Aristoteles enthymem: slutledningsformer eller meningsskapande processer?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v14i53.169Nyckelord:
enthymeme, Aristotle, discursive process, coherence, toposAbstract
Aristoteles enthymem har ofta beskrivits som en syllogism som antingen saknar en premiss eller som bygger på det osäkra. Det är tolkningar som har växt fram i relief mot logiken och som får konsekvenser för vad vi ser och inte ser när vi studerar mänsklig kommunikation. I artikeln undersöks några sådan tolkningar av enthymemet. Dessa ställs sedan mot ett alternativt betraktelsesätt där enthymemet ses som en diskursiv process där talarens resonemang aktiverar lyssnarens meningsstrukturer så att det uppstår någon form av koherens.
Referenser
Ad Herennium: de ratione dicendi ad C. Herennium. Retorikförlaget, Åstorp: 2009.
Anaximenes. Rhetorica ad Alexandrum. London: 1937.
Aristoteles. Den nikomachiska etiken. Daidalos, Göteborg: 1988.
Aristoteles. On Rhetoric. Loeb, Harvard University Press, London: 1994.
Aristoteles. Retorik. Museum Tusculanums Forlag, København: 1991.
Aristoteles. The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: 1960.
Aristotle. The Categories; On Interpretation; Prior Analytics. Harvard University Press London: 1983.
Aristotle. On Rhetoric: a Theory of Civic Discourse. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1991.
Aristotle. Posterior Analytics. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1997.
Aristotle. Prior Analytics. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oseo/instance.00262103
Aristotle. The Rhetoric of Aristotle: with a Commentary. University Press, Cambridge: 1877.
Arnauld, Antoine och Pierre Nicole. Logic, or The Art of Thinking. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166768
Baldwin, Charles Sears. Ancient Rhetoric and Poetic. The Macmillan company, New York: 1924.
Billig, Michael. Arguing and Thinking: a Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1996.
Bitzer, Lloyd. ”Aristotle’s Enthymeme Revisited.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 45 (1959). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335635909382374
Black, Max. Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.: 1962. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501741326
Booth, Wayne C. Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent. Chicago University Press, Chicago: 1974.
Braet, Antoine C. ”Ethos, Pathos and Logos in Aristotle’s ‘Rhetoric’: A Re-examination.” Argumentation 6 (1992). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154696
Brinton, Alan. ”Pathos and the ‘Appeal to Emotion’: An Aristotelian Analysis.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 5 (1988).
Catana, Leo. Vico and Literary Mannerism : a Study in the Early Vico and his Idea of Rhetoric and Ingenuity. Peter Lang, New York: 1999.
Cicero, Marcus Tullius. On the Ideal Orator (De oratore). Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780195091984.book.1
Conley, Thomas. ”The Enthymeme in Perspective.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 70 (1984). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638409383687
Conley, Thomas. ”’Logical Hylomorphism’ and Aristole’s Koinoi Topoi.” Central States Speech Journal 29 (1978). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10510977809367962
Cronkhite, Gary. ”The Enthymeme as Deductive Rhetorical Argument.” Western Speech nr. 30 (1966).
De Quincey, Thomas. ”Rhetoric”, i: The Collected Writings of Thomas De Quincey. Edinburgh: 1890.
Eemeren, Frans van, och Piet Houtlosser. ”Strategic Maneuvering: A Synthetic Recapitulation.” Argumentation 20 (2006). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-007-9037-z
Eemeren, Frans van, Tjark Kruiger, och Rob Grootendorst. Handbook of Argumentation Theory: a Critical Survey of Classical Backgrounds and Modern Studies. Foris, Dordrecht: 1987. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110846096
Ehninger, Douglas, och Wayne Brockriede. Decision by Debate. Dodd, Mead and Co, New York: 1978.
Fahnestock, Jeanne. ”Aristotle and Theories of Figuration”, i: Gross and Walzer (red), Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 2000.
Fahnestock, Jeanne. Rhetorical Figures in Science. Oxford University Press, New York: 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195117509.001.0001
Farrell, Thomas. ”Aristotle’s Enthymeme as Tacit Reference”, i: Gross and Walzer (red), Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 2000.
Fisher, Walter. ”Uses of the Enthymeme.” Speech Teacher, nr. 13 (1964). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03634526409377370
Gaines, Robert. ”The Contemporary Art of Practical Discourse”, i: Gross and Walzer (red), Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 2000.
Garver, Eugene. Aristotle’s Rhetoric: an Art of Character. University of Chicago Press, Chicago; London: 1994.
Grassi, Ernesto. Rhetoric as Philosophy: the Humanist Tradition. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 2001.
Grimaldi, William. ”Studies in the Philosophy of Aristotle s Rhetoric.” Hermes 25 (1972).
Gross, Alan G. The Rhetoric of Science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass: 1990.
Hellspong, Lennart. Konsten att tala: handbok i praktisk retorik. Studentlitteratur, Lund: 2004.
