Rhetorical situation

Last updated

A rhetorical situation is an event that consists of an issue, an audience, and a set of constraints. A rhetorical situation arises from a given context or exigence. An article by Lloyd Bitzer introduced the model of the rhetorical situation in 1968, which was later challenged and modified by Richard E. Vatz (1973) and Scott Consigny (1974). More recent scholarship has further redefined the model to include more expansive views of rhetorical operations and ecologies. [1] [2] [3]

Contents

Theoretical development

In the twentieth century, three influential texts concerning the rhetorical situation were published: Lloyd Bitzer's "The Rhetorical Situation", Richard E. Vatz's "The Myth of the Rhetorical Situation", and Scott Consigny's "Rhetoric and Its Situations". Bitzer argues that a situation determines and brings about rhetoric; Vatz proposes that rhetoric creates "situations" by making issues salient; and Consigny explores the rhetor as an artist of rhetoric, creating salience through a knowledge of commonplaces.

Bitzer's definition

Lloyd Bitzer began the conversation in his 1968 piece titled "The Rhetorical Situation". Bitzer wrote that rhetorical discourse is called into existence by situation. He defined the rhetorical situation as "a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigence." [4] With any rhetorical discourse, a prior rhetorical situation exists. The rhetorical situation dictates the significant physical and verbal responses as well as the sorts of observations to be made. An example of this would be an activist speaking out on climate change as an apparent global problem. The situation, thus, calls for the activist to use and respond with rhetorical discourse on the climate change issue. In other words, rhetorical meaning is brought about by events. Bitzer especially focuses on the sense of timing (kairos) needed to speak about a situation in a way that can best remedy the exigence.

Three constituent parts make up any rhetorical situation.

  1. The first constituent part is the exigence, or a problem existing in the world. Exigence is rhetorical when it can be affected and changed by human interaction, and when it is capable of positive modification through the act of persuasion. A rhetorical exigence may be strong, unique, or important, or it may be weak, common, or trivial.
  2. The second constituent part is audience. Rhetorical discourse promotes change through influencing an audience's decision and actions.
  3. The third constituent part is the set of constraints. Constraints may be the persons, events, objects, and relations that limit decisions and action. Theorists influenced by Marx would additionally discuss ideological constraints, which produce unconscious limitations for subjects in society, including the social constraints of gender, class, and race. The speaker brings about a new set of constraints through the image of his or her personal character (ethos), logical proofs (logos), and use of emotion (pathos). [4]

Critical responses

Vatz's challenge

An important critique of Bitzer's theory came in 1973 from Richard E. Vatz. Vatz believes that rhetoric defines a situation, because the context and choices of events could be forever described, but the persuader or influencer or rhetor must select which events to make part of the agenda. Choosing certain events and not others, and deciding their relative value or importance, creates a certain presence, or salience. Vatz quotes Chaïm Perelman: "By the very fact of selecting certain elements and presenting them to the audience, their importance and pertinency to the discussion are implied. Indeed such a choice endows these elements with a presence..." [5]

In essence, Vatz claims that the definitive elements of rhetorical efforts are the struggle to create for a chosen audience saliences or agendas, and this creation is then followed by the struggle to infuse the selected situation or facts with meaning or significance. What are we persuaded to talk about? What are we persuaded it means or signifies? These questions are the relevant ones to understand persuasion, not "What does the situation make us talk about?" or "What does it intrinsically mean?". Situations that do not physically make us attend to them are avoided and reflect the significance of subjectivity in framing socio-political realities. Vatz believes that situations are created, for example, when an activist sets an agenda to focus on climate change, thus creating a "rhetorical situation" (a situation determined by rhetoric). The activist (rhetor) enjoys more agency because they are not "controlled" by a situation, but creates the situation by making it salient in language. Vatz emphasizes the social construction of the situation as opposed to Bitzer's realism or objectivism.

While the two opinions have been widely recognized, Vatz has acknowledged that his piece is less recognized than Bitzer's. Vatz admits, while claiming that audience acceptance is not dispositive for measuring validity or predictive for future audience acceptance, that "more articles and professionals in our field cite his situational perspective than my rhetorical perspective." [6] Bitzer's objectivism is clear, and easily taught as a method, despite Vatz's criticism. Vatz claims that portraying rhetoric as situation-based vitiates rhetoric as an important field, while portraying rhetoric as the cause of what people see as pressing situations enhances its significance as a field of study.

