closely related to poetics and stylistics (V.N. Toporov).

Rhetoric divisions.

General and private rhetoric is traditionally distinguished. General rhetoric is the science of universal principles and rules for constructing good speech that do not depend on the specific area of ​​speech communication. Private rhetoric examines the features of certain types of speech communication in connection with the conditions of communication, the functions of speech and the spheres of human activity. In modern rhetoric, the term "general rhetoric" also has a second meaning - one of the directions of the new rhetoric. The beginning of the use of this term was laid by the publication of the book by J. Dubois et al. General rhetoric... Sometimes "general rhetoric" is used synonymously with "non-rhetoric".

In ancient textbooks of rhetoric, three functional types of speech were distinguished: deliberative (declining or rejecting), judicial (accusatory or defensive) and solemn, ceremonial or demonstrative (laudatory or condemning) speech. Advisory speech was used in political eloquence. It had to proceed from the value categories of useful and harmful. Judicial speech was based on the categories of just and unjust, and ceremonial - on the categories of good and bad. In the Middle Ages, the predominant type of eloquence was ecclesiastical eloquence, proceeding from the categories pleasing and displeasing to God.

In modern times, the status of various spheres of social communication has relatively leveled off. To the traditional types of eloquence - political, judicial, solemn and theological, new ones were added - academic, business and journalistic eloquence.

Nowadays, one can distinguish as many private rhetoric as there are spheres of communication, functional varieties of language, and in some cases - even smaller functional units (for example, the rhetoric of a television speech is a subsection of publicistic rhetoric).

The dominant types of speech communication have the greatest impact on public consciousness in each era. Therefore, the rhetorical disciplines that study them attract the greatest interest. Currently, this is media rhetoric, political and business (commercial) rhetoric.

Other divisions of rhetoric include theoretical, applied and thematic rhetoric. Theoretical rhetoric is engaged in scientific research of the rules for constructing high-quality speech, and applied rhetoric uses the found rules and patterns, as well as the best examples of the most successful speeches, in the practice of teaching literature. Theoretical and applied rhetoric are identical with scientific and educational rhetoric. Thematic rhetoric deals with the amalgamation of different types of literature around one important topic, for example, the presidential election. It spread to the United States.

Parts (canons) of rhetorical speech development. Parts, or canons, of rhetorical development of speech were defined in antiquity. Their composition has not undergone significant changes over the centuries. In the neorhetoric of the 20th century. only the amount of research attention paid to individual canons has changed. Almost all non-rhetorical studies concern argumentation (one of the subsections of the dispositio canon) and types of transformations of the plan of expression and the plan of content (one of the subsections of the elocutio canon). There are five canons in total.

Finding or inventing speech or text material

(inventio). Finding covers the entire set of mental operations associated with planning the content of speech or text. The author needs to define and clarify the topic (if it is not set in advance), choose the methods of its disclosure, arguments in favor of the thesis being defended and other elements of the content.

The main criteria for the selection of material are the author's communicative intention (intention) and the nature of the audience to which the author is going to address.

In the types of eloquence that serve an open competition of different points of view (primarily judicial and political), it is recommended to highlight the main controversial point and build speech around it. This main point should be verified using a number of so-called statuses: the status of establishment (the plaintiff claims that the defendant has offended him, and the defendant denies the fact of insult - it is the task of the judges to establish whether there has been an insult); the status of determination (in one definition of insult, the statement of the defendant against the plaintiff may be considered an insult, but in the other - it cannot), the status of qualification (for example, judges must determine whether the limits of necessary defense have been exceeded) and some others.

In the old rhetoric, material was subdivided into specific cases (causa) and general issues (quaestio). The deduction of the latter from the first was carried out by abstraction from the specific circumstances of the case. For example, from the specific case “candidate N during the last election campaign was twice caught in a lie”, one can deduce the general question “is it permissible to lie in the name of gaining power?” General questions, in turn, are divided into practical (as in the above example) and theoretical, for example, "what is the purpose of a person?" In modern works on rhetoric, attempts are made to clarify this subdivision of the material. It is proposed, in particular, to distinguish between encyclopedic material, empirical, "based on the data obtained by the author himself", and comparative, "bringing the empirical and encyclopedic into correspondence."

Depending on the role of the material in the development of the topic and on the attitude of the listeners to it, the old and new rhetoric determine the degrees of credibility that the material should answer. Material that is important for the development and explanation of the topic should be distinguished by a high degree of likelihood. This degree is achieved by selecting familiar material that meets the expectations of listeners or readers. The thesis itself and the strongest arguments in its favor should have the highest degree of credibility. The highest degree of likelihood is achieved through a paradox or unexpected question that presents the thesis as truth and its opposite as falsehood. A low degree of likelihood may differ material that is not of interest to listeners or readers, but which the author nevertheless includes in the text to achieve meaningful completeness. An indefinite degree of likelihood can distinguish material that is dangerous, inconvenient, indecent, etc. to present to a given audience. The author must say that he is not sure of the truth of this material. Finally, the latent degree of credibility is characteristic of the material, the assessment of which goes beyond the intellectual capabilities of the given audience.

The methods of disclosing a topic include, in particular, whether the topic will be presented in a problematic form or descriptively, in the form of dispassionate logical reasoning or emotionally. Old and new rhetoric traces these different ways to sources or modes of persuasiveness. There are three such modes: logos, ethos and pathos.

Logos is a belief through an appeal to reason, a sequence of arguments built according to the laws of logic.

Ethos is persuasion through an appeal to the moral principles recognized by the audience. Since the general moral principles and values ​​are known (justice, honesty, respect for shrines, devotion to the homeland, etc.), the author, who wants to build a belief in ethos, can only choose the principles that are suitable for the case and that are closest to the audience.

Paphos means the excitement of emotion or passion, on the basis of which persuasion occurs. The doctrine of the excitement of passions was developed already in the old rhetoric. Emotions were described, success in the excitation of which meant success in persuasion: joy, anger, hope, fear, sadness, enthusiasm, courage, pride, etc.

Rhetoric recommends, in general, to select the material so as to activate all three modes of persuasiveness. The text should present a logical sequence of reasoning, arguments should be based on moral principles and appeal to the emotions of the audience. At the same time, the modes of persuasion must be brought into harmony with each other and with the theme. Emotions aroused should be appropriate to the theme. Sharp leaps from rational persuasion to emotional speech are unacceptable - smooth transitions are needed.

The first canon of rhetorical development of speech also includes a subsection on the substantive sources of the invention of the material, in particular, on the sources of the invention of arguments and arguments. These sources are arranged in a hierarchy - from the most abstract to the most concrete. At the highest level of abstraction are the so-called general conditions of the case, described by a sequence of questions: Who? What? Where? How? With the help of whom? By what means? When? What for? Why? Each of the questions poses an area for further substantive clarifications. These refinements are called rhetorical places or topoi (Greek topoi, Latin loci). In modern university rhetoric, they are also called "semantic models" or "schemes", and the subsection itself is called a topic. Topos are private, standardized aspects of any topic. During the period of its existence, rhetoric has accumulated a fairly large number of places, which, nevertheless, are reducible to the foreseeable number of groups. One of the possible groupings looks like this:

1) Conditions: Who? What?

Topos: definition of a subject; genus and species; part and whole; identity, similarity and comparison - similarities and differences, etc.

An example of the development of a topic: subject (what?) - a computer; audience (for whom?) - for philologists; computer definition, internal architecture (central processing unit, read-only memory, etc.); peripherals, multi-computer networks, wide area networks, etc. Comparison: computer and abacus, computer and TV, computer and mobile phone (common functions), etc.

