Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Kenneth Burke
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The article presents Kenneth Burke's concept of literary form. According to Burke, literary form arouses and fulfills reader's desires. Burke presents several types or aspects of form, such as syllogistic progression, qualitative progression, repetitive form, conventional form and minor form. On the one hand, this repertoire of apparently heterogenic literary forms is compatible with traditional literary terms, but on the other hand, the notion of literary form can be applied, in Kantian manner, to human experience and sensual perception in general. Therefore, the question about the specificity of literature and the relation of form and content emerges. One of the suggested answers is that the function of literature is to propose symbols, which are patterns of human experience and play a compensatory role.
Res Rhetorica
|
2022
|
vol. 9
|
issue 3
63-79
EN
The subject of this article are verbal (press articles) and non-verbal (press photography) techniques for controlling the topic of refugees, immigrants and migrants as well as the strategies for managing emotions in the press. The analysis draws on the concept of identification proposed by Kenneth Burke. Identification with a dialogue partner is a phenomenon that can be interpreted in terms of interpersonal balance, resulting from the unification of the sender's vision of the world proposed to the recipient. The analysis of the text and accompanying photos in this study indicates a number of narrative strategies that lead to the phenomenon of consubstance postulated by Burke. Its results are, among others, positive relations with the sender of the message, resulting from a positive assessment of the presented values and the image of the world, attempts to imitate opinions, attitudes and behaviors. The analysis proves that each party draws on a similar repertoire of linguistic strategies and rhetorical procedures when trying to identify the worlds of the sender and the recipient. The authors of the presented content focus the readers' attention, direct the way of perceiving the situation, and, by manipulating the image of reality, they evoke the designed emotions through word and image.
PL
Przedmiotem artykułu są werbalne (artykuły prasowe) i niewerbalne (fotografia prasowa) techniki kontrolowania tematu uchodźców, imigrantów i migrantów oraz strategie zarządzania emocjami na przykładzie materiałów prasowych. Analiza odwołuje się do zaproponowanego przez Kennetha Burke’a pojęcia identyfikacji. Identyfikacja z partnerem dialogu jest zjawiskiem, którego efektem może być ujednolicenie wizji świata proponowanej odbiorcy przez nadawcę. Przedstawiona w pracy analiza tekstu oraz towarzyszących mu zdjęć wskazuje strategie narracyjne, które prowadzą do postulowanego przez Burke’a zjawiska konsubstancjalności. Jej rezultatem są m.in. pozytywne relacje z nadawcą komunikatu prasowego, wynikające z dodatniej oceny prezentowanych wartości autora i obrazu świata, prób naśladownictwa opinii, postaw i zachowań. Analiza dowodzi, że każda ze stron konfliktu czerpie z podobnego repertuaru strategii językowych i zabiegów retorycznych stosowanych do identyfikacji światów nadawcy i odbiorcy. Twórcy prezentowanych treści ogniskują uwagę czytelników, ukierunkowują sposób postrzegania sytuacji, a manipulując obrazem rzeczywistości, wzbudzają zaprojektowane emocje słowem i obrazem.
EN
Cynical speech is a proper form of manifestation of what we call cynicism. It takes the form of a persuasive strategy which assumes the achievement of the rhetorical consubstantiation of a cynical speaker and her/his auditorium. Cynical speech is a game that takes place between three sides: a cynical speaker posing as an immoralist, a moralist and an auditorium, the acquisition of which is the aim of both interlocutors. At the outset, the cynical speaker gives the identity of naive dilettantes’ to both the members of the auditorium and the moralist and then tries to persuade the audience to side with him and take on the role of the students of a cynical expert. This is what can be described as cynical modulation. In its course, the initial opposition of a professional versus dilettante turns into an opposition of master versus student, while the unattractive identity of a dilettante is transferred to a moralist. In this way, the speaker achieves what Kenneth Burke thinks is the right goal for any rhetorical act: the speaker’s consubstantiation with the auditorium. This process is presented based on the example of the disputes between Socrates, as a moralist on the one hand, and sophist-politicians Thrasymachus and Callicles, who personify the type of cynical speakers, on the other. The analysis of cynical speech carried out in the paper leads to an indication of some basic features of this way of speaking, as well as the relationship that exists between them and the content of viewpoints voiced by cynical speakers. These viewpoints have been described as aristocratic democratism and people’s anti-democratism. These are two forms of what has been described as the cynical counter-ideal. The adoption of these positions is an indirect expression of the same systematic ambiguity that lies in the form of cynical speaking, which belongs to the very essence of cynicism as a cultural phenomenon.
EN
This article discusses Kenneth Burke’s theory of the symbol, which considers the use of the sign as a specifically human activity associated with the formation of meaning. In Burke’s view, the symbol is a meaning-making device that can influence human action and thoughts, and therefore represents the key to understanding the nature of human communication. In this article, Burke’s ideas are compared to other sign-symbol theories — namely, the semiotics of Umberto Eco and Juri Lotman, Charles Sanders Peirce’s semeiotics, as well as Ernst Cassirer’s philosophy of symbolic forms —, with analysis on the way each of these theorists defines the nature of the symbol and its conventional acceptation, principle of identification, and the characteristics of the symbolisation process itself.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.