Holmberg, Carl. ”Dialectical Rhetoric and Rhetorical Rhetoric.” Philosophy and Rhetoric, nr. 10 (1977).
Ijsseling, Samuel. Rhetoric and Philosophy in Conflict: an Historical Survey. M. Nijhoff, The Hague: 1976. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1037-5
Isokrates. Isocrates: in three volumes. 2. Harvard University Press, London, Cambridge: 1929.
Jackson, Sally, och Scott Jacobs. ”Structure of Conversational Argument: Pragmatic Bases for the Enthymeme.” Quarterly Journal of Speech, nr. 66 (1980). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638009383524
Johnstone, Christopher Lyle. ”An Aristotelian Trilogy: Ethics, Rhetoric, Politics, and the Search for Moral Truth.” Philosophy of Rhetoric, nr. 20 (1980).
Kennedy, George Alexander. Aristotle: On Rhetoric: a Theory of Civic Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Kuhn, Thomas. De vetenskapliga revolutionernas struktur. Thales, Stockholm: 1997.
Lakoff, George, och Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live by. University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001
Lanham, Richard. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms: a Guide for Students of English Literature. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles: 1991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520912045
Lanigan, Richard. ”Enthymeme: The Rhetorical Species of Aristotle’s Syllogism.” Southern Speech Communication Journal, nr. 39 (1973). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10417947409372230
Lund Klujeff, Marie. ”Retoriske figurer og stil som argumentation.” Rhetorica Scandinavica 45 (2008). DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/ZXKT8229
Lunsford, Andrea, och Lisa Ede. ”On Distinctions Between Classical and Modern Rhetoric”, i: Connors, Ede and Lundsford (red) Essays on Classical Rhetoric and Modern Discourse. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 1984.
Madden, Edward H. ”Aristotle’s Treatment of Probability and Signs.” Philosophy of Science 24, nr. 2 (1957) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/287530
McBurney, James Howard. ”The Place of the Enthymeme in Rhetorical Theory”, Speech Monographs nr. 3 (1936) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03637753609374841
McCloskey, Deirdre. The Rhetoric of Economics. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wis.: 1998.
Miller, Arthur, och John Bee. ”Enthymemes: Body and Soul” Philosophy and Rhetoric nr. 5:4 (1972)
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Samlade skrifter, band 2. Otidsenliga betraktelser I-IV / Efterlämnade skrifter 1872-1875. Symposion, Eslöv: 2005.
Nussbaum, Martha Craven. Känslans skärpa, tankens inlevelse: essäer om etik och politik. Symposion, Stockholm: 1995.
Perelman, Chaim. Retorikens imperium: retorik och argumentation. Brutus Östlings bokförl. Symposion, Eslöv: 2004.
Perelman, Chaim, och Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric: Treatise on Argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame: 1969.
Piaget, Jean. Språk och tanke hos barnet. Liber Förlag, Malmö: 1984.
Quandahl, Ellen. ”Aristotle s Rhetoric: Reinterpreting Invention.” Rhetoric Review, nr. 4 (1986). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198609359115
Quintilian. The Institutio Oratoria. Harvard University Press; W. Heinemann, Cambridge, Mass, London: 1920.
Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius. Den fulländade talaren. Wahlström & Widstrand, Stockholm: 2002.
Selander, Staffan, Lennart Hellspong, och Maria Wolrath Söderberg. ”Final Report for the Project Rhetoric in Teacher Training for Scientific and Technical Professions (116/G03).” NSHU www.nshu.se/download/4728/116g03slutrapportselander.pdf.
Sigrell, Anders. Att övertyga mellan raderna: en retorisk studie om underförståddheter i modern politisk argumentation. Rhetor förlag, Åstorp: 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/XUUY4379
Tindale, Christopher. Acts of Arguing: A Rhetorical Model of Argument. State University of New York Press: 1999.
Walker, Jeffrey. ”The Body of Persuasion: A Theory of the Enthymeme.” College English, nr. 56 (1994). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/378216
Walton, Douglas och Fabrizio Macagno. “Enthymemes, Argumentation Schemes and Topics” Logique & Analyse 205 (2009). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034
Van Eemeren, Frans, och Rob Grootendorst. Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale: 1992.
Wheelwright, Philip Ellis. Metaphor & Reality. Indiana University Press, Bloomington: 1975.
Vico, Giambattista. On the Study Methods of Our Time. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.: 1990. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501732591
Wolrath Söderberg, Maria. ”En metaforisk didaktik”, i: Geer and Malmbjer (red), Språk på tvärs. Stockholm: 2004.
Wolrath Söderberg, Maria. Finns det genvägar till klokhet? Retorik som konsten att överväga. Studentlitteratur, Lund: 2003.
##submission.downloads##
Publicerad
Referera så här
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Copyright (c) 2024 Rhetorica Scandinavica
Detta verk är licensierat under en Creative Commons Erkännande-Ickekommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0 Internationell-licens.
Open Access; CC Erkännande-IckeKommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0