2) Conditions: How? With the help of whom? By what means?

Topos: methods, mode and mode of action, interrelated subjects and objects, tools, etc.

Example: principles of a computer (transmission of electrical signals, semiconductor matrices, optical signal, digital signal coding), the role of a human operator, software.

3) Conditions: Where? When?

Topos: place - geographically, socially (in what strata of society); distance (close-far); time (morning-day-night), era (modern, classical), etc.

Example: the history of the emergence of a computer, the country where computers first appeared, social structures (at first, only production and office use). Time of occurrence: 20 c. Counting machines of past centuries, etc.

4) Conditions: Why? Why?

Topos: causes, goals, intentions, consequences, etc.

Example: why computers appeared, what they are used for today, what global computerization can lead to, consequences in the form of information wars, etc.

The compiler of speech or text can fill each group of places depending on his own needs, excluding some toposes or adding new ones. It must also be borne in mind that the structure of places is in no way identical to the structure of the speech or text itself. This is just an auxiliary structure that helps to select content-rich content.

In modern didactic rhetoric, one can find the identification of the concepts of “place” (loci) and “common places” (loci communes). Meanwhile, in theoretical rhetoric, starting from Aristotle, these concepts are not identical. Common places do not mean standardized aspects of considering any topic, but meaningfully certain places that served “to emotionally reinforce existing arguments ... threatens these strongholds of human society if the accused is not convicted (in the opinion of the prosecutor) or acquitted (in the opinion of the defense lawyer). Due to the abstractness of their content, these motives could develop in the same way in speeches on any occasion: hence their name ”(ML Gasparov).

The method of spreading and enriching the rhetorical places of detention found with the help of the technique was called rhetorical amplification.

Arrangement or composition of material

(dispositio). This part includes the teaching about the order of arrangement and about the main blocks of the structure of a text or speech. The basis of the canon "disposition" was the doctrine of chriya, or the composition of speech. On the basis of the doctrine of chriya, such modern disciplines have arisen as the doctrine of literary composition and the theory of composition as part of the theory of text.

The main blocks of the structure of a text or speech are counted from three (introduction - main part - conclusion) to seven (introduction - definition of a topic with its subdivisions - presentation - digression - argumentation or proof of one's own thesis - refutation - conclusion). One more block can be added to these blocks - the title of the text.

Detailed division is used for texts related to functional varieties of language (scientific and business speech, journalism). It does not always apply to the analysis of works of art. To designate the structurally compositional parts of the latter in literary criticism, another series of terms is often used: beginning - outset - culmination - denouement - ending.

1. Title. It did not stand out as a separate block in traditional rhetoric. The importance of titles has increased with the development of mass communication rhetoric. Here the title (or the title of the TV program) came to be seen as a means of drawing the addressee's attention to the text of a newspaper publication or to a TV show in the context of an alternative choice associated with a constant increase in the number of messages received by the addressee.

2. Introduction. Its function is to psychologically prepare the audience for the perception of the topic. It is recommended to build the introduction in such a way as to immediately interest the audience in the topic and form favorable psychological conditions for its presentation. To do this, you can justify the choice of the topic, express respect for the audience and opponents, show the general content background against which the topic will unfold. Depending on the type of audience, the nature of the topic and the situation of communication, the author must choose one of the types of introduction: usual (for some types of texts there is a standard form of introductions), short, restrained, non-standard (paradoxical), solemn, etc.

It should be noted here that the introduction, like some other structural blocks (for example, argumentation), can be present in the text either only once, or accompany the introduction of each new subtopic.

3. Definition of the topic and its subdivision. Here the author directly defines what he is going to talk about or write next, and lists the most important issues that he wants to highlight (aspects of the topic). In a number of genres of special communication (educational lecture, scientific article), a plan for further communication can be proposed here. Subdivision of the topic should meet a number of criteria: be logically expedient; contain only essential, approximately equivalent aspects of the topic. If the main task is to convince the audience, the rhetoric recommends building the unit incrementally: from the least convincing to the most convincing aspects of the topic. The definition of the topic and thesis can follow both before the presentation and after it, preceding the argumentation.

Direct naming of the topic is not necessary for philosophical and artistic works. Moreover, the indication of the topic, especially at the very beginning, can negatively affect the effectiveness of the impact of such works on the audience.

4. Presentation. A consistent story about the various aspects of the subject in accordance with the presented plan. There are two methods of presentation: (1) natural, plot, historical or chronological method, when the author presents selected facts in their chronological or other natural sequence (first the cause, then the effect, etc.); (2) an artificial, plot-based or philosophical method, when the author deviates from the natural sequence and follows the logic of unfolding the topic created by him, wishing to increase the entertaining, conflicting nature of the message, to keep the audience's attention using the effect of broken expectations. In this case, after a message about a later event in time, a message about an earlier event may follow, after a story about the consequences - a story about the reasons, etc.

5. Retreat or digression, excursion. It briefly characterizes a subject that is only indirectly related to the main topic, but which the author considers it necessary to tell the audience about. It is not an obligatory compositional part. The place of retreat in the composition is also not fixed. Usually the digression is located either in the course of the presentation, or after the presentation and before the argumentation. A digression can be used to relieve mental stress if the topic requires serious intellectual efforts from the audience and the author, or emotional release if the author accidentally or deliberately touched on an emotionally unsafe topic in this audience.

6. Argumentation and refutation. Argumentation is understood as a collection of arguments in favor of the thesis in its compositional unity and the process of presenting these arguments. Refutation - the same argumentation, but with the "opposite sign", ie a collection of arguments against the antithesis defended by the opponent, or, if the main antithesis is not formulated, against possible doubts and objections to the thesis, as well as the process of presenting these arguments.

For both Aristotle and neo-rhetoricians, argumentation (including refutation) is considered the most important compositional block, since it is she who plays the main role in convincing the audience, and, consequently, in achieving rhetorical goals as such. The doctrine of argumentation was actively developed already in the old rhetoric. In the new rhetoric, the theory of argumentation is its main part.

The most important distinction in the theory of argumentation is the distinction between proof, demonstration, or logical argumentation on the one hand, and rhetorical, dialectical argumentation, or simply argumentation, on the other. The proof is carried out according to the formal rules of logic: the laws of logical inference, the rules for constructing a syllogism and general logical laws. The case when the author manages to deduce the truth of the thesis by formal proof is considered as almost ideal. "Almost", since rhetoricians and especially neo-rhetoricians recognize that logically strict proof is a necessary, but not always sufficient condition for the success of a persuasion (if the audience, for example, is hostile and fundamentally does not want to agree, or if, due to a low intellectual level, it is not able to understand that the thesis has already been proven). However, more often a formal proof of the thesis is impossible. In this case, the author has to resort to rhetorical argumentation. Thus, convincing the audience of managers of chemical enterprises of the need for them to implement environmental protection measures, it is not enough to simply prove (based on the data of chemical and biological sciences) that the substances emitted by their enterprises are harmful to living organisms. This proof needs to be supported by an illustration, for example, how contact with such a substance can end for the children of one or another leader, as well as a mention of the sanctions that threaten those who do not take the necessary measures to neutralize emissions.

Rhetorical arguments differ primarily in the topoi (places) with which they can be invented or chosen. On this basis, one can first of all distinguish two large groups: arguments originating from "external" places (observation, illustration, example and evidence) and arguments originating from "internal" places (deductive, in particular, causal, generic and other argumentation, assimilation and opposition). In the modern theory of argumentation, the first group is otherwise called empirical, and the second - theoretical argumentation (A.A. Ivin). Other general classes of rhetorical arguments are also distinguished: analogy, dilemma, induction, as well as contextual arguments: tradition and authority, intuition and faith, common sense and taste (A.A. Ivin).