Consigny's challenge

Another response to Bitzer and Vatz came from Scott Consigny. Consigny believes that Bitzer's theory gives a rhetorical situation proper particularities, but "misconstrues the situation as being thereby determinate and determining," [7] and that Vatz's theory gives the rhetor a correct character but does not correctly account for limits of a rhetor's ability.

Instead, he proposes the idea of rhetoric as an art. Consigny argues that rhetoric gives the means by which a rhetor can engage with a situation by meeting two conditions.

  1. The first condition is integrity. Consigny argues that the rhetor must possess multiple opinions with the ability to solve problems through those opinions.
  2. The second condition is receptivity. Consigny argues that the rhetor cannot create problems at will, but becomes engaged with particular situations.

Consigny finds that rhetoric which meets the two conditions should be interpreted as an art of topics or commonplaces. Taking after classical rhetoricians, he explains the topic as an instrument and a situation for the rhetor, allowing the rhetor to engage creatively with the situation. As a challenge to both Bitzer and Vatz, Consigny claims that Bitzer has a one-dimensional theory by dismissing the notion of topic as instrument, and that Vatz wrongly allows the rhetor to create problems willfully while ignoring the topic as situation. The intersection of topic as instrument and topic as realm gives the situation both meaning (as a perceptive formal device) and context (as material significance). Consigny concludes:

The real question in rhetorical theory is not whether the situation or the rhetor is "dominant," but the extent, in each case, to which the rhetor can discover and control indeterminate matter, using his art of topics to make sense of what would otherwise remain simply absurd. [7]

Other critical responses

Flower and Hayes

In their 1980 article, "The Cognition of Discovery: Defining a Rhetorical Problem", Linda Flower and John R. Hayes expand upon Bitzer's definition of the rhetorical situation. In studying the cognitive processes that induce discovery, Flower and Hayes propose the model of the rhetorical problem. The rhetorical problem consists of two elements: the rhetorical situation (exigence and audience), and the writer's goals involving the reader, persona, meaning, and text. [8] The rhetorical problem model explains how a writer responds to and negotiates a rhetorical situation while addressing and representing his or her goals for a given text.

Biesecker

In response to both Bitzer and Vatz, Barbara Biesecker challenges the idea of the rhetorical situation in her 1989 article "Rethinking the Rhetorical Situation from Within the Thematic of Différance". [9] Biesecker critiques both Bitzer's claim that rhetoric originates from the situation and Vatz's claim that the rhetoric itself creates its own situation. Rather, she proposes a deconstruction of rhetorical analysis, specifically through the lens of Jacques Derrida's thematic of différance . [9] In addition to questioning proposed views of the speaker and the situation, this lens also challenges the view of the audience as a unified, rational concept. Taken together, Biesecker suggests that the thematic of différance allows us to see the rhetorical situation as an event that does not simply convince audiences to believe or act in a certain way or represent the claims put forth by a static speaker or situation. Rather, she argues, this deconstruction reveals the ability of the rhetorical situation to actually create provisional identities and social relationships through articulation. [9]

Garret and Xiao

In their 1993 article, Mary Garrett and Xiaosui Xiao apply Bitzer's rhetorical situation model to the response of the Chinese public to the Opium Wars of the 19th century. Garrett and Xiao propose three major changes to the existing theory of the rhetorical situation:

  1. Elevating the audience as a defining factor of rhetorical situation, rather than the speaker, because of its role in deciding exigency, kairos ("fittingness" [10] ), and constraints.
  2. Recognizing the power of discourse traditions within a given culture to influence the audience's perceptions, exigency, kairos, and constraints.
  3. Emphasizing the interactive and dialectical nature of the rhetorical situation. [10]

Rhetorical ecology

Rhetorical ecology was cemented as a method by Jenny Edbauer in 2005; this shifted from Lloyd Bitzer's model of rhetorical situations. She argued that this consists of independent elements of exigence, audience, and constraints. Edbauer argues that the rhetorical situation lies within more extensive networks of meaning, or "ecologies."She offered rhetorical ecology as a new method that includes the interaction transformation fluidity openness of all these elements with ongoing social flux. Pushing the theory to be more dynamic than static argues that rhetoric is inherently interactive.  Edbauer argues that viewing rhetorical situations as ecologies shows us that "public rhetorics do not only exist in the elements of their situations but also the radius of their neighboring events. [1] [11]

Elements of rhetorical ecologies

The six core elements of Rhetorical ecology as a method are Interconnectedness, Fluidity and Change, Affective Dimensions, Materiality, Public Engagement, and Historical Context.

