Assignment: Learning Style from Aristotle's Rhetoric

"For it is not sufficient to understand the things one needs to argue; it is also necessary to understand how one needs to say them." So says Aristotle at the beginning of Book III of his Rhetoric, where he addresses style, a central concern of rhetoric.

I am asking my students to go through Aristotle's discussion of style (following the reading guide below). This will include studying definitions and examples of a set of rhetorical terms (mostly stylistic devices) on Silva Rhetoricae: The Forest of Rhetoric. They will then create a new post based loosely on one of their previous ones, focused on schemes and tropes, as explained below the reading guide.

Contexts for Studying Style
Aristotle began to systemize rhetorical terms, something that many others expanded on and refined later on. People went a bit crazy with style--especially with naming various figures of speech. It's easy to get lost in all of the language--or to mistake that one has understood style by knowing the definitions of some stylistic devices. This is why it's important to understand style in terms of several larger rhetorical concepts:

• kairos, audience, and decorum --because style needs to be adjusted to fit the audience, the moment, and the message.
• the persuasive appeals of logos, pathos, and ethos --because style helps to deliver the message and enhance the rational appeal; because style often aims for eliciting pleasure or other emotion in an audience; and because one's use of style is a major factor in building one's ethos.
• delivery --because, even if words are not given orally, there is a close connection between style and performance -- also tied to ethos
• invention -- not because style substitutes for developing one's argument or reasoning, but because style can be generative and not just expressive. Methods for amplification of style often parallel the topics of invention. 

Reading Guide - Aristotle, Rhetoric, Book III
Have at hand the Sachs outline for Book III (pp. 128-30). Please study any terms that are linked from this outline, as well as those listed after the reading guide.

Chapter 1 (pp. 247-49). Note the way Aristotle associates style with delivery and performance, relating rhetoric to both poetry and drama.
Chapter 2 (pp. 249-52). Note Aristotle's discussion of diction (word choice), tone, and clarity as parts of style.
Chapters 3-6 (just read summaries of these on p. 128)
Chapter 7 (pp. 257-58). Note how Aristotle connects word choice both to pathos and ethos, as well as to the general principle of decorum.
Chapter 8 (just read summary on p. 129, noting the overlap with poetry by focusing on rhythm)
Chapter 9 (pp. 260-62). Understand what Aristotle means by a period (which isn't exactly the same thing as a sentence. See the discussion of the periodic sentence). On p. 261 Aristotle begins discussing the arrangement of clauses, focusing on antithesis as well as isocolon, a specific sort of parallelism. He also refers to oxmoron and later, to assonance. Can you see the parallelism and antithesis at work in the examples offered on p. 262, line 30 and forward?
Chapter 10 - Begin reading this on p. 263 at the bottom (near 1411a) where he begins to discuss metaphor. Read footnote #224 (referring to Aristotle's Poetics where he has also discussed metaphor). Note the way those other metaphors are related to the topic of invention Genus and Species.
Chapter 11 (pp. 265-69). When talking about metaphors that vividly place something before the eye, Aristotle is discussing ecphrasis. Within this same chapter he ends up mentioning simile, proverb, and hyperbole.
Chapter 12 (pp. 269-71). Note how he makes a distinction between oral and written style. A very important topic he raises on 269-70 is that of amplification and variation.

Understanding Figures of Speech
Most of the terms highlighted above from Aristotle are figures of speech. The figures are a core part of style, though not the only part. We will study additional figures when looking at Roman rhetoric. But to give some scaffolding for understanding the figures, begin with the idea of figures or figuration, understand the difference between schemes and tropes, and then study the very small set of these listed below.

Figures
Think of "figures of speech" as "configurations of language" -- they aren't the core meanings (the "semantic" value of language), but they "configure" the way we understand them. For example, if I say "The meeting was an Olympic games," I am using a metaphor, equating a meeting with the Olympics. The meeting is not the Olympic games, but using this metaphor configures the way one can think about it. The figure of speech draws attention to certain qualities by way of the metaphor.

Another way to look at figures is to think of them as screens. They illuminate certain aspects of a given thing (like a movie screen does). But at the same time, they screen out other possible ways of thinking about something (like setting a screen in basketball). So, by calling the meeting an Olympic Games, I am "configuring" the way my hearers think about the meeting, calling attention to its competitive or playful nature. At the same time I screen out other ways of thinking about the meeting (such as its purpose or outcomes).

All stylistic devices are configurations -- figures -- by which verbal expression gives a different view upon or tone to the topic in question.  They also are (re)configurations of customary uses of speech. To use the example above, one is using the idea of Olympic games in a way that deviates from its literal meaning. The ancient Greeks certainly weren't referring to an office meeting when they referred to the Olympics.

Schemes and Tropes
Thinking of figures as artful deviations from normal language is helpful, and it leads us to understanding a broad division among the figures of speech:

• schemes: artful deviations from the ordinary arrangement of words; and
• tropes: artful deviations from  the ordinary meaning of a word
  (See schemes and tropes on Silva Rhetoricae.)