From the point of view of the modern theory of argumentation (H. Perelman), the choice of one or another formal type of rhetorical argument directly depends on the content that the author wants to put into it.

As for the research interest of the modern theory of argumentation, it is aimed primarily at studying the most difficult cases, for example, the impossibility of formal proof of the truth of moral judgments or judgments about values. The study of this class of judgments is especially important for legal argumentation dealing with normative statements.

In the refutation, the same types of arguments can be used, but with the opposite sign (for example, the head of a chemical enterprise claims that the benefits of his company's products for the country's economy are immeasurably higher than the harm caused by pollution of a local water body). The best is a refutation, when the inconsistency of the thesis is deduced formally and logically. Along with logical proof and the standard methods of rhetorical argumentation listed above, there is an extensive set of techniques used mainly to refute the antithesis ("argument to personality", "argument to ignorance", "argument to force", deceiving wordy empty reasoning, manipulation of ambiguity words, substitution of homonymous concepts, etc.). Their rhetoric does not recommend using them for ethical reasons, but you should know them in order to recognize them from your opponent. Sophists used similar techniques in ancient Greece. For their study, a special applied rhetorical discipline has developed - eristics. The material accumulated by eristics has become the object of interest of the modern theory of argumentation. Since the sophists did not compile detailed lists of their tricks and tricks (otherwise the demand for their teaching services would have decreased), the detailed description and systematization of tricks belongs to later times. Among the famous works in this area is A. Schopenhauer's brochure Eristic.

Along with the doctrine of methods, the theory of argumentation also studies logical errors of argumentation. The latter include, for example, a contradiction in the definition by the type of oxymoron ( living Dead), the definition of the unknown in terms of the unknown ( Zhrugr is a Russian witsraor), negation instead of definition ( a cat is not a dog), tautology, etc.

7. Conclusion. In the conclusion, the main content of the text is briefly repeated, the most powerful arguments are reproduced, the desired emotional state of the listeners and their positive attitude towards the thesis are reinforced. Depending on which of these tasks the author considers the most important, he can choose the appropriate type of conclusion: summarizing, typologizing or appealing.

Verbal expression or diction

(elocutio). The part of rhetoric that is most closely related to linguistic problems is the canon "verbal expression", since it is here that the organization of specific linguistic material is considered, up to the selection of words and the structure of individual sentences.

The verbal expression must meet four criteria: correctness (meet the rules of grammar, spelling and pronunciation norms), clarity (consist of generally understandable words in generally accepted combinations, if possible, do not include abstract, borrowed and other words that may not be clear to the audience), grace or ornamentation (being more aesthetic than everyday speech) and appropriateness. The relevance in traditional rhetoric was reduced to the harmony of the topic and the choice of linguistic means, first of all, vocabulary. From the requirement of relevance arose the theory of the three styles, according to which low-style objects should be spoken about in low-style words, tall objects - high, and neutral objects - in medium-style words.

These components of the canon "verbal expression" formed the basis of modern science of the culture of speech.

The most voluminous part of the old, especially medieval rhetoric was one subsection of the canon "verbal expression" - the doctrine of figures. The opinion was expressed that all "verbal expression" and in general all rhetoric without a trace is reduced to the doctrine of figures.

There are about a hundred figures themselves, however, the simultaneous use of Latin and Greek names, to which names from new languages ​​were added, led to the fact that a much larger number of doublet or synonymous terms began to be used to designate these figures over the centuries.

Even in antiquity, attempts were made to classify figures.

First of all, the figures of thought were separated, which were later isolated under the name of tropes (metaphor, metonymy, etc.), and figures of speech. The latter were subdivided, according to Quintilian, into figures based on the form of speech (grammatical figures) and figures based on the principles of word placement. Other common classifications included the division into word figures (alliteration, assonance) and sentence figures (parcellation, ellipsis, multi-union, non-union, etc.). Some of the figures of the sentence later began to be considered in two ways, depending on the characteristics of a particular language, the nature and purpose of use: on the one hand, as rhetorical figures, and on the other, as means of line syntax. Of the modern classifications, the most promising are the classifications of figures according to the corresponding procedures for transforming the plan of expression and the plan of content. Authors Common rhetoric propose to distinguish figures based on reduction, addition, reduction with addition and permutations (J. Dubois). V.N. Toporov gives the following classification of transformation methods: repetition aaa ... (for example, multi-union), alternation abab ... (parallel syntactic constructions), addition of abc for ab (exploitation), abbreviation for abc (ellipsis), symmetry ab / ba (chiasm), expansion a> a 1 a 2 a 3, collapse a 1 a 2 a 3> a, etc.

The canon “verbal expression” ended with the doctrine of the amplification of linguistic expression (the amplification of the content plan referred to the topic), in particular, through the sharing of figures, and the doctrine of the rhetorical period.

Memory, memorization

(memoria This canon was intended for orators who needed to memorize speeches prepared by them for subsequent public reproduction, and had a more psychological than philological character. It contained a list of techniques that made it possible to memorize relatively large volumes of textual information, mainly based on complex visual images.

Execution, utterance

(actio). Speaker's appearance... The section on performance included information and skills that today relate to the theory of acting: mastery of the voice - its accent-intonational wealth, facial expressions, the art of posture and gesture. Complex requirements for the speaker's behavior were formulated: to demonstrate charm, artistry, self-confidence, friendliness, sincerity, objectivity, interest, enthusiasm, etc.

Rhetoric and related disciplines.

Rhetoric, like linguistics, belongs to the range of semiotic sciences (see the works of V.N. Toprov, Yu.M. Lotman). The stylistics and culture of speech are separate and independently developing subsections of the old rhetoric. The problems of a number of other disciplines, philological and non-philological, intersect with the problems of rhetoric. These are: the syntax of superphrasal unity and the linguistics of the text, the linguistic theory of expressiveness, the linguistic theory of prose, but also logical sciences, especially modern non-classical logics, psycholinguistics, the psychology of memory and emotions, etc.

The circle of traditional rhetorical disciplines includes eristics, dialectics and sophistry. The disciplines of the non-rhetorical cycle include the linguistic theory of argumentation, the study of communication, general semantics, structural poetics, literary analysis of the text in the framework of new criticism, etc.

A brief historical sketch and personalities.

Rhetoric as a systematic discipline developed in ancient Greece during the era of Athenian democracy. During this period, the ability to speak in public was considered a necessary quality of every full citizen. Consequently, Athenian democracy can be called the first rhetorical republic. Individual elements of rhetoric (for example, fragments of the doctrine of figures, forms of argumentation) arose even earlier in Ancient India and Ancient China, but they were not consolidated into a single system and did not play such an important role in society.

It is customary to trace the beginning of rhetoric to the 460s BC. and associate with the activities of the senior sophists Coraxus, Tisias, Protagoras and Gorgias. Corax allegedly wrote a textbook that has not come down to us The art of persuasion, and Tisias opened one of the first schools of teaching eloquence.

Protagoras

(c. 481-411 BC) is considered one of the first to study the derivation of conclusions from premises. He was also one of the first to use a form of dialogue in which the interlocutors defend opposing points of view. compositions that have not come down to us belong The art of arguing, About sciences and others. It was he who introduced the formula "The measure of all things is a person" (the beginning of his composition True).

