Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 20.djvu/531

RHETORIC 513 chief sources, the use of tawdry or ungainly compounds (5nra ov6fjLa.ro.}, the use of rare or obsolete words (ywrrai), and infelicity of epithet or metaphor. A simile (ei/ccoi/) is a metaphor with an explanation (yos): e.g., in speaking of Achilles, "he sprang on them like a lion" is simile ; " the lion sprang on them " is metaphor. Simile is less available than metaphor for prose, being more poetical. The " proportional " metaphor mentioned here requires a passing com- ment. Aristotle used the term " metaphor " (/meratyopd) in a larger sense than ours. He meant by it " any transference of a word to a sense different from its proper sense. " Thus he can distinguish (Poet., c. 21) four classes of metaphor: (1) "from genus to species," as when "vessel" means "ship"; (2) from species to genus, as when "the lilies of the field" stand for flowers" generally. These two kinds are not what we call "metaphors," but are examples of the figure which was afterwards named "synec- doche." Aristotle's third class of metaphor is (3) "from species to species," under which head come almost all familiar metaphors, as to " scent a plot, " the generic notion, "find out," being common to the special terms, "scent" and "detect"; (4) then lastly there is the "proportional" metaphor (?/ avaKoyov), when A is not simply compared with B (on the strength of something obviously common to both), but A's relation to C is compared with B's relation to D. To call old age " the evening of life " implies that old age is to life as the evening to the day. Obviously a proportion " of this kind is implicit in the metaphors of Aristotle's third class ; but in the fourth class proportion is expressly indicated by the mention of the second term ("life" in our example). The first four chapters having thus dealt with expression in the narrower sense of diction (Ae|ts proper), Aristotle devotes the next eight (iii. 5-12) to composition, which would be properly called avvOfffis. After remarks on the first requisites grammatical cor- rectness, and purity of idiom (rb er,vifii') we have some hints on "dignity" of style (oyKos). " Propriety " (rb TrpeVoj/) is defined as depending chiefly on three qualities : (1) expression of the feel- ings which it is desired to move in the hearer ; (2) fitness to the character and position of the speaker ; and (3) congruity with the level of the subject. A certain "rhythm" (pv0/j.6s), or harmonious movement, should be sought in prose ; but this must not be so pre- cise as to give the effect of metre. The elements of rhythm are "times," i.e., in writing, long or short syllables, the short syllable being the unit. Here, following the early writers on music (comp. Plato, Rep., 400 B), Aristotle recognizes three "rhythms" : (1) the " heroic " or dactylic, ^^-', which is in the ratio of equality, since = - -*~^, or 1 : 1 ; (2) the iambic or trochaic (- or ), which has the ratio of 2 to 1 ; (3) the pseonic, -^^^, which has the ratio of 3 : 2. Of these, the heroic is too grand for prose ; the iambic is too commonplace, being the very cadence of ordinary talk (avr-fj e<rriv 77 Ae|is r&v Troa>v) ; the trochee is too comic. The p;eon remains. It is the best rhythm for prose, since it will not, by itself, produce a metrical effect (/j.aov av0dvei). The "first" pseon ( ^-^^) is most suitable to the beginning of sentences, the " fourth " pseon ( ^ - ) to the close. Rhythm having been attained, a framework is supplied by the period (wepioSos). A "compact" or periodic style (Ka.reffrpa.fji- lic yueVij A.eis) is so called in contrast with that " running " style (elpoij.fl/r] eis) which simply strings clause to clause, having no necessary end until the thought is finished," and is unpleasing because it is unlimited ; " for all men wish to descry the end. The periodic style pleases for the opposite reason, because the nearer always fancies that he has grasped something and has got something denned. The period may consist of several parts or members (/caJA.a), or it may be "simple," forming a unit (d0eA.ijs, ^oj/0/ccoA.os). The rhetorical use of antithesis is then noticed in its application to the period. Two kindred figures are also men- tioned, jjarisosis, a parallelism of structure between clauses of equal length, and iMromoiosis, a resemblance in sound, when the last (or first) word of one clause has an echo, as it were, in the same place of the next clause. .vity. Two chapters (10, 11) are now given to the sources of vivacity in (speaking. Those "smart sayings" (ra. affrela) which win applause " must be invented by the clever or practised man ; the business of this treatise is to point out their use." They come chiefly from (1) metaphor, (2) antithesis, and (3) vividness i.e., placing the thing described "before the eyes of the hearer" (rb irpb ofn^arcav iroielv). This is called by Aristotle evepyeia., "actuality" (which must be carefully distinguished from fvdpyeia, another term for " vivid- ness "), since things are represented not merely in their potentiality (Svvafjits), but as living and moving. One of the most effective kinds of point (says Aristotle) is "a metaphor with a surprise," i.e., with the disclosure of a likeness not perceived before, the source of the pleasure being the same as in riddles. The whole subject of expression is concluded by a chapter on the 61 'al general types of style, in their relation to the three branches of 7s of rhetoric (ch. 12). There is. a literary style (ypa<piK^ A.