Everyday Use
What have you learned from the text so far? Comment below and reference a page number.
Your second post should be from pages 15-27.
Metonymy, or The Husband's Revenge
Metonymy, or the Husband's Revenge Rachel de Queiroz Metonymy. I learned the word in 1930 and shall never forget it. I had just published my first novel. A literary critic had scolded me because my hero went out into the night “chest unbuttoned.” “What deplorable nonsense!” wrote this eminently sensible gentleman. “Why does she not say what she means? Obviously, it was his shirt that was unbuttoned, not his chest.” I accepted his rebuke with humility, indeed with shame. But my illustrious Latin professor, Dr. Matos Peixoto came to my rescue. He said that what I had written was perfectly correct; that I had used a respectable figure of speech known as metonymy; and that this figure consisted in the use of one word for another word associated with it—for example, a word representing a cause instead of the effect, or representing the container when the content is intended. The classic instance, he told me, is “the sparkling cup”; in reality, not the cup but the wine in it is sparkli...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading this passage, I found it interesting how the basis of Rhetoric, when appealing to an audience, goes all the way back Aristotle in ancient Athens. On page eleven, the author explains how Aristotle taught his students to use Rhetoric by utilizing logos, pathos, and ethos (generally by using all three in the same paper or paragraph). By doing so, an author not only creates a balance of the devices, but can then use them to persuade his or her audience towards a specific point of view. A speech or paper must have strong appeal if the author hopes to convey his or her message.
DeleteIn part two, I learned the importance of context when it comes to Rhetoric. On page 16, the author talks about how context shapes how rhetors argue their positions or explore ideas. It gave different examples of events in history and talked about different context rhetors could explore using those events. Rhetors can also use wider cultural contexts when discussing an issue, but it is important that rhetors pick cultural pieces that people can identify with and view in the way the rhetor wants them to. I think I mainly found this section interesting because I struggle with the context of my papers sometimes, so it provided me with some insight.
DeleteRhetoric relies heavily on presentation, which is explained on page eight with the introduction of personae. Having the information you need to share your message is important, but with a persona, you can present it in a way that would make people listen. So as the audience changes, the personality will as well so that they can relate to the person and therefore will be more inclined to hear what you have to say. For example, if I were speaking to a group of children, I wouldn't use the same words I would for people our age or older because they just wouldn't understand, which would prevent my message from clearly getting across.
ReplyDeleteAccording to page six of the text, "rhetoric means reading... to analyze the decisions the rhetor makes as he or she works to accomplish a purpose for a specific audience." Reading this made a couple of things click in my mind. I realized that, for example, in an email conversation I had with instructor Mrs. Morton today, I was exposed to rhetoric in the sentences she sent. Before, I comprehended those sentences as "normal sentences," but now I understand that there's rhetoric in there. I further realized that in most of the emails I read and respond to, both the teacher and I are subconsciously and/or automatically using rhetoric in our sentences; moreover, it seems that this is done to get more information across faster or to combat the innate loss of information that pure text has compared to talking.
ReplyDelete(PART 2): Page 24 had an analysis of the phrase "NO MEANS NO" appearing on some signs. They described the phrase as "like a strong, forceful parent disciplining an unruly child who was trying to get away with something forbidden." From this description, I realized that I have, in previous years, had thoughts like this after reading parts of the passages on our big tests; and I could have written an analysis containing a thought like that.
DeleteWhen reading the text, my mind immediately went to rhetoric in the media. As the text says on page 4, rhetoric refers to "the specific features of texts, written or spoken, that cause them to be meaningful, purposeful, and effective for readers or listeners in a given situation." Sometimes when watching the news, the broadcaster would make specific facial cues to signal what their belief is on the given topic being discussed. If they're talking about a sensitive or terrible topic, they will say "wow" or shake their head after saying it to further the impact of the message to the listener. For the extreme examples, if you are watching a more liberal program, they will use much more negative words towards republicans, and when watching a more conservative program, they will use more negative words towards democrats. That is due to them knowing their audience of being either conservative or liberal and utilizing language that will solidify these negative ideas in the audience's minds about the opposing party (I'm not making this political; simply stating the visual/auditory bias used in media to portray their agenda to the audience).