Interconnectedness: Rhetorical ecologies emphasize how rhetoric is interconnected in nature. Instead of viewing rhetorical elements like audience, text, and content as separate, individual entities that operate independently, Edbauer argues that utilizing rhetorical ecologies shows a more extensive network of interactions that constantly shape each other.

Fluidity and change: Rhetorical ecologies account for rhetoric's fluidity and change over time. Edbauer points out that situations are not static; they take on a life of their own and evolve due to changing social conditions.

Affective dimensions: The concept of rhetorical ecologies incorporates affective dimensions, such as emotional and sensory experiences, that affect how messages are received and ultimately understood.

Materiality: Rhetorical ecologies also account for the material conditions and aspects of rhetoric, including the physical context in which communication occurs, technology, environment, and cultural artifacts that shape communication practices

Public engagement: Rhetorical ecologies also highlight rhetoric's role in creating public policies and social formations of identity. This aligns closest to materiality, as collective identity is formed through various symbiotic relationships that affect public discourse.

Historical context: Rhetoric did not develop out of nowhere but is impacted by a variety of historical factors. This portion of the framework encourages an examination of the historical and temporal dimensions of rhetoric, ultimately suggesting that understanding the past is vital for analyzing any current rhetorical situation and its possible implications. [1]

Theories leading up to rhetorical ecology

Coe

The first time the concepts of rhetoric and ecology were explored in relation to one another was in 1975 by Richard Coe. [12] In his article, "Eco-Logic for the Composition Classroom", Coe offers up eco-logic as an alternative to traditional analytical logic used in rhetoric and composition studies. The contrast between the two is that analytical logic breaks down wholes into smaller parts to examine them, while eco-logic examines the whole as itself. [12] His primary proof in favor of this type of thinking and approach to rhetoric and composition is that the meaning of the written or spoken word is relative to the context in which it is written or spoken. [12]

Cooper

A more explicit link between rhetoric and ecology was drawn in 1986 by Marilyn Cooper in her article titled "The Ecology of Writing". [13] With an acute focus on the composition classroom, Cooper critiques the notion of writing as a primarily cognitive function, positing that it ignores important social aspects of the writing process. [13] She also argues that a simply contextual perspective of writing is also insufficient; rather, an ecological view of writing extends past the immediate context of a writer and their text to examine the systems that the writer is a part of with other writers. Cooper suggests five different systems that are all intricately interwoven in the actual act of writing: ideas, purposes, interpersonal interactions, cultural norms, and textual forms. [13] Cooper illustrates this ecological model using the metaphor of a web, in that something that impacts one system will inevitably impact all the systems. Cooper also addresses the significant rhetorical concern of audience, claiming that within the ecological model, views of audience are improved as the implication is that there is really communication with a real audience happening, as opposed to an imagined audience, or generalized other. [13] For Cooper, the ecological model allows us to look at people who interact through writing and the systems making up the act of writing itself.

Challenges to rhetorical ecology

Jones

In 2021, Madison Jones published an article titled "A Counterhistory of Rhetorical Ecologies", challenging the rhetorical ecology framework. [2] In the article, he explicitly acknowledges that he is not writing off the theory as something inherently bad; rather, he is observing complications within it and offering up creative new perspectives on the topic. He begins by outlining the various environmental, colonial, and nuclear issues that arise when the metaphor of ecology is invoked. [2] Tying this back to rhetoric, he argues that spatiotemporal issues within the idea of rhetorical ecology (i.e., issues that are related to the location and timing of a rhetorical event) are directly linked back to these historical realities interwoven into the larger idea of ecology. [2] He suggests the framework of field histories as a way to acknowledge the complicated history of the field of ecology as it is used rhetorically. He particularly focuses on the need to employ place-based and community-engaged research to better understand the history of the discipline and work toward shaping a better future. [2]

Other recent theories and applications

Gallagher

John R. Gallagher's 2015 article, "The Rhetorical Template", addresses the rhetorical situation in relation to "Web 2.0" and the templates of social networking sites, such as Facebook. Gallagher defines these Web 2.0 templates as "prefabricated designs that allow writers to create a coherent text." [14] Gallagher contends that rhetorical templates offer a new approach to making meaning within new exigency. Rhetorical templates function within constraints of the genre, but also affect the exigence and purpose by creating how the text is written and read.

