Page 152 - Šolsko polje, XXX, 2019, št. 5-6: Civic, citizenship and rhetorical education in a rapidly changing world, eds. Janja Žmavc and Plamen Mirazchiyski
P. 152
šolsko polje, letnik xxx, številka 5–6
normative form, this goal failed, it was not followed or implement-
ed, and it ended up as one of those objectives that were left out of our
ambitious and packed syllabus.
b) “Pupils understand that what has been said reaches beyond the
literal (they understand what presuppositions and implications (implica-
tures) are).” (Žagar, Ž. et al., 1999/2004, p. 5)
Once more, we are in Grice’s universe. Consider a sentence (poten-
tial utterance), for example:
Jane no longer writes fiction. >
Presupposition: Jane once wrote fiction.
Jane no longer writes fiction. >
Possible implicatures: She turned to painting.
She has a new job.
She is happily married now.
..........................................
How can one tell them apart:
Presuppositions can’t be negated, implicatures can.
Presuppositions can’t be cancelled, implicatures can.
This goal failed as well; in spite of the fact that implicitness and in-
nuendos are important parts of rhetoric. It turned out it was too difficult
even for the teachers, and if something is too difficult for teachers …
c) “Pupils understand that language is not only a neutral means of
persuasion and argumentation, but that it can also persuade and argue
by itself (e.g. language particles such as already/only, only/almost etc.).”
(ibid.)
With this objective we wanted to call attention to an interesting lan-
guage phenomenon, discovered by French linguist O. Ducrot (1996), that
different phrasing of the same “fact”, put forward as an argument, can
lead to different conclusions:
It is already 8 o’clock > It is late.
It is only 8 o’clock. > It is (still) early,
while the “state-of-affairs” is the same in both cases: it is (simply) 8 o’clock.
What effect/meaning/conclusion we wish to achieve depends on how we
phrase the argument.
This goal failed as well, though it is worth noting that it is very suc-
cessful with my university students: if nothing else persuades them that it
is useful and fun studying rhetoric, these kind of examples does.
150
normative form, this goal failed, it was not followed or implement-
ed, and it ended up as one of those objectives that were left out of our
ambitious and packed syllabus.
b) “Pupils understand that what has been said reaches beyond the
literal (they understand what presuppositions and implications (implica-
tures) are).” (Žagar, Ž. et al., 1999/2004, p. 5)
Once more, we are in Grice’s universe. Consider a sentence (poten-
tial utterance), for example:
Jane no longer writes fiction. >
Presupposition: Jane once wrote fiction.
Jane no longer writes fiction. >
Possible implicatures: She turned to painting.
She has a new job.
She is happily married now.
..........................................
How can one tell them apart:
Presuppositions can’t be negated, implicatures can.
Presuppositions can’t be cancelled, implicatures can.
This goal failed as well; in spite of the fact that implicitness and in-
nuendos are important parts of rhetoric. It turned out it was too difficult
even for the teachers, and if something is too difficult for teachers …
c) “Pupils understand that language is not only a neutral means of
persuasion and argumentation, but that it can also persuade and argue
by itself (e.g. language particles such as already/only, only/almost etc.).”
(ibid.)
With this objective we wanted to call attention to an interesting lan-
guage phenomenon, discovered by French linguist O. Ducrot (1996), that
different phrasing of the same “fact”, put forward as an argument, can
lead to different conclusions:
It is already 8 o’clock > It is late.
It is only 8 o’clock. > It is (still) early,
while the “state-of-affairs” is the same in both cases: it is (simply) 8 o’clock.
What effect/meaning/conclusion we wish to achieve depends on how we
phrase the argument.
This goal failed as well, though it is worth noting that it is very suc-
cessful with my university students: if nothing else persuades them that it
is useful and fun studying rhetoric, these kind of examples does.
150