Gorgias

(c. 480-380 BC) was a disciple of Corax and Tisius. He is considered the founder, or at least the discoverer of figures as one of the main objects of rhetoric. He himself actively used figures of speech (parallelism, homeoteleuton, i.e. uniform endings, etc.), tropes (metaphors and comparisons), as well as rhythmically constructed phrases. Gorgias narrowed the subject of rhetoric that was too vague to him: unlike other sophists, he argued that he taught not virtue and wisdom, but only oratory. first began to teach rhetoric in Athens. His work has survived About non-existence or about nature and speech Praise to Elena and Justifying Palamed.

Fox

(c. 415-380 BC) is considered the creator of judicial speech as a special type of eloquence. His presentation was distinguished by brevity, simplicity, consistency and expressiveness, symmetrical structure of phrases. Of the approximately 400 of his speeches, 34 have survived, but the authorship for some of them is considered controversial.

Isocrates

(c. 436–388 BC) is considered the founder of "literary" rhetoric - the first rhetorician to focus primarily on writing. He was one of the first to introduce the concept of composition of an oratorical work. At his school, the allocation of four compositional blocks was adopted. The peculiarities of his style are complex periods, which, however, have a clear and precise structure and therefore are easily understandable, rhythmic articulation of speech and an abundance of decorative elements. The rich ornamentation made Isocrates' speeches somewhat cumbersome to listen to. However, as a literary reading, they were popular, as evidenced by the large number of copies on papyri.

Plato

(427–347 BC) rejected the value relativism of the sophists and noted that the main thing for a rhetorician is not copying other people's thoughts, but his own comprehension of the truth, finding his own path in oratory. His main dialogues on rhetoric issues are Phaedrus and Gorgias... In them he noted that the main task of oratory is persuasion, meaning conviction, first of all, emotional. He emphasized the importance of a harmonious composition of speech, the speaker's ability to separate the paramount from the unimportant and take this into account in speech. Moving on to the analysis of the practice of judicial rhetoric, Plato noted that here the orator should not seek the truth (which is of no interest to anyone in the courts), but strive for the maximum plausibility of his arguments.

Aristotle

(384–322 BC) completed the transformation of rhetoric into a scientific discipline. He established an inextricable link between rhetoric, logic and dialectics and, among the most important features of rhetoric, singled out its “special dynamic expressiveness and approach to the reality of the possible and probabilistic” (AF Losev). In the main works on rhetoric ( Rhetoric, Topeka and On sophistic refutations), pointed out the place of rhetoric in the system of sciences of antiquity and described in detail everything that constituted the core of rhetorical teaching over the next centuries (types of arguments, categories of listeners, kinds of rhetorical speeches and their communicative goals, ethos, logos and pathos, style requirements, tropes , synonyms and homonyms, compositional blocks of speech, methods of proof and refutation, rules of dispute, etc.). Some of the listed questions after Aristotle were either perceived dogmatically, or were completely removed from the rhetorical teaching. Their development was continued only by representatives of the new rhetoric starting from the middle of the 20th century.

In addition to theorists in antiquity, practical orators played an important role, who did not write theoretical works on rhetoric, but whose exemplary speeches were actively used in teaching. The most famous speaker was Demosthenes (c. 384–322 BC).

In Greece, two styles of oratory have developed - the richly decorated and flowery Asianism and the simple and restrained Atticism that arose as a reaction to the abuse of decoration.

In the pre-Christian Latin oratory tradition, the most famous theorists of oratory are Cicero and Quintilian.

Cicero

(106–43 BC) The theory of rhetoric is presented mainly in five of his writings: About finding, Topeka- an application of the eponymous work of Aristotle to Roman oratory practice, Speaker, Brutus and About the speaker... In them, Cicero discusses the structure and content of speech, the choice of one of the styles in accordance with the content of speech, the period and the sources of belief.

Quintilian

(c. 35-100 AD) owns the most complete ancient textbook on eloquence Institutio oratoria or Rhetorical instructions in 12 books. In it he systematizes all the knowledge accumulated by his time on the art of an orator. He defines rhetoric, characterizes its goals and objectives, writes about the communicative tasks of message and persuasion, on the basis of which he considers three types of rhetorical organization of the message. Then he examines the main compositional blocks of the message, paying special attention to the analysis of argumentation and refutation, writes about ways of arousing emotions and creating the right moods, concerns issues of style and stylistic processing of the message. He devotes one of the books to the technique of pronunciation and memorization.

Aurelius Augustine

(354-430), one of the church fathers, before his conversion to Christianity, among other things, taught rhetoric. Having become a Christian, he substantiated the importance of eloquence for the interpretation of biblical provisions and for Christian preaching. His reflections on the role of rhetoric for the interpretation and explanation of Christian doctrine are contained, in particular, in the treatise De doctrina christiana (About Christian teaching). In many ways, it is his merit that the rhetoric was not rejected by Christians and continued to be developed in the Christian era.

In the Middle Ages, rhetoric became one of the "seven liberal sciences" in the Varro system of sciences taught in schools and universities. These seven sciences were divided into two groups: trivium (grammar, rhetoric and dialectics) and quadrivium (arithmetic, music, geometry, astronomy). The teaching of the sciences of the trivium continued in theological and secular schools until the 19th century.

Pierre Ramus

(1515-1572) tried to revise the ancient doctrine of the three styles. He argued that any subject can be written in each of the three styles (which was rejected by the ancient tradition). He used the term "rhetoric" for the three components of communication (diction, memory and action), the purpose of which is persuasion. His followers defined rhetoric as ars ornandi, i.e. the art of embellished speech. As a consequence, after Ramu, rhetoric began to be reduced to the study of literary form and expression. Ramus, being himself a logician, believed, nevertheless, that the figures of speech are only an ornament and they cannot be characterized as models of reasoning. The spread of his point of view led to the final separation of rhetoric from logic and philosophy at that time.

From the beginning of the 17th century. the first written Russian rhetorical manuals appear. The first Russian rhetoric (1620) is a translation from the Latin rhetoric of one of the leaders of the Reformation F. Melanchthon (1497-1560). Another important textbook on eloquence was Rhetoric, attributed to Metropolitan Macarius.

The original concept of Russian rhetoric was proposed by M.V. Lomonosov (1711-1765) in A quick guide to rhetoric(1743) and A quick guide to eloquence(1747). In these books, the Russian scientific terminology of rhetoric was finally fixed. From the second half of the 18th to the middle of the 19th centuries. many textbooks, manuals and theoretical works on rhetoric were published (according to the bibliography of V.I. Annushkin - over a hundred titles, not counting reprints). The following works survived the largest number of reprints: An experience of rhetoric, composed and taught at the St. Petersburg Mining School(1st ed. - 1796) I.S. Rizhsky (1759-1811); General rhetoric(1829) and Private rhetoric(1832) N.F.Koshansky (1784 or 1785-1831), later reprinted with the participation of K.P. Zelenetsky, known for his own rhetorical works, and Brief rhetoric(1809) A.F. Merzlyakov (1778-1830). Other theoretically important works of Russian rhetoricians were also known: Eloquence Theory for All Kinds of Prose Writings(1830) A.I. Galich, who included "psychological, aesthetic and ethical principles in the consideration of rhetoric", The rules of supreme eloquence(manuscript 1792, published in 1844) M.M. Speransky, Foundations of Russian literature(1792) A.S. Nikolsky (1755-1834) and Readings about literature(1837) I. I. Davydov (1794-1863).

In the West, the Age of Enlightenment became an era of decline in rhetoric. Rhetoric has acquired a reputation as a dogmatic discipline that has no practical value, and if applied, it was only to mislead the audience. Interest in rhetoric was lost. The situation changed only in the first half of the 20th century, under the influence of radical economic and political transformations in the life of society, which put forward new requirements for speech practice.