Ordeman

In his 2023 study, William. J Ordeman employs a rhetorical ecology perspective. He examined how power dynamics, historical contexts, and nonhuman agents such as disease or natural disasters influence rhetorical strategies across different communities. He focused his research on Mexican American communities in El Paso, Texas, specifically the Chihuahuita neighborhood. He compared a historical event such as the Spanish flu epidemic (1918) to the communicative strategies used by a mix of government policies and media narratives to illustrate how public health officials communicate to marginalized communities in times of global health pandemic like that of COVID-19. Ordeman argued that the distribution of resources was affected by neoliberal policies and historical context to strip away citizens of their agency.[ citation needed ]

A fundamental way in which Ordeman's study utilized aspects of rhetorical ecology was its use of nonhuman agents such as the Rio Grande River and infectious diseases. He argued that these factors significantly contributed to the vulnerability of marginalized populations during the Spanish flu outbreak. He argues that Neoliberal policies have and continue to affect the treatment of marginalized bodies by prioritizing the interests and growth of a white economy, leading to the disenfranchisement of communities of color which are then deemed as expendable aliens. Because of these Neo-Liberal policies, Ordeman argues that Mexican Americans face poor working conditions and low wages. This exploration of bodies combined with the lack of governmental support and resources, Ordeman argues, makes this community especially vulnerable to health crises. [15]

Gruber

In her chapter titled The Power of Ecological Rhetoric Trans-Situational Approaches to Veganism, Vegetarianism, and Plant-Based Food Choice scholar Sibylle Gruber looks at the complexity of food choices. She emphasizes that what we choose to consume is not a simple choice; however, that choice is affcted by various social, political, and cultural factors. Utilizing Blitzer's original rhetorical situation analysis, Gruber stresses the importance of context in understanding how messages surrounding a plant-based diet are constructed and received. Grubber further argues that we must consider the audience, exigence, and constraints that help shape the rhetoric surrounding veganism, Vegetarianism, and environmentalism. She mentions the existence of several rhetorical situations that occur concurrently. These different conversations surrounding veganism are showcased through the sharing of personal narratives from a wide variety of communities. Pinpointing the responses allows Gruber to situate various responses to veganism. It recognizes that knowledge in a rhetorical situation becomes valuable, incorporating new perspectives as they become available. The chapter also furthers the concept of rhetorical ecologies by utilizing a portion of the method. Gruber shows the need for inclusivity from mainstream media in addressing social change and environmental justice. [16]

Hitchcock

In her 2023 article Framing Palestinian Rights: A Rhetorical Frame Analysis of Vernacular Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) Movement Discourse by Jennifer Hitchcock. She applies rhetorical situation methodology to the American political movement supported by many college students nationwide, known as Pro-BDS. Pro-Bds is a political movement supporting Palestinian rights and attempting to scrutinize Israel for its actions regarding Palestinian territories. Hitchcock examines how pro-BDS student activists create and alter discourse surrounding the movement, suggesting that the discourse is ever-evolving as it interacts with various speakers, audiences, and exigencies. A central component from the foundation of the rhetorical situation is the need to focus on the audience, and the students did just that by primarily targeting their discourse to their peers, faculty, and administration. By doing this, the students hoped to resonate with their audience's core values, such as justice, freedom, and equality for all people. This was done in an attempt to increase their persuasive power and solicit emotional empathy. Hitchcock also uniquely utilized expenses by looking at the long-term occupation of Israel on Palestinian land. As well as the short-term or immediate concerts such as Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW). This dual analysis helps contextualize the activist messaging in both the immediate sense and broader historical frames. [17]