=|is) and a t). style suited to oral contest or debate (aytavurriK-fi). The literary style is that which admits of the highest finish (aKpifteffrdrt}), and is best suited to the epideictic branch of rhetoric, since the latter is properly addressed to readers. The other, or "agonistic," style is best adapted to delivery (vTroKpiriKwrdr-ri). It is so mainly through two things adaptation to the character of speaker and hearer, and skilful appeals to feeling. Forensic and deliberative rhetoric both use it ; but the forensic branch admits of higher finish, and so far approximates to the literary style. Deliberative rhetoric, on the other hand, is like drawing in light and shade (without colours), arKiaypaobia like scene-painting, we should rather say, i.e., it is meant to produce its effects at a distance, and will not bear looking at too closely. From expression we now pass to the other subject announced at Arrange- the opening of the third book, arrangement (ra^ty), which occupies ment. the last seven chapters (13-19). The received system, which had been popularized, if not originated, by Isocrates, recognised four divisions of a speech : (1) exordium (or proem), vpoolfjuov ; (2) narrative, Si^y^tns ; (3) proof, iriffrfis ; (4) peroration, firloyos. Aristotle adopts this fourfold 'partition as his basis, with the preliminary remark, however, that only two elements are neces- sarily present in every case, viz., "statement" of one's subject, Trp6dearis, and "argument" in its support, iriffreis. He then takes the four divisions in order. The contents of the proem usually 1. Proem, come under one of two heads (1) exciting or allaying prejudice ; (2) amplifying or detracting. In epideictic rhetoric the connexion of proem with sequel may be comparatively loose ; it is like a flute- player's prelude (irpoaviov which he deftly links on to the key- note (ev$6ffi/j.ov) of his principal theme. The forensic proem, on the other hand, may be likened to the prologue of an epic or a tragedy (ch. 14, 15). Narrative is least needed in deliberative 2. Nairn- speaking, since this deals chiefly with the future. In forensic nar- tive. rative, the object must be to bring out clearly the issues on which accuser or accused relies, with an effective colouring of ethos and pathos. In the epideictic branch, the narrative should not form a continuous whole, but should be divided and varied by comments (ch. 16). The rhetorician's proofs (trio-Ten) will, in the forensic 3. Proof. branch, be relevant to one of four issues : (1) fact : was the alleged act done, or not ? (2) damage : if done, was it hurtful ? (3) crimin- ality : if hurtful, was the hurt justifiable ? (4) quantity or degree. Aristotle's four "issues " (a/j.(f>i<Tprir-f)(reis) here correspond with the <rrd<Teis, "positions" or "questions," usually three, of later legists and rhetoricians: (1) ara-ais a-roxao-riic-fi, status conjecturalis, the question of fact; (2) ffrdffts bpinJ), status definitimis, nomen, or finitio, the question of legal definition ; (3) ffruais iroidrriTos status qualitatis or juridicialis, the question of justice or injustice. Thus Cicero says, "res (controversiam facit) aut de vero (1), aut de recto (3), aut de nomine" (2), Orat., xxxiv. 121. In delibera- tive rhetoric, the four "issues" can be applied to the future, since, if a speaker anticipates certain results from a course of a policy, his adversary can deny their (1) probability, (2) expediency, (3) justice, or (4) importance. The enthymeme is most useful in the delibera- tive branch, as the "example," or rhetorical induction, is most useful in the forensic. The "ethical" proof from the speaker's indicated character is always a most important adjunct to the logical proof (ch. 17). A chapter is now given to one special re- source by which a proof can often be enforced, viz., interrogation of the adversary (ep^rrjens), which has usually one of two objects (1) rediwtio ad absurdum, or (2) to entrap him into a fatal admis- sion (ch. 18). The last chapter of the book, and of the treatise, 4. Epi- deals with the peroration or "epilogue" (eirloyos). This aims logue. usually at one of four things : (1) to conciliate the hearers ; (2) to magnify or lower the importance of topics already treated ; (3) .to excite emotion in the hearers ; (4) to refresh their memories by a short recapitulation. Remarking that asyndeton gives force to the close of an epilogue, Aristotle ends his rhetoric with the last words (not quite accurately quoted) of the great speech in which Lysias denounced Eratosthenes Traiiffo/jiai KaTijyopwv. dKijK^are, ewpdicaTe, iretr6vQare, e^ere, Sucd^ere. Aristotle's Rhetoric is incomparably the most scientific work which exists on the subject. It may also be regarded as having determined the main lines on which the subject was treated by nearly all subsequent writers. The extant treatise on rhetoric entitled 'P^Topi/c?/ Trpos 'AAeai/8/ooi/ was undoubtedly by Anaximenes of Lampsacus, and was The Rhe- probably composed about 340-330 B.C., a few years before toric f Aristotle's work. The introductory letter prefixed to it is n ; a late forgery. If the treatise of Anaximenes is compared compared with that of Aristotle the distinctive place of the latter with Aris- in this field becomes clearer. Anaximenes, who knew the totle's, treatise of Isocrates, and could profit by all the preceding Greek "arts," is, for us, the sole representative of technical rhetoric before Aristotle, and probably represents it at its best. We miss the intellectual power, the grasp of principles, and the subtle discrimination which belong to XX. -65