Revival of rhetoric in the 20th century started in the USA. It is associated, first of all, with the activities of I.A. Richards and K. Burke. I.A. Richards' work Philosophy of rhetoric(1936) showed the relevance and social significance of "persuasive" rhetoric, and the works of K. Berk (in particular, Rhetoric of motives) emphasized the importance of literary rhetoric.

The problems of the new rhetoric were developed in the works of American propaganda theorists H. Laswell, W. Lippman, P. Lazarsfeld, K. Howland and the founders of the management discipline "public relations" A. Lee, E. Bernays, S. Black and F. Jeffkins. From the very beginning of the rhetorical revival in the United States, the emphasis was on the rhetoric of the media (since rhetoric was seen as an effective tool for manipulating public opinion, i.e., an instrument of social power) and business rhetoric (negotiating, persuading a partner, etc.). In terms of the level of penetration of practical rhetoric into public life, the United States can be called a rhetorical superpower.

Nevertheless, the emergence of new rhetoric is associated with Europe - with the publication in France of the treatise by H. Perelman and L. Olbrecht-Tyteki New rhetoric. A treatise on argumentation(1958). In it, at the modern level of scientific knowledge, primarily logical, the rhetorical system of Aristotle received further critical development. H. Perelman and L. Olbrecht-Tyteka examined the connection between logic and argumentation, the concept of audience, dialogue, ambiguity, presumptions, toposes, normativity, argumentation errors, categorized arguments and analyzed in detail their individual categories.

An important role in the modern theory of argumentation (also broadly referred to as the theory of practical discourse) is occupied by the analysis of judgments about values. In addition to H. Perelman and L. Olbrecht-Tyteki, R. L. Stevenson, R. Hare, S. Tulmin, K. Bayer devoted their works to this. These and other aspects of the theory of argumentation are also developed by A. Ness, F. van Eemeren, V. Brokridi and others.

Researchers are respected by A guide to literary rhetoric(1960) H. Lausberg and Methodologically Important Work General rhetoric(1970) Liege group "mu" (J. Dubois with colleagues). After the publication of the work of the Liege, the new rhetoric is often called "general rhetoric."

In Russia, the crisis of rhetoric has shifted in time. Beginning approximately in the middle of the 19th century, it ended in the late 70s - early 80s of the 20th century. Despite this, in the 20s of the 20th century. in Russia, attempts were made to revive the theory of oratory. The world's first Institute of the Living Word was created with the participation of S.M. Bondi, V.E. Meyerhold, A.V. Lunacharsky, N.A. Engelgardt, L.V. Shcherba, L.P. Yakubinsky, etc. laboratory of public speech by K.A. Syunneberg. The rhetorical initiative did not receive official support. A strange opposition has formed in the official theory of oratory. Rhetoric as a bearer of bad qualities began to be opposed to Soviet oratory as a bearer of good qualities: "In our time, rhetoric is a condemning definition of a pompous, outwardly beautiful, but insignificant work, speech, etc." ( Dictionary of literary terms... M., 1974, p. 324). At the same time, an objective and detailed analysis of even Soviet oratory was not encouraged.

Some important theoretical works on rhetoric in the 1960s – 1970s (SSAverintsev, GZApresyan, VPVompersky, etc.) became the harbingers of an exit from the "rhetorical crisis". In modern Russia, a significant number of works on didactic and theoretical rhetoric appear, which allows us to speak of a rhetorical renaissance. The authors of these works can be divided into five groups. The division is distinguished by a certain amount of convention, in particular because different works of one researcher sometimes make it possible to assign him to different groups at the same time.

1. Supporters of the revival of traditional rhetoric as "the art of speaking red" taking into account new scientific achievements. This is a significant part of the scientists involved in teaching rhetoric (V.I.Annushkin, S.F. Ivanova, T.A. Ladyzhenskaya, A.K. Mikhalskaya and many others). 2. Developers of the modern theory of argumentation, cognitive linguistics and the theory of speech influence (A.N.Baranov, P.B.Parshin, N.A. Bezmenova, G.G.Pocheptsov, V.Z. Dem'yankov, E.F. Tarasov and etc.). 3. Developers of individual rhetorical directions - the theory of figures, tropes, the theory of expressiveness (N.A. Kupina, T.V. Matveeva, A.P. Skovorodnikov, T.G. Khazagerov, etc.). 4. Methodologists of rhetoric (SI Gindin, YV Rozhdestvensky, EA Yunina and others). 5. Researchers of "literary rhetoric" - poetic language (ML Gasparov, VP Grigoriev, SS Averintsev, VN Toporov, etc.).

Prospects for rhetoric.

In the future, apparently, one should expect the transformation of rhetoric as a modern semiotic discipline into a more "exact" science, to the extent that the criterion of accuracy is applicable to the humanities. This should be accomplished through a detailed quantitative and qualitative description of the patterns of structure of all existing types of text and speech genres. It is possible to create detailed catalogs of types of transformations of the expression plan and content plan, a description of all possible structural types of natural language arguments. It is also interesting to study the predictive potential of rhetoric - to what extent, based on the capabilities of the discipline, it is possible to predict the qualities of new speech genres and types of texts appearing in connection with the emergence of new spheres of social practice.

Ethical aspect: rhetoric, when used correctly, is an effective tool in the fight against linguistic aggression, demagogy, and manipulation. Here didactic rhetoric plays an important role. Knowledge of the foundations of the disciplines of the rhetorical cycle will make it possible to recognize demagogic and manipulative propaganda techniques in the media and in private communication, and, therefore, to effectively defend against them.

Leon Ivanov

Literature:

Antique rhetoric... M., 1978
Dubois J. and others. General rhetoric... M., 1986
Perelman H., Olbrecht-Tyteka. L. From book « New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation". - In the book: Language and modeling of social interaction. M., 1987
Graudina L.K., Miskevich G.I. Theory and practice of Russian eloquence... M., 1989
Toporov V.N. Rhetoric. Trails. Figures of speech... - In the book: Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary. M., 1990
Gasparov M.L. Cicero and ancient rhetoric... - In the book: Cicero Mark Tullius. Three treatises on the art of oratory. M., 1994
Zaretskaya E.N. Rhetoric. Theory and practice of language communication. M., 1998
Ivin A.A. Foundations of the theory of argumentation... M., 1997
Annushkin V.I. History of Russian Rhetoric: Reader... M., 1998
Klyuev E.V. Rhetoric (Invention. Disposition. Elocution). M., 1999
Yu.V. Rozhdestvensky Rhetoric theory... M., 1999
Lotman Yu.M. Rhetoric is a mechanism for generating meaning(section of the book "Inside Thinking Worlds"). - In the book: Lotman Yu.M. Semiosphere. SPb, 2000

(Greek rhetorike "oratory"), a scientific discipline that studies the patterns of generation, transmission and perception of good speech and high-quality text.

At the time of its origin in antiquity, rhetoric was understood only in the direct meaning of the term - as the art of an orator, the art of oral public speaking. A broad understanding of the subject of rhetoric is the property of a later time. Now, if it is necessary to distinguish the technique of oral public speaking from rhetoric in a broad sense, the term is used to refer to the former oratorio.

Traditional rhetoric (bene dicendi scientia "the science of good speech" as defined by Quintilian) was opposed to grammar (recte dicendi scientia - "the science of correct speech"), poetics and hermeneutics. The subject of traditional rhetoric, in contrast to poetics, was only prose speech and prose texts. Rhetoric was distinguished from hermeneutics by a predominant interest in the persuasive power of the text and only a weakly expressed interest in other components of its content that did not affect the persuasive power.

