Talk:Rhetorical device/Archives/2016
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Not yet ready to delve to deeply into composing articals
Comment moved from main page by TimmyD 06:22 May 3, 2003 (UTC)
I can't believe that I'm the first one to feel the need to write about this topic, or the majority of the devices I linked to here. Something seems to be wrong.
-- 68.5.87.191
Syntax is a very broad topic, not a single device. Michael Hardy 21:35, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I'm not yet ready to delve to deeply into composing articals ( I'm only abit beyond the hunt and peck stage...), but I do like to make ocassional notes about subjects relating to analysis and form... A little googling on the subject of rhetoric will turn up some long lists of terms, figures of speech rather high on the list, which relates mainly to condensing, adding, subtracting or substituting- beginings, middles or ends of- words, phrases sentences etc. Rhetoric differs from pure dilectic largely by it's attempt to Charm the mind. Other aspects include use of rythm, assonce, etc. Music has many devices which can be considered rhetorical, in music one might differentiate between the "conventional" ie scales and arpeggios( the meat of virtuosos), and "figures" ie more ideosyncratic less expected terms and phrases.Both Aristotle and Cicero have written very interesting books on the subject. Forensics are related. wblakesx4.234.84.188
"In rhetoric, a rhetorical device or resource of language is a technique that an author or speaker uses to convey to the listener or reader. A meaning with the goal of persuading him or her towards considering a topic from a different perspective, using sentences designed to encourage or provoke a rational argument from an emotional display of a given perspective or action."
Isn't it ironic that an article discussing a literary technique begins this way? Maybe this is just an example of the irony discussed later . . . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.234.201 (talk) 17:42, 28 January 2016 (UTC)