Among the three rhetorical tasks of the speaker, the plain style focuses on docere, i. It is why the plain style is sometimes associated with the judicial kind genus iudiciale , which consists of proving guilt or innocence. In an ideal situation, the judicial kind, practised in court speeches, focuses on the search of truth and establishing facts e.
However, as the accuser or the defender, each speaker strives to make plausible a particular version of the facts. If one extends the framework of the three rhetorical kinds outside its original applications, it is the judicial kind that fits the best the traditional mode of commu- nicating science. The declared goal of the exact sciences is indeed to seek the truth by establishing facts concerning nature and identifying cause and effect relations.
In the humanities and social sciences, the purpose is rather to argue in favour of various interpretations regarding cultural issues, including human motivations and actions. The interpretations are argued within different research paradigms e. Accord- ing to the traditional approach, scientific activity is based exclusively on reason. The implementation of this function helps to achieve the basic task of scientific activity, as formulated by Wilhelm von Humboldt: to know and to understand more.
The plain style — applied, in the cultural context of Greek rhetoric, in court speeches — meant arguing in a simple way, understandable for uneducated au- diences. If we expand the original rhetorical model to modern communication contexts, the plain style is characteristic of expressive communication, realized in such genres as diary, biography, and letter. In scientific communication, an expressive form of cog- nition is an essay,10 a genre that allows presenting a personal view of the world, un- restricted by the requirements of any method, expressed through unconstrained language, without any terminological discipline.
The conceptual category of current language is associated with common knowledge and practical reason. Therefore, the preference for colloquial language is also manifested in less expressive and more factual genres, for example texts of scientific popularization, as they require references to a shared experience, used as a steppingstone for presenting the less obvious forms of scientific cognition.
However, along with the specialization and professionalization of cognition and its procedures e. This applies to genres such as a scientific article or scientific monograph, whose declared intention is to present facts objectively.
Advanced skills of reasoning at a high level of abstraction, ability to create and understand scientific theories, knowledge of methodological criteria for their verification and falsification are required. In addition to these epistemic categories, Gajda also lists heuristic categories e.
In the scientific style, reasoning is formulated in adequate technical terms. Col- loquial speech is therefore supplanted by specialist terminology, applied in an as- cetic manner, without stylistic ornaments. Montaigne, Essais, Garnier, Paris [original ]; A.
Berardinelli, La forma del saggio. Sendyka, Nowoczesny esej. In translating that approach to style into rhetoric categories, Gajda framed style within categories which combine inventio and elocutio. Theories, Applications, Practices, vol. Kwiatkowska eds. Middle style in communicating scientific content The middle style genus medium is located between the plain style characterized by simplicity, factuality, dispassionate nature and the grand style which exploits emotionality and its impact on decision-making.
The middle style avoids collo- quialisms and commonality. The text is expected to attract attention and to delight the audience with its creative inventiveness especially in terms of decorativeness, i.
This is how the author accomplishes the purpose of delectare. Within the rhetorical framework, the middle style fits best the so-called cer- emonial oratory genus demonstrativum. The purpose of genus demonstrativum is to praise or blame from the perspective of values important to a group.
Since the values are known and shared by the group, no one needs convincing about their worth. Within the cultural universe of ancient rhetoric, the main genres of speech which employed the middle style were apologias e. By expanding the repertoire with literary genres, the middle style is characteristic of those literary forms in which artistry and formal invention count, such as poetry, avant-garde dramas and columns. As part of academic communication, this style is implemented in genres that express evaluation e.
According to their idealised frame, a teacher speaks as a representa- tive of generally shared social values which are generally agreed upon by society. What a teacher says does not seem controversial as the teacher only reports on that which had already been prov- en by scientists. Teachers also fulfil a social role which gives them an indisputable right to speak Ch.
Perelman, L. La nuova retorica, trans. Schick, M. Mayer, E. Barassi, Einaudi, Torino [original ], pp. The authors did not discuss the epideictic kind in relation to the middle style, which is why their remarks only applied to inventio.
Rhetorical Styles in Knowledge Communication 73 critical statements ; in showy genres the FameLab15 competition for scientists, or the well-known TED [Technology, Entertainment, Design] conference which may also include scientists popularizing science and in strictly scientific genres arti- cles, books.