ReplyDeleteI thought the part on page 12 about treating subject matter was interesting. When writing or speaking, "the subject must be an 'open' one." I never really thought about it but it makes sense after reading. There's no point in an argument setting to bring up something that can't be opposed. Sharing information everyone already knows does not benefit the conversation.
On page thirteen, the passage says that a good writer capitalizes on information already known to get the reader curious on the topic; then they satisfy their curiosity with more facts and ideas on the topic. Earlier on page six, were told that "being skilled at rhetoric means being able to plan and write compositions, not just write them." I know realize how important planning is for good rhetoric. With careful planning, you'll be able to know what will make the reader curious about your topic; then you'll be able to teach them on what they are wanting to learn about.
ReplyDelete(Part 2) On page seventeen, the passage says that a good rhetor must understand intention. One way to do that is to plan ahead, just like what I talked about on the post I am commenting on now; but I want to focus more on the second way which is "when you begin with a topic, [and] discover your aim as you write." This allows the reader to discover intention while the writer discovers intention as well.
DeleteWhile I was skimming throughout the pages, my eyes were drawn to the large picture of the triangle. Page seven encompasses this three-sided shape, explaining how a good writer or speaker must "consider the subject and the kinds of evidence used to develop it, the audience..., and the[ir] character." Without connecting just one of the sides, the triangle cannot create a full shape. Just as this, a speech or piece of writing cannot be completely effective without weaving in these three points. So, it is important not to focus just on the words spewing out of someone's mouth but also to how those words are presented to a certain audience. Otherwise, the writing will be pointless and will not create any form of an impact.
ReplyDeleteFour Essential Concepts to a Good Argument:
Delete- open subject; open areas, have some grey ideas
- build curiosity; give them a little bit about what they already know and adding onto that
- have a claim; support it, or no one will be convinced
- have active and robust discussions; allow your audience to know how and why you are
right
S peaker
O ccasion
A udience
P urpose
S ubject
+ TONE
While reading the text, page 3 caught my attention in particular. The reason for my curiosity comes in the form of the pages main subject, which is the "bad name" for rhetoric. It certainly is true that several historical villains, such as Hitler, have used rhetoric for evil ends, it never occurred to me that that would sully the concept of rhetoric. Certainly Hitler was evil, but there is much to learn about society, people, and rhetoric by studying his speeches/rule. Similarly, looking at people like Martin Luther King Jr. teaches us similar lessons, just the opposite side of these three concepts. While I may not have learned a ton from this page, it shifted my perception to that of what most people might see from a first glance of rhetoric.
ReplyDeletePrior to reading the text, I would have more simply defined rhetoric as effective diction; however, on page two of the text it is defined as "the art that humans use to process all the messages we send and receive." I find this interesting since I have never considered rhetoric as something two-sided. Obviously I understand choosing devices, changing diction, and varying tone —all things that build rhetoric— to fit your audience, but considering rhetoric as a "negotiation" is new to me. An author basing their rhetoric on the audience is obvious, but what I have failed to realize is that reading is an equally important part of the process. The words are used to convey a message, and mean nothing if no one is on the receiving end. This is why rhetoric is a negotiation between the writer and reader where "they anticipate... [and] decide [] things based on how they perceive the scene."
ReplyDelete^^Basically, I did not realize that the analytical side of rhetoric is actually in the definition.
Delete(This is josh but I’m doing it from my phone soo I don’t know if my account will load through)
ReplyDeleteSince first being introduced to rhetoric devices, we’ve been taught how to include and blend them into our everyday writing. When reading the assigned pages, however, something new was brought to my attention. When thinking about being a good writer with the ability to use rhetoric comfortably, I usually think of someone who can blend these techniques into their own writing; however, on page six, the author mentions being skilled at rhetoric also includes being able to read and listen to other writers pieces with a “discerning eye and a critical ear”(page 6). This taught me rhetoric is not just a one-sided concept and needs to be mastered in all facets. Once this is accomplished, you will be able to present your work with easily and comfortability and your message will be received how you intend it to.