Fuglsby

In her 2023 Dissertation titled: Including Critical Feminist Approaches in the Technical & Professional Communication Classroom: An Autoethnography throughout Changing Rhetorical Ecologies, Brandi Jo Fuglsby advocates for the inclusion of critical feminist perspectives in technical and professional communication (TPC) in higher education. By utilizing a rhetorical ecological perspective, Fuglsby showcases how rhetoric is not about isolated messaging but messaging in and of itself is influenced by various social, cultural, and technological factors. To further emphasize her point, she argues that a classroom is part of a more extensive ecological system where students and teachers alike are affected by outside circumstances in an ongoing process and thus subject to change. Fuglsby furthers that the incorporation of critical feminist approaches into the classroom allows for recognition and support of counter-rhetorical strategies by showcasing how different messages compete with each other. This highlights Fuglsby's belief that rhetoric inside the classroom can either challenge or support the existing narratives. On a technical level, Fuglsby highlights the importance of multimodality in communication practices. She suggests that incorporating different approaches in the classroom also means different mediums, which can affect the learning outcomes of an ever-growing, diverse student population. Her dissertation thus works in meta-formation, one where her argumentation is subject to growth and development similar to that which she studies. [18]

Edholm

Just as rhetorical situations worked to create the concept of rhetorical ecologies, these methods pushed academia to new heights. In his work Rhetorical Narrative Theory and the Act of Telling: Reflections on the Search for a New Paradigm, Scholar Roger Edholm examines the limits to the current iteration of narrative theory. He borrows from the foundation of the work of rhetorical ecologies to push Narrative theory to new levels. He does this by linking the importance of contextual understanding, which is emphasized in rhetorical ecologies. This point argues that rhetoric should include various social, cultural, and environmental factors. Edholm argues that this shapes how a narrative is created. Where the process becomes dynamic and changing as it shifts from the narrator to the audience and even the narrative itself; another point Edholm makes about the complexity that incorporates communication borrowing from the study of rhetorical ecologies Edholm argues that narrative communication is multilayered and can not be simple formulas however they must include various voices from the environment. Another similarity is that of audience engagement, which rhetorical ecologists submit is an important part of understanding the impact of rhetoric. Edholm argues that how the audience responds to narratives is crucial to understanding the efficacy of rhetoric. [19]

Use in teaching writing

Rhetorical situation triangle.jpeg

The rhetorical situation is a component of some first-year college writing courses, wherein students learn about the rhetorical situation, rhetorical analysis, and awareness of the features they must respond to from their rhetorical situation(s). [20] [21] [22] In this context, the rhetorical situation is taught in several parts: [23]

Though some scholars, such as Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle, have criticized the use of the rhetorical situation as a core component of first-year writing courses, arguing that it would be better to teach students about writing and writing studies than it would be to teach them how to write by responding to rhetorical situations. [25] In response, some others (such as Tara Boyce) have noted that both approaches appear to have their limitations, and that challenges remain regardless of approach. Boyce writes that "students, though aware of and capable of implementing [rhetorical] awareness into writing practices, most often do not. The question remains in how to adapt pedagogy to achieve this awareness and how to measure that achievement." [26]


Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetoric</span> Art of persuasion

Rhetoric is the art of persuasion. It is one of the three ancient arts of discourse (trivium) along with grammar and logic/dialectic. As an academic discipline within the humanities, rhetoric aims to study the techniques that speakers or writers use to inform, persuade, and motivate their audiences. Rhetoric also provides heuristics for understanding, discovering, and developing arguments for particular situations.

Genre is any style or form of communication in any mode with socially agreed-upon conventions developed over time. In popular usage, it normally describes a category of literature, music, or other forms of art or entertainment, based on some set of stylistic criteria. Often, works fit into multiple genres by way of borrowing and recombining these conventions. Stand-alone texts, works, or pieces of communication may have individual styles, but genres are amalgams of these texts based on agreed-upon or socially inferred conventions. Some genres may have rigid, strictly adhered-to guidelines, while others may show great flexibility. The proper use of a specific genre is important for a successful transfer of information (media-adequacy).

<i>Kairos</i> Right or opportune moment

Kairos is an ancient Greek word meaning 'the right or critical moment'. In modern Greek, kairos also means 'weather' or 'time'.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetorical criticism</span>

Rhetorical criticism analyzes the symbolic artifacts of discourse—the words, phrases, images, gestures, performances, texts, films, etc. that people use to communicate. Rhetorical analysis shows how the artifacts work, how well they work, and how the artifacts, as discourse, inform and instruct, entertain and arouse, and convince and persuade the audience; as such, discourse includes the possibility of morally improving the reader, the viewer, and the listener. Rhetorical criticism studies and analyzes the purpose of the words, sights, and sounds that are the symbolic artifacts used for communications among people.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Visual rhetoric</span> Communication through visual elements

Visual rhetoric is the art of effective communication through visual elements such as images, typography, and texts. Visual rhetoric encompasses the skill of visual literacy and the ability to analyze images for their form and meaning. Drawing on techniques from semiotics and rhetorical analysis, visual rhetoric expands on visual literacy as it examines the structure of an image with the focus on its persuasive effects on an audience.