The choice of the middle style instead of the plain style as a way of communicating scientific content indicates that the world of science appreciates not only cognitive quali- ties. According to the view, proclaimed e. This Enlightenment genre, whose introduction is attributed to a French writer, Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle, was aimed at explaining new scientific dis- coveries. The general public lacked proper education and therefore considered sci- ence unintelligible and boring.
The genre mainly fulfilled the function of delectare: the principal intention of authors was to ensure the attractiveness of the message, so they wrote in a vivid manner omitting any intellectually difficult areas and sim- plifying complex notions so as to offer a light, easy and pleasant reading.
Despite the popularity of many of those works, widely appreciated by readers,18 scientists criticised them for their numerous factual errors. Folia Litteraria Polonica , issue 1 31 , pp. One could identify two main methods of using the middle style in scientific communication.
Using the example of New Historicism communication practices, Peck MacDonald discusses it as […] an anecdotal style — one that is nonepistemic, not explicitly focused on disciplinary knowledge making […]. That is, scholars display prowess, privilege originality, and amplify on paradoxical themes. The other method of using the middle style in scientific communication is to fulfil both the purpose of docere and the purpose of delectare in a balanced man- ner, appropriate for the essence of the issue.
Peck MacDonald, p. Rhetorical Styles in Knowledge Communication 75 communication is commonly considered as Example: Work- focused discussion between employer and employee.
Like organizational communication, this too is sometimes seen as part of the general category of group communication, but much research has been focused specifically on communication within a family relationship. Family communication can be enhanced by the long-standing and close relationships among participants as well as the likelihood that families have shared heritage, similar values, and social rituals. Patterns differ in communication between spouses, between parent and child, among siblings, and within the wider family context.
Example: Conversation during a holiday meal. Additionally, some scholars identify a category of impersonal communication. This is a distinction between impersonal and interpersonal communication on the basis of the quality of the interaction. Impersonal communication is that which involves functional short-term exchanges such as might occur between a shopper and a salesman; the label of interpersonal is reserved for communication that functions in deeper and more meaningful relationships.
The process of interpersonal communication includes several stages over an extended life cycle. Communication scholar Mark Knapp has outlined one useful framework for understanding the coming-together process.
Note that these stages can be applied to personal friendships, romantic relationships, business encounters, and many other types of interaction. Likes or dislikes can be instantaneous, though many people have learned that first impressions may be misleading. This is the stage of intense friendships, close business partnerships, romantic commitments, and so on.
This may involve immediacy live, or so-called real time. It does not involve a primary context but instead uses technology to link the various parties in communication. Example: Two business colleagues using the telephone or e-mail. Example: Teleconference in a distance- learning class. Mediated communication offers the advantage that it allows people to communicate over a distance or throughout a time span that would not be possible in direct communication.
E-mail offers instantaneous global communication, and cell phones are highly mobile. Computer technology makes it possible for people to do their job without being physically present, allowing them to work from their home or from across the world.
Like direct communication, mediated communication may be formal or informal, personal or public. Feedback may be immediate or delayed. Machines even can assist in communication across language barriers more on that in Unit 5 on intercultural communication. This may be either real time or on a taped- delay basis, or it may be rooted in the usually recent past. Examples: Radio and television, newspapers and magazines. Most conversations of a standard five-step process of opening, built-up, substance, feedback, and closing.
Since a conversation is a two-way process, it involves various controls, many associated with conversational turns the changing of the speaker and listener role. Conversations can exist in both direct and mediated settings. Speech act: An intentional utterance made to achieve an intended goal. In an informal context, a speech act might be a promise made by a parent to his or her child.
A more formal example of a speech act is an interview given by a government leader with hopes of persuading voters. Communication competence: The ability to communicate in a socially acceptable way.
For more public situations, this involves the audience perception of the speaker in terms of vocal presentation, message control, command of language, physical appearance, and so on. Self-disclosure: Process of making internal revelations about oneself that others would be unlikely to know otherwise. While self-disclosure is an individual communication tactic, it invites reciprocity. Gender differences: Communication scholars have researched the varying ways men and women communicate, which often varies further among different cultures.
Some of the major differences are that men use report talk to share information or demonstrate knowledge, whereas women often use rapport talk to enhance relationships and share experiences.
Psychologists have observed that men and women who are androgynous in their communication styles rather than those who rely heavily on stereotypically masculine or feminine style are more successful in their interactions with others. Metacommunication: Communication about the act or process of communicating rather than focusing on the content of communication. For example, a couple that argues about how to spend their money is communicating.