I found page three to be interesting. As a result of only discussing rhetoric in English, I knew *only* the formal definition. I never considered that it is seen as negative to be classified as a speaker/writer "full of rhetoric." I have only seen rhetoric used in a positive light, so the examples that were provided gave me a new outlook on this strategy of writing.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, the idea that rhetoric is a ~relationship~ between both writer and audience is something I never gave thought to. While it is pretty obvious, I never really thought of it that way.
Delete(Part 2) I found the example of a community as a whole using rhetoric collectively to be very interesting. The way they all joined to communicate one message with one tone causes an even powerful message to be sent out. It is interesting to consider how rhetoric is used everyday, whether purposely or not. Rhetoric is used in our communities and everyday lives and interactions.
DeleteEarly on in the passage, it was made clear that the meaning and effectiveness of rhetoric relies heavily on context. On page 3, it informs us that we use rhetoric every day. Whether or not we pick up on what the other person is saying entirely depends on how they convey it to us. The passage cites the end of a movie as an example, and I found that very interesting. Maybe movies that I found confusing just had vague rhetoric that I didn't understand due to lack of context.
ReplyDeleteIn the passage, the part of the text that catches my eye is on page 4. The part that defines rhetoric as the "art of analyzing all the language choices... so that the text becomes meaningful, purposeful, or effective" shows me my previous assumptions were false. Before reading this passage, I thought rhetoric was used to illustrate the tone or mood of the text, basically I thought it was elevated diction; now, I can see that it really does change the text. For example, in movies or books, emphasis of certain parts with strong rhetoric or using specific rhetoric for certain characters to show their traits can dramatically change the text, even giving the meaning to areas that would typically be glanced over and forgotten.
ReplyDelete4 essential concepts to a GOOD argument
Delete1. Subject needs to be open with ideas that are channeling in opposite directions. There needs to be gray area.
2. Build curiosity; part of building curiosity is giving people a little bit of what they already know so they can link onto, and then adding onto it.
3. Create a claim-- make sure it is well supported
4. Have active and robust argument; allow your audience to know how and why you're right to continue the thinking
S:peaker
DeleteO:ccasion
A:udience
P:urpose
S:ubject
(This is Madison)
ReplyDeleteAs I read through the text, page 11 particularly stood out to me. This is primarily because I always thought that, in order to have a powerful message with good rhetoric, you must separate logos, ethos, and pathos. I had the preconceived notion that it was impossible to blend all three into the same small portion of a text. Although I now know it is not impossible, I expect it would be extremely hard to appeal to all of those different areas at the same time; however, I bet it would be very powerful writing if done correctly.
I found page 16-17's discussion regarding cultural context interesting. For example, it mentions that when writing about a topic such as gun control in America, the rhetor may consider the "American West" as Americans frequently "mythologize[] over" this time period. Thus, the question of whether "Americans [relate] themselves [to] cowboys" is presented. This technique utilized by rhetors is useful as they are then able to connect with the audience further. Including details significant to an audience's culture will surely make a more memorable impact.
DeleteMichelle Orioha
ReplyDeleteWhile reading through the passage, I found the concept on page 10 was interesting. The different methods authors' use to convey their purpose and influence readers is an interesting topic. I definitely see why some others may choose to introduce their opinions of ideas in a way that is different than the typical use of persona in writing. It is also useful to know when questioning whether or not an author's opinion is different than the tone would lead one to believe.
(sorry this is late. Apparently it did not publish previously through my personal laptop )
Everyday Use PT2: While reading the second portion of the article, I realized that good rhetoric truly does help your understanding and response to issues in the community. For example, if there was a major issue in Ohio and someone who speaks like they've never heard proper English before in front of a crowd or Governor Dewine, nothing will change in the area because everyone will just ignore the person since they sound dumb. However, someone with good rhetoric can lead a cause and make a difference in the community because they understand how to use SOAPSTONE to their advantage.