Procatalepsis, also called prolepsis or prebuttal, is a figure of speech in which the speaker raises an objection to their own argument and then immediately answers it. By doing so, the speaker hopes to strengthen the argument by dealing with possible counterarguments before the audience can raise them.

Pathos appeals to the emotions and ideals of the audience and elicits feelings that already reside in them. Pathos is a term most used often in rhetoric, as well as in literature, film and other narrative art.

Genre studies is an academic subject which studies genre theory as a branch of general critical theory in several different fields, including art, literature, linguistics, rhetoric and composition studies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Composition (language)</span> Assembling words and sentences into a work

The term composition as it refers to writing, can describe authors' decisions about, processes for designing, and sometimes the final product of, a composed linguistic work. In original use, it tended to describe practices concerning the development of oratorical performances, and eventually essays, narratives, or genres of imaginative literature, but since the mid-20th century emergence of the field of composition studies, its use has broadened to apply to any composed work: print or digital, alphanumeric or multimodal. As such, the composition of linguistic works goes beyond the exclusivity of written and oral documents to visual and digital arenas.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Glossary of rhetorical terms</span>

Owing to its origin in ancient Greece and Rome, English rhetorical theory frequently employs Greek and Latin words as terms of art. This page explains commonly used rhetorical terms in alphabetical order. The brief definitions here are intended to serve as a quick reference rather than an in-depth discussion. For more information, click the terms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetoric of science</span> Body of scholarly literature

Rhetoric of science is a body of scholarly literature exploring the notion that the practice of science is a rhetorical activity. It emerged after a number of similarly oriented topics of research and discussion during the late 20th century, including the sociology of scientific knowledge, history of science, and philosophy of science, but it is practiced most typically by rhetoricians in academic departments of English, speech, and communication.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cognitive rhetoric</span>

Cognitive rhetoric refers to an approach to rhetoric, composition, and pedagogy as well as a method for language and literary studies drawing from, or contributing to, cognitive science.

Rhetorical stance refers to the deliberate choices made by a communicator in shaping and presenting their message. It encompasses the strategic decisions regarding language, style, and tone that are employed to achieve a specific communicative purpose. This concept is deeply rooted in rhetorical theory and is a fundamental aspect of effective communication across various disciplines, including literature, public speaking, and academic writing.

Feminist theory in composition studies examines how gender, language, and cultural studies affect the teaching and practice of writing. It challenges the traditional assumptions and methods of composition studies and proposes alternative approaches that are informed by feminist perspectives. Feminist theory in composition studies covers a range of topics, such as the history and development of women's writing, the role of gender in rhetorical situations, the representation and identity of writers, and the pedagogical implications of feminist theory for writing instruction. Feminist theory in composition studies also explores how writing can be used as a tool for empowerment, resistance, and social change. Feminist theory in composition studies emerged in the late 1960s and early 1970s as a response to the male-dominated field of composition and rhetoric. It has been influenced by various feminist movements and disciplines, such as second-wave feminism, poststructuralism, psychoanalysis, critical race theory, and queer theory. Feminist theory in composition studies has contributed to the revision of traditional rhetorical concepts, the recognition of diverse voices and genres, the promotion of collaborative and ethical communication, and the integration of personal and political issues in writing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lloyd Bitzer</span> American rhetorician

Lloyd Bitzer was an American rhetorician. In 1962, Lloyd Bitzer received his doctorate from the University of Iowa. He held the title of Associate Professor of speech at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the early 1960s. He continued to be a professor at the institution in the school of Rhetoric, Politics, and Culture until 1994, when he retired. Bitzer was involved with many organizations including the National Communication Association and the National Development Project in Rhetoric. In 1968, Bitzer published his famous theory of situational rhetoric.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theories of rhetoric and composition pedagogy</span>

