Rhetorical history and rhetorical criticism: A distinction
Bruce E. Gronbeck
Abstract
Bruce E. Gronbeck
Abstract
The writer argues that, conceptually, rhetorical history (the study of the historical effects of rhetorical discourse) and rhetorical criticism (the analysis of rhetorical discourse and acts for a series of essentially normative or advisory purposes) must pursue different goals, ought to be judged by differing criteria, and usually employ varying sources of evidence. Among other recommendations, he suggests not simply teaching “methods” and “approaches” but teaching much about the personal, aesthetic, normative, predictive, and social functions of rhetorical analysis.
OpenAlex reports 24 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The writer argues that, conceptually, rhetorical history (the study of the historical effects of rhetorical discourse) and rhetorical criticism (the analysis of rhetorical discourse and acts for a series of essentially normative or advisory purposes) must pursue different goals, ought to be judged by differing criteria, and usually employ varying sources of evidence. Among other recommendations, he suggests not simply teaching “methods” and “approaches” but teaching much about the personal, aesthetic, normative, predictive, and social functions of rhetorical analysis.
Key concepts: Rhetorical question, Normative, Rhetorical criticism, Criticism, Rhetorical device, Rhetorical modes, Epistemology, Sociology