The methodological difference between rhetoric and disciplines of the rhetorical cycle from other philological sciences lies in the orientation towards the value aspect in the description of the subject and the subordination of this description to applied problems. In Ancient Russia, there were a number of synonyms with a value meaning, denoting the mastery of the art of good speech: benevolence, kindness, eloquence, cunning, chrysostom and finally eloquence... In ancient times, the value element also included a moral and ethical component. Rhetoric was considered not only the science and art of good oratory, but also the science and art of bringing to good, convincing of good through speech. The moral and ethical component in modern rhetoric has survived only in a reduced form, although some researchers are making attempts to restore its meaning. Other attempts are being made - to define rhetoric, completely removing the value aspect from the definitions. There are, for example, definitions of rhetoric as a science of generating utterances (such a definition is given by A.K. Avelichev with reference to U. Eco - Dubois). The elimination of the value aspect of the study of speech and text leads to the loss of the specificity of rhetoric against the background of descriptive philological disciplines. If the task of the latter is to create a complete and consistent description of the subject, which allows further applied use (for example, in teaching a foreign language, creating automatic translation systems), but in itself is neutral in relation to applied problems, then in rhetoric the description itself is built with an orientation on the needs of speech practice. In this regard, educational (didactic) rhetoric plays just as important a role as scientific rhetoric in the system of rhetorical disciplines, i.e. training in the technique of generating good speech and high-quality text.

Antique rhetoric... M., 1978
Dubois J. and others. General rhetoric... M., 1986
Perelman H., Olbrecht-Tyteka. L. From book « New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation". - In the book: Language and modeling of social interaction. M., 1987
Graudina L.K., Miskevich G.I. Theory and practice of Russian eloquence... M., 1989
Toporov V.N. Rhetoric. Trails. Figures of speech... - In the book: Linguistic Encyclopedic Dictionary. M., 1990
Gasparov M.L. Cicero and ancient rhetoric... - In the book: Cicero Mark Tullius. Three treatises on the art of oratory. M., 1994
Zaretskaya E.N. Rhetoric. Theory and practice of language communication. M., 1998
Ivin A.A. Foundations of the theory of argumentation... M., 1997
Annushkin V.I. History of Russian Rhetoric: Reader... M., 1998
Klyuev E.V. Rhetoric (Invention. Disposition. Elocution). M., 1999
Yu.V. Rozhdestvensky Rhetoric theory... M., 1999
Lotman Yu.M. Rhetoric is a mechanism for generating meaning(section of the book "Inside Thinking Worlds"). - In the book: Lotman Yu.M. Semiosphere. SPb, 2000

Find "Rhetoric" on

Much in life is determined by the ability to communicate. Academic, career, and personal success is built on communication skills. Whether you are reading a report in an audience, congratulating on a holiday, or having a job interview, a laconic, structured speech will convey information to your audience in a favorable light. The science that studies the subtleties of oratory is rhetoric. It helps to give clarity, specificity, and persuasiveness to speech.

From its inception in antiquity to the present day, rhetoric as a science has been understood in different ways. The founding sophists defined it as a discipline that teaches us to manipulate, prove the point of view of the orator, and dominate discussions.

Today, in the first place is harmonizing speech, the search for truth, the inducement to thought. In the modern sense, rhetoric is a discipline that studies ways to create a purposeful, impactful, harmonizing speech. The subject of rhetoric is thought-speech action.

Combining philosophy, sociology, psycholinguistics and philology, modern rhetoric allows you to achieve effective speech interaction with any society.

The subject and objectives of rhetoric

The subject in rhetoric is the ways of forming an appropriate word:

• oral;
• printed;
• electronic;
• the process of converting thought into speech.

The tasks of rhetoric are reduced to its direction. The first direction is logical: persuasiveness, efficiency of speech are the predominant parameters. The second is the literary direction: the dominant aspects are the splendor and beauty of words. Considering the combination of logical and literary trends in modern rhetoric, its tasks include the correctness, persuasiveness and expediency of speech.

Rhetoric and culture of speech

The culture of speech is a discipline that studies the norms of literary and national languages, as well as the rules for the expedient use of linguistic means of expression. Rhetoric and speech culture are interrelated concepts that ensure productive communication.

Private and general rhetoric

Rhetoric falls into two categories: general and specific. General rhetoric studies oratory in general and is useful to anyone.

Private rhetoric, based on canons and rules, studies the art of eloquence in various professional fields.

The general rhetoric is divided into sections:

• rhetorical canon;
• oratory - the art of public speech;
• dispute - the art of apodictic discussion (arguing for the sake of reaching the truth);
• conversation - a section that teaches you to conduct a private, social or business conversation;
• rhetoric of everyday communication, teaching to recognize emotional and speech signals sent by the interlocutor, to adjust to them;
• an ethnorologist studying the features of speech behavior of different nationalities.

The rhetorical canon of antiquity consisted of five parts:

• Invention (invention). Forming an idea for a speech. Searching for an answer to the question: What to say?
• Location (disposition). Drawing up a text plan to achieve the transmission of the main idea.
• Expression (elocution). Speech design with visual language means, text editing.
• Memorization (memorio). The speaker's choice of the method of conveying information. Learning, taking notes.
• Pronunciation (share). Speech by the speaker to the audience.

At the fifth stage, the oratory culminates and the antique rhetorical canon ends. For the sake of improving oratory skills, in the modern canon, one more point has been added:

• Reflection. It implies the author's reasoning over his performance, the search for weak formulations and the highlighting of successful speech techniques.

Three stages can be distinguished in the rhetorical canon:

• precommunicative, including work on speech (invention, location, expression, memorization);
• communicative, representing the interaction of the speaker with the audience (utterance);
• postcommunicative stage, which is the analysis of the performance (reflection).

The oratorical activity is based on three concepts - ethos, logos, pathos.

• Ethos implies the validity of speech by circumstances influencing the topic of the speech (place, time, duration of speech);
• Logos is responsible for the logical component;
• Paphos includes the emotional and mimicry color of the performance.

Types of eloquence

There are five main types of eloquence:

• Socio-political type - diplomatic, socio-political, political-economic, parliamentary, rally and propaganda speeches.
• Academic view - scientific lectures, reports, abstracts, seminars and reports.
• Judicial view - speeches of the protagonists of trials: lawyers, prosecutors, judges.
• Theological eloquence or spiritual appearance - parting words, sermons, solemn speeches of a church orientation.
• Social and everyday types of eloquence - drinking, jubilee, festive or memorial speeches.

The origin of rhetoric as a scientific discipline takes place in ancient Greece as early as the fifth century BC. Due to the formation of a slave-owning democracy, the art of persuasive speech has gained a great demand in society. Any representative of the polis (city) could learn oratory from the teachers of rhetoric - the sophists (sages).

Possessing all the skills of eloquence, the sophists taught their wards through practical exercises. During heated discussions and subsequent analyzes of speeches, the masters of the word prepared students for the professions of judicial defenders, prosecutors, and rhetoricians. Sophists taught the art of decorating words, creating convincing speeches. They argued that the art of speech is not in the search for truth, but in proving the correctness of the speaker.

Rhetoric was understood by the sophists as the science of persuasion, the goal of which is victory over the enemy. This served as the subsequent negative connotation of the meaning of the word "sophism". If at first it was understood as "skill, skill, wisdom", now it is "trick, invention."

Famous sophist philosophers:

• Protagoras (485-410 BC)

Considered the founder of the art of debate. The author of the thesis: "Man is the measure of all things."

• Gorgias (483-375 BC)

Oratorical master, the first teacher of rhetoric in Athens. The founder of the use of tropes and figures of speech in rhetoric. Legacy: Praise to Elena, Protection of Palamed.