Theories of rhetoric and composition pedagogy encompass a wide range of interdisciplinary fields centered on the instruction of writing. Noteworthy to the discipline is the influence of classical Ancient Greece and its treatment of rhetoric as a persuasive tool. Derived from the Greek work for public speaking, rhetoric's original concern dealt primarily with the spoken word. In the treatise De Inventione, Cicero identifies five Canons of the field of rhetoric: invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. Since its inception in the spoken word, theories of rhetoric and composition have focused primarily on writing

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Visual rhetoric and composition</span>

The study and practice of visual rhetoric took a more prominent role in the field of composition studies towards the end of the twentieth century and onward. Proponents of its inclusion in composition typically point to the increasingly visual nature of society, and the increasing presence of visual texts. Literacy, they argue, can no longer be limited only to written text and must also include an understanding of the visual.

Rhetorical circulation is a concept referring to the ways that texts and discourses move through time and space. The concept seems to have been applied to texts sometime in the mid-1800s, and it is considered, by most scholars, to be either subordinate to or synonymous with the canon of rhetorical delivery, or pronuntiatio. It is something like newspaper circulation and magazine circulation in that it can involve print media, but it is not limited to these. In fact, any kind of media can circulate. Books can be loaned; Internet memes can be shared; speeches can be overheard; YouTube videos can be embedded in web pages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Invitational rhetoric</span>

Invitational rhetoric is a theory of rhetoric developed by Sonja K. Foss and Cindy L. Griffin in 1995.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Feminist rhetoric</span> Practice of rhetoric

