FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1995308078> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1995308078 endingPage "71" @default.
• W1995308078 startingPage "45" @default.
• W1995308078 abstract "Over the second half of his long and distinguished career, Chaïm Perelman reiterated the central themes of his theory of rhetoric many times. As the audience for his work expanded, Perelman was repeatedly invited to summarize the principles presented in La nouvelle rhétorique, his magnum opus authored in collaboration with Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca, which appeared in 1958. On these occasions, he would often attempt to clarify or refine the major concepts presented in that treatise. Nevertheless, even today many aspects of Perelman's work remain enigmatic. In outline, The New Rhetoric itself conveys a sense of structural and theoretical clarity, but for many readers this first impression evaporates when they confront the complexity and detail of the work's exposition. In the preface to their new study of Perelman, Alan Gross and Ray Dearin observe: The New Rhetoric is difficult to read, a task made even more difficult for American audiences because virtually all its examples and illustrations are from a literature in a foreign language. . . . Moreover, Perelman's later attempts to achieve clarity, in The Realm of Rhetoric, and numerous shorter articles, are equally puzzling. Consequently, some of Perelman's best ideas are virtually buried in a very long work, and therefore largely lost even to the most careful readers. In addition, on such central issues as the relationship between rhetoric and philosophy Perelman remains maddeningly obscure. (2003, ix) While Perelman's status as a pioneering figure in the rejuvenation of rhetorical study in Continental Europe is secure, as is his placement among the canonical twentieth-century theorists by American scholars, such difficulties constitute an impediment to contemporary understanding and future appreciation of his achievement; and the sprawling character of The New Rhetoric certainly has not helped to counteract the less [End Page 45] sympathetic reception his work has received in some corners of rhetorical and argumentation studies.1 Gross and Dearin's volume joins several other recent studies that have contributed to the untangling of Perelman's thought and to the profitable application of his ideas.2 Still, some of Perelman's best ideas remain buried and sorely in need of excavation. Chief among these are considerations prompted by Perelman's use of the evocative yet mysterious term communion. Although communion appears repeatedly among the panoply of concepts and argumentative techniques described in The New Rhetoric, explicit discussion of it there is brief and scattered, and the subject receives only glancing mention in Perelman's subsequent publications. In turn, communion has been all but ignored in the scholarship responding to or extending Perelman's work.3 This is even the case in studies where one would expect to see more serious engagement with Perelman's ideas on the subject—notably, in those that consider the status of values in argumentation and the role of rhetoric in the constitution and maintenance of community.4 In this essay, we offer a detailed analysis of Perelman's conception of communion and, in the course of endowing the concept with greater presence, aim to show its rich implications for these areas of inquiry. We argue that the idea of communion is a vital, if understated, component of Perelman's proposed new rhetoric. Like other aspects of Perelman's theory, however, it is an expansive and somewhat slippery notion. In The New Rhetoric, communion is used in a very general sense as the term denoting a community's agreement on questions of value, but also, more narrowly, as an objective sought in certain forms of discourse and as an effect of specific linguistic-stylistic devices. The exegesis needed to indicate the subtle links between these senses will enable us to describe the manner in which Perelman endeavored to integrate the technical lore inherited from the classical tradition of rhetoric with a broadly social and determinedly pluralisticconception of argumentation. We begin by examining communion in relation to Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca's ideas..." @default.
• W1995308078 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1995308078 creator A5002052904 @default.
• W1995308078 creator A5049530494 @default.
• W1995308078 date "2006-01-01" @default.
• W1995308078 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W1995308078 title "Presencing &quot;Communion&quot; in Chaim Perelman's New Rhetoric" @default.
• W1995308078 cites W140324260 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1488505771 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1490973232 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1504665089 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1508802392 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1509935849 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1516605260 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1519135855 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W154112546 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1560756451 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W157303022 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1578403217 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1598629165 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1894064689 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1898041641 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1975769233 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W1986667594 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2004743861 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2014103166 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2015462985 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2040438716 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2073515212 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2083004226 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W210470487 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2114458865 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2131365105 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2153418155 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2154054821 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W2529005777 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W3137245036 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W3145922146 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W3149979680 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W3175712594 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W3178696392 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W346865588 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W357000021 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W368302110 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W418288095 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W574708950 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W588898317 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W619684425 @default.
• W1995308078 cites W841216214 @default.
• W1995308078 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/par.2006.0006" @default.
• W1995308078 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W1995308078 type Work @default.
• W1995308078 sameAs 1995308078 @default.
• W1995308078 citedByCount "23" @default.
• W1995308078 countsByYear W19953080782012 @default.
• W1995308078 countsByYear W19953080782013 @default.
• W1995308078 countsByYear W19953080782014 @default.
• W1995308078 countsByYear W19953080782016 @default.
• W1995308078 countsByYear W19953080782018 @default.
• W1995308078 countsByYear W19953080782019 @default.
• W1995308078 countsByYear W19953080782023 @default.
• W1995308078 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1995308078 hasAuthorship W1995308078A5002052904 @default.
• W1995308078 hasAuthorship W1995308078A5049530494 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C1370556 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C192562157 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C2776285698 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C2777146004 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C2778757428 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConcept C57869631 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C107038049 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C111472728 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C124952713 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C1370556 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C138885662 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C142362112 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C17744445 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C185592680 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C192562157 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C199539241 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C2776285698 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C2777146004 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C2778757428 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C41895202 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C55493867 @default.
• W1995308078 hasConceptScore W1995308078C57869631 @default.
• W1995308078 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W1995308078 hasLocation W19953080781 @default.

• next