• Lysias (445-380 BC)

The father of the art of the forensic word. His speeches were distinguished by clarity and brevity, 34 of them have survived to this day, including: "Speech against Eratosthenes, a former member of the College of the Thirty" and "Acceptance speech in the case of the murder of Eratosthenes." Eratosthenes was one of thirty tyrants responsible for the death of his brother Lysias after the capture of Athens by Sparta.

• Isocrates (436-338 BC)

One of the students of Gorgias, the founder of literary rhetoric. His speeches stood out for their simplicity, clear syllable for all Athenians. The most famous sayings are: "Panegyric" and "Panathenaic" speech. Isocrates' understanding of why rhetoric is needed is reflected in the statement: "A true master of the word should not tinker with trifles and inspire listeners that it is useless for them, but something that will save them from poverty and bring great benefits to others." He also owns the expression: "Learning is the sweet fruit of a bitter root."

The Sophists extolled the art of speech over truth. Dialectics was understood as a competition for the sake of victory. The search for the truth seemed senseless, because, according to the sophists, there was no such thing.

The teachings of Socrates makes you look at rhetoric in a new way. The search for truth and the acquisition of virtue become the main tasks. Through his dialogues, called "Socratic irony", the philosopher led the interlocutor to the knowledge of himself. He taught profundity, morality. Socrates did not write any works, but the works of his students, such as Plato and Xenophon, convey the sayings of the thinker. For example: "No one desires evil", "Virtue is knowledge."

Plato in the 380s BC NS. founded the Academy, which taught astronomy, philosophy, mathematics, geometry, as well as techniques that develop the spiritual qualities of a person. His teaching called for abandoning passions in order to purify the mind for knowledge. The sciences were taught by the dialectical method, individualism developed.

Plato's rhetorical ideal is reflected in the statement: "Every speech should be composed like a living being." It meant a clear structure of speech, the ratio of the general to the particular. The philosopher especially appreciated the clarity of speech and truth.

Aristotle is an ancient Greek thinker, a disciple of Plato. He spent 20 years at the Academy, later founded Lyceum (after the temple of Apollo of Lycea), in which he personally taught philosophy and rhetoric. With his treatise "Rhetoric", Aristotle singled out the art of words among other sciences, defined the principles of constructing speech and methods of proof. It is Aristotle who is considered the founder of rhetoric as a science.

In ancient Rome, the politician, philosopher and great orator Mark Tullius Cicero contributed to the development of rhetoric. In Brutus or the Famous Orators, Cicero conveyed the history of rhetoric in the names of famous orators. The treatise "On the orator" forms the image of a worthy rhetorician, combining knowledge in history, philosophy and law. The Orator is dedicated to the styles and rhythm of eloquence. Mark Tullius singled out rhetoric among other sciences, calling it the most difficult. In his understanding, the subject of rhetoric is as follows - the speaker must have deep knowledge in all areas in order to be able to support any dialogue.

Mark Fabius Quintilian, in his 12-book composition "Rhetorical Instruction", analyzed the rhetoric, supplementing his own conclusions regarding all its components. He appreciated the clarity of the syllable, the speaker's ability to awaken emotions in the audience. He defined rhetoric as "the science of speaking well." Quintilian also supplemented the teachings of rhetoric, indicating the importance of the non-verbal component.

Development of rhetoric in Russia

Russian rhetoric developed primarily on the basis of Roman. The need for rhetoric grew and fell with the change of political and social regimes.
How Russian rhetoric developed over the centuries:

• Ancient Russia (XII-XVII centuries). Until the 17th century, the term "rhetoric" and textbooks on it did not exist in Russia. However, there were rules. Ethics of speech, indicated by the terms: "eloquence", "piety" or "rhetoric". They studied the art of speech, guided by the liturgical texts, the works of preachers. For example, the collection "Bee" (XIII century).
• First half of the 17th century. "The Legend of the Seven Free Wisdoms"; the opening of Moscow advanced schools; Kiev Theological Academy; 1620 - the first textbook on rhetoric in Russian; Books "On the invention of cases", "On decoration".
• Late 17th - early and mid 18th centuries "Rhetoric" by Mikhail Usachev; Rhetoric by Andrey Belobotsky; "Old Believer Rhetoric"; treatises "Poetics", "Rhetoric", "Ethics, or the Science of Customs", as well as a number of lectures on the rhetorical art of Feofan Prokopovich.
• XVIII century. Rhetoric as a science in Russia was formed by the works of Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov: "A Brief Guide to Rhetoric" (1743), "Rhetoric" (1748). Lomonosov's "Rhetoric" is an anthology, a fundamental work in the development of this science.
• The beginning and the middle of the XIX century. Until the middle of the nineteenth century, there was a rhetorical "boom" in Russia. The teachings of the word were published one after another. The works of I.S. Rizhsky, N.F. Koshanskiy, A.F. Merzlyakova, A.I. Galich, K.P. Zelensky, M.M. Speransky. In the second half of the century, rhetoric is superseded by literature. In Soviet times, stylistics, linguistics, and the culture of words are taught, while rhetoric is criticized.

The subject and objectives of rhetoric in the 21st century or why rhetoric is needed today

Our time is characterized by high technology, versatile, accessible, tirelessly developing education system. This is the age of information and communication. The communicative abilities of an individual, her desire for development, determine success in all spheres of life.

First of all, public speaking is useful for people in non-production areas of activity - media workers, lawyers, psychologists, teachers, designers, salespeople, etc.

But why do locksmiths, doctors, drivers need rhetoric? The answer in the next question, everyone can find for themselves separately: What person does not need to be able to think and own his word?

Learning the basics of public speaking, psychology, body language will be useful to everyone who strives for a full, comfortable life in society.

It is important for every person to be able to communicate, as such a skill is a good helper in many life situations. Almost all success in school, work, and personal life is based on communication skills. If the information is presented by the speaker in a laconic and structured way, then it will reach the audience in the best possible way. The science that studies all the details of public speaking is rhetoric. It is thanks to her that you can make your speech clear and convincing. What is rhetoric? Science or academic discipline?

What does the word "rhetoric" mean? Translated from Greek, the word rhetoric looks like "rhetorike" and means "oratory." Initially, this definition implied the ability to speak beautifully and express one's thoughts in front of other people.

Over time, the concept of rhetoric changed several times, which was influenced by the change in the periods of cultural development of people. Therefore, this science, from antiquity to the present, was perceived in different ways.

It was founded by sophists, who said that rhetoric is a discipline that can teach a speaker to prove his position, manipulate and dominate discussions. In modern times, the basis of such a science is harmonizing speech, the search for truth, the inducement to thought.

Now the word rhetoric is understood as a discipline that allows you to study the methods of forming speech, characterized by expediency, harmony, and the ability to influence. In this regard, the subject of rhetoric acts as a thought-speech action.
Rhetoric combines the teachings of philosophy, sociology, psychology, which helps to achieve effective speech interaction with any audience.

Thus, modern rhetoric is viewed from three sides:

• This is a science that considers the art of speech, which has specific norms of public speaking in front of people, allowing you to achieve a good result when influencing listeners.
• This is the highest level of mastery of pronunciation of speech in front of the public, command of the word at a professional level and excellent oratory.
• An academic discipline that helps students to teach the rules of public speaking.

Thus, general rhetoric studies the rules for constructing a purposeful and persuasive speech, which helps to make a speech vivid and memorable.

What does science study?

The subject of rhetoric, as a science, includes methods for the formation of appropriate oral and written speech, as well as the process by which thoughts are converted into speech.

In order to define the tasks of rhetoric, you need to know about its main directions. They are distinguished by two:

1. Logical, in which the main aspects are the ability to convince the listener, effectively present information.
2. Literary, in which the richness and attractiveness of words are considered the most important elements.