A couple that discusses how they argue is engaging in metacommunication. The four quadrants of panes represents the different ways information can be seen and observed, both by oneself and by others. The open pane includes what everyone can see: your physical looks, occupation, economic and social situation, as well as what you say and write. The hidden pane includes information about yourself that you have not revealed to others: secrets, hopes, fantasies.
The blind pane is what others see in you that you cannot see: shortcoming, talents, faults. Finally, the unknown pane includes information that nobody yet knows: untapped potential, undiscovered interests.
Thus they can enhance communication and relationships. The problem with stereotypes is that, particularly when they negatively prejudge others, they make it difficult to correctly interpret information we see and hear.
Rather than accepting information at face value and interpreting the other in a favorable or neutral light, negative stereotypes lead us to presume the worst in others. This is an example of communication breakdown, a phenomenon in which the normal process of communication is thwarted because inappropriate and erroneous interpretations are given to incoming information.
We use stereotypes every day to make judgments about people. In commercial settings, stereotypes affect both who business people work with and how they structure business relationships. Stereotyping likewise plays a public role, such as diplomatic relationships between nations or the ethnic profiling that law-enforcement agencies use to identify who might be committing a crime. The various and overlapping types of small groups lead to various types of communication patterns.
These are built by people who are drawn together by a common task, such as students working together on a project or company employees assigned to a common job activity. The working of groups has been the subject of much study, particularly from the framework of organizational communication.
Leadership styles of small groups have been identified — generally in a three-part continuum ranging from high control authoritarian leaders through moderate control democratic leaders to low control laissez-faire leaders. This style is often characterized as insincere and patronizing, and when people realize that they have been played by a manipulator, they will not respond well to that person in future communications.
While some manipulation could come in useful in a customer-facing role where there is a need to calm down an irritated client, this style will lead to some clashes within teams or departments if one employee is using it consistently.
Where possible, a manipulative communicator should be steered into assertive communication. Manipulator knows what they want to achieve and has clear goals, they are just not taking the best path to get there. Each person will have a preferred method of communication, and endeavoring to use it can help make sure that you are effectively getting your message across. No matter what your style is, you can adjust it to fit these four types, depending on the style of the person you are communicating with.
It may take some practice, but it will make you a much more effective communicator. They want quantifiable information and disregard emotional statements as too vague or unimportant. This means that they would prefer a statement such as " this quarter, sales are up 8.
When communicating with this type of person, do your research first! Lay out the numbers, then follow up with your request. The upside of this is that an analytical communicator is good at looking at issues logically. If an analytical communicator is not performing well, you could bring them the numbers that show where they are lacking, and they will accept that they need to improve in those areas. The downside is that they can be perceived as cold or emotionless.
They may make colleagues feel uncomfortable, or dismiss those who do not communicate in the same way. This can cause some issues within teams who have disparate styles of communication, such as personal communicators. They also might take too much time analyzing, calculating, and checking details, leading to a slow response time to issues, and resulting in lost opportunities. They are quick to see the broad picture and can easily leap to the conclusion, sometimes offering great insights as to how best to complete a project.
The upside is that this type of communicator understands ideas quickly, and is already proposing solutions to possible challenges. They can often come up with out-of-the-box ideas and enjoy challenging themselves and others.
The downside is that this impatience can lead to mistakes. Intuitive communicators hate having to sit through the boring details, but by skipping that, they risk missing crucial information. They also will chafe at communicators who need to explain ideas or projects step-by-step, like functional communicators. The functional communicator lives on the other side of the spectrum from the intuitive communicator.
They prefer to walk through the steps of the process, outlining each one until they reach the conclusion and can tie it all up in one neat package. They are detail-oriented, good at understanding which processes will be the most helpful to ensure success, and they can be trusted to create functional timelines, allocate tasks, and run projects.
Using a sentence like " We want to create an improved user manual. We would like you to write the outline, consult with the developers, hire a technical writer, and edit the finished product. Can you take care of that? The upside of a functional communicator is their detail-oriented mind will be sure not to miss any important steps.
They find it easy to focus on implementing projects and have a native understanding of what it will take to accomplish. Their thorough nature will make sure that the project runs successfully. The downside of this is that their dogged focus on the process, improving each step and stage, can sometimes lead to them losing sight of the big picture and not accomplishing the actual goals of the project.
Their plodding, step-by-step style can also bore the audience, especially if a functional communicator is paired with an intuitive communicator.
0コメント