ReplyDeletePart 2: Rhetoric is not limited to formality; it can be an important asset in pretty much any situation in everyday life. Page 25 goes into depth on this, providing many examples from college essays to the CDs you listen to. When anyone is trying to elicit some sort of reaction from others, they utilize rhetoric. When you are pondering an option, you are unknowingly using rhetorical skills to decide, weighing the pros and cons based on the information provided and choosing the one that best suits what you want or need.
ReplyDeleteDuring the midst of my journey through the countless pages of chapter one, I came to the major realization that rhetoric is not something that can just benefit you in front of a huge crowd or in a classroom; rather I pleasantly discovered that rhetoric applies to all aspects of life. On pages 21 and 22, whether it be in your community or talking to the big man of another country, knowing how to utilize rhetoric to connect to others can be the make or break of getting a person to understand you and be on your side. So, basically, understanding proper use and balance of rhetoric is a must-have.
ReplyDeleteWhat caught my eye was the part about intention. On page 17, the author states that a "rhetor's intention is what [they] want[] to happen as a result of the text." I see this happen a lot in bias news coverage. They will state something about a certain person and in return want you to believe them and equally hate this person. People will say things to attempt to persuade you. The author touched on persuasion a bit as well. I found myself using a lot of rhetoric in the many speeches I have had to do in my life, mostly for persuasive purposes. I also appreciated when the author touched on rhetoric and two way streets. As a skilled rhetor, I am able to pick up when a governing official needs us to do something. For example, the skilled and highly respectable rhetor, Governor Mike Dewine, often asks for our cooperation and to follow the guidelines laid out to us. While some people are unable to recognize his sincere and earnest pleas to the citizens of Ohio, I am able to understand what he wants for us. We listen to what he says, we do what he says, he makes our lives better. Rhetoric must be used in times like these. With a trained and well experienced speaker at the helm, they are able to control an entire population with proper rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteIn pouring over our literary scripture, I once again found a particularly interesting point. On page 17, the text talks about intention, which is something that is fairly obvious. What is not obvious, however, is the more exploratory side of rhetoric. One of the things this particular section points out is how you may decide on a topic, but you cannot form an opinion until you have researched both sides. This seems to be the opposite of what society wants, which is just blindly forming an opinion without properly researching or understanding your own/ the other side. I found it interesting that something I am passionate about -that is, exploration of topics- is in fact a huge part of our studies of rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteUpon reading the opening passage of text, the metaphor on page sixteen immediately caught my attention. How ironic, a strong use of rhetoric while explaining rhetoric's importance and omnipresence. As a rhetor, it is important to understand that our works are not "island[s]." They are not "separate unto [them]selve[s]." One must realize that each piece has a context and purpose that connects them to the audience and, yes, other rhetors. Rhetoric is more than just writing well; it is about connecting. Any given text is more than just a lone island. It is a connection to the rest of the world.
ReplyDeletepart 2:
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the last portion of Chapter One, I found the information discussed on pages 23 and 24 insightful. It is interesting to see how important rhetoric can be in even the general parts of people's lives. Explaining how a community came together to protest something by displaying signs that said "NO means NO" shows how powerful rhetoric can be when it comes to unity among communities and society in general. It also shows that extreme sophisticated is not even required to make a lasting difference in the way events are processed and people interact.
(Alexis)
ReplyDeletePart 2: On page 18, the text delves into why genre is important, and the example used, an application letter, really surprised me. When rhetoric comes to mind, I think about old classics with hidden meaning in the dialogue that I probably wouldn’t catch the first time around, so it was helpful to learn that rhetoric can and should be used in every piece of intentional writing.
Part 2: while reading, pages 20 - 22 stood out most to me. I felt that applying rhetoric to something a large fundamental as citizenship was a great way to aid the reader’s understanding. To be more specific, I enjoyed the example of the drafting of men and women and how being a skilled rhetoric could make you a better and more “well informed” citizen.
ReplyDelete