Taking into account the fact that in this science these directions are combined, this rhetoric sets itself the task of making speech correct, convincing and expedient.
Having defined what rhetoric is and why it is needed, there is no doubt about its necessity in the life of a person, especially those involved in public activities.

Ancient rhetoric

The origin of rhetoric dates back to ancient Greece. Due to the fact that democracy was formed in this state, the ability to persuade has gained considerable popularity in society.

Every resident of the city had the opportunity to undergo training in oratory, which was taught by the sophists. These sages considered rhetoric to be the science of persuasion, which studies ways of verbally defeating an opponent. Because of this, in the future, the word "sophism" caused a negative reaction. Indeed, under them, rhetoric was viewed as a trick, an invention, while earlier this science was considered the highest skill, skill.

In ancient Greece, many works were created that reveal rhetoric. Who is the author of the classic Greek treatise on this science? This is the well-known thinker Aristotle. This work, entitled "Rhetoric", singled out oratory from all other sciences. It defined the principles on which speech should be based, and indicated the methods used as evidence. Thanks to this treatise, Aristotle became the founder of rhetoric as a science.

In ancient Rome, Mark Tullius Cicero, who was engaged in politics, philosophy and oratory, contributed to the formation of rhetoric. He created a work called "Brutus or the famous orators", describing the development of science in the names of popular orators. He also wrote a work "About the speaker", in which he talked about what kind of speech behavior a worthy speaker should have. Then he created the book "Orator", revealing the basics of eloquence.

Cicero considered rhetoric to be the most difficult science, unlike others. He argued that in order to become a worthy speaker, a person must have deep knowledge in all areas of life. Otherwise, he simply will not be able to maintain a dialogue with another person.

Development of rhetoric in Russia

Rhetoric in Russia arose on the basis of Roman science. Unfortunately, it was not always so in demand. Over time, when the political and social regimes changed, the need for it was perceived in different ways.

Development of Russian rhetoric in stages:

• Ancient Russia (XII-XVII centuries). During this period, the term "rhetoric" and educational books on it did not yet exist. But some of its rules have already been applied. People at that time called the ethics of speech eloquence, piety or rhetoric. The teaching of the art of words was carried out on the basis of liturgical texts that were created by preachers. For example, one such collection is The Bee, written in the 13th century.
• First half of the 17th century. During this period, a characteristic event was the publication of the first Russian textbook, revealing the foundations of rhetoric.
• The end of the 17th century - the beginning and the middle of the 18th century. At this stage, the book "Rhetoric", written by Mikhail Usachev, was published. Also, many works were created, such as "Old Believer Rhetoric", works "Poetics", "Ethics", several lectures on the rhetorical art of Feofan Prokopovich.
• XVIII century. At this time, the formation of rhetoric as a Russian science took place, a huge contribution to which was made by Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov. He wrote several works dedicated to her, of which the book "Rhetoric" became the basis in the development of this science.
• The beginning and the middle of the 19th century. This period is characterized by the fact that there was a rhetorical boom in the country. Well-known authors have published a large number of textbooks. These include the works of I.S. Rizhsky, N.F. Koshanskiy, A.F. Merzlyakova, A.I. Galich, K.P. Zelensky, M.M. Speransky.

However, since the second half of the century, this science begins to actively supplant literature. Soviet people studied stylistics, linguistics, culture of speech, and criticized rhetoric.

Laws of word art

Rhetoric at any time had its ultimate goal - to influence the audience. Expressive speech, as well as pictorial and expressive means, play a special role in achieving it.

Scientists divide this science into two types - general and specific. The subject of general rhetoric includes general methods of behavior in the pronunciation of speech and the practical possibilities of their application in order to make speech effective.

This type includes the following sections:

• rhetorical canon;
• public speaking;
• rules on how to dispute;
• the norms of the conversation;
• teachings about everyday communication;
• communication between different nations.

By studying these sections, the speaker gains knowledge about the basic features of speech use, which are the basis for every master of the word.

General rhetoric explores ways to achieve mutual understanding between the speaker and the audience. For this, the following laws have been developed:

• The law of harmonizing dialogue. The speaker should awaken the feelings and thoughts of the audience, turning the monologue into a dialogue. It is possible to build a harmonious communication only with the help of a dialogue of all the people participating in the discussion. The essence of this rule is more accurately revealed by the following laws.
• The Law of Orientation and Advancement of the Listener. The person to whom the oratorical influence is directed should have the feeling that he, together with the speaker, is moving towards the intended goal. To achieve this effect, the speaker needs to use words in speech that determine the order of events, connect sentences and summarizing expressions.
• The law of emotionality of speech. A person speaking to an audience should himself experience the feelings that he is trying to evoke in the audience, and also be able to convey them through speech.
• The law of pleasure. It implies the ability to present speech in such a way that it pleases the audience. This effect is easy to achieve if the speech is expressive and rich.

A particular type of rhetoric is based on a general type and involves the specific use of general provisions in certain spheres of life. Thus, science studies what rules of pronunciation of speech and behavior must be applied by the speaker, depending on the situation.

There are a lot of private rhetoric, but they all come together in two main groups:

1. Homiletics.
2. Oratory.

The first group implies the ability of the speaker to repeatedly influence the public. This includes the church and academic type of eloquence. In modern rhetoric, this group includes propaganda that is carried out in the media.

Thus, with academic eloquence, an orator, conducting several lectures, does not have to speak again about the purposes of their conduct, about their necessity, and so on every time. It is enough for him to tell about this at the first lecture, and for all the rest the general task will expand by studying a new topic.

Oratory is not capable of influencing people many times. In this regard, the speaker needs to be able to correctly conclude each speech. This group includes judicial, everyday, socio-political and other types of eloquence.

At present, oratorical has grown quite widely, so a specific type of rhetoric has already begun to be divided into its subspecies. For example, administrative, diplomatic, parliamentary and other rhetoric was singled out from socio-political eloquence.

Speech variations of the speaker

There are several types of oratorical speech, depending on who needs to be convinced, where the speech is taking place, what purpose it pursues. These include the following eloquence:

• Social and political. This is when they read reports on social, political and economic topics, speak at rallies, and carry out campaigning.
• Academic. This includes giving lectures, scientific papers, or messages.
• Judicial. This type of eloquence is used by the prosecutor and the defense attorney when speaking in court. By their speech, they must convince the accused person of the guilt or innocence of the accused.
• Social and household. It is used by all people, giving speeches at anniversaries, feasts or at commemorations. This also includes secular chatter, which does not require disputes, discussions, but is characterized by ease and simplicity of perception.
• Theological. This eloquence is used in churches, for example, when believers read a sermon or other speech in a cathedral.
• Diplomatic. This type assumes compliance with ethical standards in business speech. This is necessary in business negotiations, correspondence, in the preparation of official documents, as well as in translation.
• Military. This kind of eloquence is used when calling for battle, issuing orders, regulations, transmitting information by radio communication.
• Pedagogical. It includes speeches by teachers and students, both oral and written. This also includes lecturing, which is considered a difficult act of pedagogical communication.
• Internal, or imaginary. This is the name of the dialogue that each person conducts with himself. This type implies mental preparation for oral presentation to the public, as well as for the written transmission of information, when a person reads what has been written to himself, remembers something, thinks about something, and so on.

Based on the above, we can draw a conclusion about what rhetoric is and why society needs it. Rhetoric as the science of oratory involves the study of the correct pronunciation of speech in front of the public in order to somehow influence the people listening to it. With its help, speakers acquire the skills to make their speech correct, appropriate, and most importantly, convincing.