Above, by calling a meeting the Olympics, I was being metaphorical, turning the idea of Olympics from its normal usage to a different, non-literal, "figurative" meaning. In other words, this was using a "trope" (the Greek word for "turn"). Tropes are things that turn words, applying them in ways not obvious or customary. And that is part of why they work! Audiences are delighted by being able to transfer an idea from something outside of its natural area of application.

Schemes do the same thing but beyond the level of a word or phrase. If, continuing the example above, I had said "That meeting was nothing more and nothing less than the Olympics," I am still using a trope, the metaphor of equating a meeting with the Olympics. But by adding in "nothing more and nothing less" I was making an artful rearrangement of words. In this case, I used a scheme of balance and opposition, antithesis (referring to bringing opposites together: "less"; "more"). That opposition was more evident because it was expressed through parallelism (a similarity of structure): 

nothing more

nothing less 

I have arranged these two phrases in a column so it is easy to see not only their parallelism but also their equal length: same number of letters, same number of syllables.  The Greeks had a word for this (when you arranged things of similar structure in similar length): isocolon (literally "same" + "column"). Repetition also is a variety of scheme, and it occurs in this expression as the word "nothing" appears first in two successive phrases: "nothing more" and "nothing less." This scheme is known as anaphora.

Not bad for just a handful of words. The expression "nothing more or nothing less" ends up being quite artful, by bringing together opposites (antithesis); by doing so using a similar structure (parallelism) where each element has the same length (isocolon) and each element begins with the same word (anaphora).

The schemes and tropes thus help us to uncover hidden structures in language, making them conscious so that we can better account for the persuasiveness and effectiveness of others' speaking and writing, and so that we can use them more artfully in our own communication.

A handful of figures to know
Here is a starter set of figures of speech to know. I've selected these as being representative of larger categories. If you wish, you can look at other figures of speech from the same category indicated in these lists of schemes and tropes:

A few tropes to know:

• metaphor (one way to reference one thing as another; another is simile)
• paronomasia (one variety of wordplay)
• anthimeria (one variety of substitution)
• hyperbole (one kind of overstatement/understatement)
• oxymoron (one kind of semantic inversion)

A few schemes to know:

• parallelism (one of the structures of balance)
• anastrophe (one type of change in word order)
• ellipsis (a figure of omission)
• alliteration (a figure of repetition)

Assignment: Schemes and Tropes post
I want my students to return to the topic of their most recent blogging assignment (where they tried their hand at using various topics of invention). The new post will not be a continuous paragraph or miniature essay; it will be a list of nine items, each of the nine schemes and tropes listed under "A handful of figures to know," just above. Each entry in the list will be divided into

1. the name of the figure; 
• the figure you make up (put it in quotes); 
• a brief explanation as to why what you made up is actually an example of that figure and if possible a word about the effect the figure gives

Example:

Post Title: "Figurative Language about Hunches"

Tropes about hunches:

1. metaphor: 
• "A hunch is a slap in the face from Fate."
• A hunch is not something physical like a slap but the metaphor of a slap suggests it is something pressing or alarming and not just vague or spiritual.
2. paronomasia
• "One should not sit on one's hunches any more than one's haunches."
• Both "hunches" and "haunches" sound similar, making them seem similar in meaning. But it's funny to think of literally sitting on hunches the way one sits/squats on the back of one's legs.
3. anthimeria
• "You are hunching about the neighbors' marriage again and I don't like it."
• Normally we speak of people having a "hunch" or "hunches," but here this concept is being used as a verb. By saying "are hunching" it makes it seem like that person has a habit of guessing.
4. hyperbole 
• "No, it's no mere hunch I am following. It is the imperial command of Dame Destiny!"
• By suggesting it is some kind of royal person issuing a command, this blows up the idea of a hunch all out of proportion--the very kind of exaggeration that hyperbole is.
5. oxymoron
• "What is a hunch but the cool warmth of instinct?"
• "cool" and "warm" are placed right together. By having these opposites simultaneously describe a trait it makes it thoughtfully paradoxical.

Schemes about hunches:

1. parallelism
• "A hunch is a vital to follow as it is tricky to understand."
• The parallel parts are "vital to follow" and "tricky to understand" (both follow a pattern of [adjective] [infinitive] or _____ to ______).
2. anastrophe 
• "A hunch I have and a powerful one at that."
• Normally the expression would have "hunch" come at the end ("I have a hunch."). But by putting it first in the sentence, it makes it sound a little mysterious or maybe ancient.
3. ellipsis
• "She has a good hunch and he a bad."
• Obviously they each have a different kind of hunch, but "hunch" is only said once and just implied--as though it really was there but not stated right after "bad."
4. alliteration
• "Your hunch that hummus halts hunger was heartfelt but hideously foolhardy."
• The repeated H's at the start of nearly every word makes the alliteration sound clever.

NOTE: This post is not due until Monday, October 13 at 10pm. Comments should be completed by 9am on October 14.