Feminist rhetoric emphasizes the narratives of all demographics, including women and other marginalized groups, into the consideration or practice of rhetoric. Feminist rhetoric does not focus exclusively on the rhetoric of women or feminists but instead prioritizes the feminist principles of inclusivity, community, and equality over the classic, patriarchal model of persuasion that ultimately separates people from their own experience. Seen as the act of producing or the study of feminist discourses, feminist rhetoric emphasizes and supports the lived experiences and histories of all human beings in all manner of experiences. It also redefines traditional delivery sites to include non-traditional locations such as demonstrations, letter writing, and digital processes, and alternative practices such as rhetorical listening and productive silence. In her book, Rhetorical Feminism and This Thing Called Hope (2018), Cheryl Glenn describes rhetorical feminism as, "a set of tactics that multiplies rhetorical opportunities in terms of who counts as a rhetor, who can inhabit an audience, and what those audiences can do." Rhetorical feminism is a strategy that counters traditional forms of rhetoric, favoring dialogue over monologue and seeking to redefine the way audiences view rhetorical appeals.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Edbauer, Jenny (2005-09-01). "Unframing models of public distribution: From rhetorical situation as rhetorical ecologies". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 35 (4): 5–24. doi:10.1080/02773940509391320. ISSN   0277-3945. S2CID   142996700.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 Jones, Madison (2021-08-08). "A Counterhistory of Rhetorical Ecologies". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 51 (4): 336–352. doi:10.1080/02773945.2021.1947517. ISSN   0277-3945. S2CID   238358762.
  3. ↑ Vatz, Richard E. (1973). "The Myth of the Rhetorical Situation". Philosophy & Rhetoric. 6 (3): 154–161. ISSN   0031-8213. JSTOR   40236848.
  4. 1 2 Bitzer, Lloyd F. (1968). "The Rhetorical Situation". Philosophy & Rhetoric. 1 (1): 1–14. ISSN   0031-8213. JSTOR   40236733.
  5. ↑ Perelman, Chaïm (1979). "Philosophy, Rhetoric, Commonplaces". The New Rhetoric and the Humanities. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. pp. 52–61. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-9482-9_3. ISBN   978-90-277-1019-2 . Retrieved 2021-04-06.
  6. ↑ Vatz, Richard E. (January 2009). "The Mythical Status of Situational Rhetoric: Implications for Rhetorical Critics' Relevance in the Public Arena". The Review of Communication. 9 (1): 1–5. doi:10.1080/15358590802020798. S2CID   42754664.
  7. 1 2 Consigny, Scott (Summer 1974). "Rhetoric and Its Situations". Philosophy and Rhetoric. 7 (3): 175–186. JSTOR   40237197. S2CID   85444714.
  8. ↑ Flower, Linda; Hayes, John R. (1980). "The Cognition of Discovery: Defining a Rhetorical Problem". College Composition and Communication. 31 (1). National Council of Teachers of English: 21–32. doi:10.2307/356630. JSTOR   356630. S2CID   54845454.
  9. 1 2 3 Biesecker, Barbara A. (1989). "Rethinking the Rhetorical Situation from within the Thematic of 'Différance'". Philosophy & Rhetoric. 22 (2): 110–130. ISSN   0031-8213. JSTOR   40237580.
  10. 1 2 Garret, Mary; Xiao, Xiaosui (March 1993). "The Rhetorical Situation Revisited". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 23 (2). Informa UK Limited: 30–40. doi:10.1080/02773949309390985. JSTOR   3885923. S2CID   144723013.
  11. ↑ Lan, Linli; Yuan, Ying (October 2022). "Ecological Rhetoric: Strands and Trend". Linguistics and Literature Studies. 10 (5): 85–94. doi: 10.13189/lls.2022.100501 . ISSN   2331-642X.
  12. 1 2 3 Coe, Richard M. (1975). "Eco-Logic for the Composition Classroom". College Composition and Communication. 26 (3): 232–237. doi:10.2307/356121. JSTOR   356121.
  13. 1 2 3 4 Cooper, Marilyn M. (1986). "The Ecology of Writing". College English. 48 (4): 364–375. doi:10.2307/377264. ISSN   0010-0994. JSTOR   377264.
  14. ↑ Gallagher, John R. (March 2015). "The Rhetorical Template" (PDF). Computers and Composition. 35. Elsevier: 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2014.12.003. Archived (PDF) from the original on May 6, 2017.
  15. ↑ Ordeman, W. (2023-03-15). "Histories of Radical Interactionality: Rivers, Disease, Borders, and Laundry". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 53 (2): 217–230. doi:10.1080/02773945.2022.2129756. ISSN   0277-3945.
  16. ↑ Gruber, Sibylle (2023-01-06), "The Power of Ecological Rhetoric", The Rhetorical Construction of Vegetarianism (1 ed.), London: Routledge, pp. 23–44, doi:10.4324/9781003039013-2, ISBN   978-1-003-03901-3 , retrieved 2024-11-16
  17. ↑ Hitchcock, Jennifer (2023-03-15). "Framing Palestinian Rights: A Rhetorical Frame Analysis of Vernacular Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) Movement Discourse". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 53 (2): 87–103. doi:10.1080/02773945.2022.2095422. ISSN   0277-3945.
  18. ↑ Fuglsby, Brandi (May 2023). "Including Critical Feminist Approaches in the Technical & Professional Communication Classroom: An Autoethnography throughout Changing Rhetorical Ecologies".{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  19. ↑ Edholm, Roger (2024-03-01). "Rhetorical Narrative Theory and the Act of Telling: Reflections on the Search for a New Paradigm". Poetics Today. 45 (1): 17–44. doi:10.1215/03335372-10938592. ISSN   0333-5372.
  20. ↑ Wardle, Elizabeth (2009). ""Mutt Genres" and the Goal of FYC: Can We Help Students Write the Genres of the University?". College Composition and Communication. 60 (4): 765–789. doi:10.58680/ccc20097196. ISSN   0010-096X. JSTOR   40593429.
  21. ↑ Formo, Dawn; Neary, Kimberly Robinson (2020-05-01). "Feature: Threshold Concepts and FYC Writing Prompts: Helping Students Discover Composition's Common Knowledge with(in) Assignment Sheets". Teaching English in the Two-Year College. 47 (4): 335–364. doi:10.58680/tetyc202030647. ISSN   0098-6291. S2CID   259459221.
  22. ↑ "First Year Program (FYC) Principles". University of North Georgia. Retrieved 2023-12-27.
  23. ↑ Peters, Jason; Bates, Jennifer; Martin-Elston, Erin; Johann, Sadie; Maples, Rebekah; Regan, Anne; White, Morgan. "What is the Rhetorical Situation?". Writing Arguments in Stem.
  24. ↑ Long, Liza; Minervini, Amy; Gladd, Joel (2020-08-18). "The Rhetorical Situation". Write What Matters.
  25. ↑ Downs, Douglas; Wardle, Elizabeth (2007). "Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions: (Re)Envisionin". College Composition and Communication. 58 (4): 552–584. doi:10.58680/ccc20075923. ISSN   0010-096X.
  26. ↑ "Response to Downs and Wardle and Their Critics • Locutorium". Locutorium. Retrieved 2023-12-27.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.