Page 81 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 81
he linguistic-discursive creation of the speaker’s ethos for the
sake of persuasion: a key aspect of rhetoric and argumentation 81
Mussolini says that a policy of segregation will be pursued. Due to the
morphosyntactic structure, it seems as if he didn’t have anything to do
with it. As if that wasn’t hypocritical enough, he claims that the world
will be surprised at his or their generosity. Again, Mussolini seems un-
derstanding, well-meaning and responsible and all that makes for the
speaker’s ethos which makes him appear a blameless, caring and sympa-
thetic political leading figure.
4. Concluding Remark
Due to skilfully used morphosyntactic constructions such as the
zero-realization of arguments (I), the specification of syntactically un-
necessary actants (II), the passive voice (III), the marked use of syntac-
tically unnecessary circumstantials (IV), the recessive rather than the
causative diathesis (V) as well as the use of the SI-diathesis (VI) allow
the speaker to build up an extremely favourable ethos of himself. From
these few quotations Mussolini emerges as disinterested and altruistic
(I), non-violent, sympathetic and empathetic (II), politically farsighted
(III), full of respect and integrity (IV), peaceful and responsible (V), un-
derstanding, well-meaning and caring (VI). According to the doxa of
those times and under the circumstances of those days the portrait of
the speaker which arose from his speeches, which is in other words the
linguistic-discursively constructed ethos, was by all means positive. On
the basis of this positive ethos as a first implicit premise the speaker has
a promising starting point for his argumentation.
References
Amossy, R. (1999). La notion d’ethos de la rhétorique à l’analyse de dis-
cours. Images de soi dans le discours. La construction de l’ethos. Lau-
sanne. Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé, 9–30.
Amossy, R. (2002a). Des topoï aux stéréotypes: le doxique entre logos et
pathos. Eggs, E. (ed.). Topoï, discours, arguments. Stuttgart: Stein-
er, 11–25.
Amossy, R. (2002b). Nouvelle rhétorique et linguistique du discours.
Koren, R., and R. Amossy (eds.). Après Perelman: Quelles politiques
pour les nouvelles rhétoriques? Paris: L’Harmattan, 153–171.
Amossy, R. (2006). L’argumentation dans le discours, Paris: Armand
Colin.
Anscombre, J. C., and O. Ducrot (1997). L’argumentation dans la
langue, Liège: Mardaga.
sake of persuasion: a key aspect of rhetoric and argumentation 81
Mussolini says that a policy of segregation will be pursued. Due to the
morphosyntactic structure, it seems as if he didn’t have anything to do
with it. As if that wasn’t hypocritical enough, he claims that the world
will be surprised at his or their generosity. Again, Mussolini seems un-
derstanding, well-meaning and responsible and all that makes for the
speaker’s ethos which makes him appear a blameless, caring and sympa-
thetic political leading figure.
4. Concluding Remark
Due to skilfully used morphosyntactic constructions such as the
zero-realization of arguments (I), the specification of syntactically un-
necessary actants (II), the passive voice (III), the marked use of syntac-
tically unnecessary circumstantials (IV), the recessive rather than the
causative diathesis (V) as well as the use of the SI-diathesis (VI) allow
the speaker to build up an extremely favourable ethos of himself. From
these few quotations Mussolini emerges as disinterested and altruistic
(I), non-violent, sympathetic and empathetic (II), politically farsighted
(III), full of respect and integrity (IV), peaceful and responsible (V), un-
derstanding, well-meaning and caring (VI). According to the doxa of
those times and under the circumstances of those days the portrait of
the speaker which arose from his speeches, which is in other words the
linguistic-discursively constructed ethos, was by all means positive. On
the basis of this positive ethos as a first implicit premise the speaker has
a promising starting point for his argumentation.
References
Amossy, R. (1999). La notion d’ethos de la rhétorique à l’analyse de dis-
cours. Images de soi dans le discours. La construction de l’ethos. Lau-
sanne. Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé, 9–30.
Amossy, R. (2002a). Des topoï aux stéréotypes: le doxique entre logos et
pathos. Eggs, E. (ed.). Topoï, discours, arguments. Stuttgart: Stein-
er, 11–25.
Amossy, R. (2002b). Nouvelle rhétorique et linguistique du discours.
Koren, R., and R. Amossy (eds.). Après Perelman: Quelles politiques
pour les nouvelles rhétoriques? Paris: L’Harmattan, 153–171.
Amossy, R. (2006). L’argumentation dans le discours, Paris: Armand
Colin.
Anscombre, J. C., and O. Ducrot (1997). L’argumentation dans la
langue, Liège: Mardaga.
