UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Informal argumentation : toward a unified foundation for teaching composition King, Amanda T. 1983

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1983_A8 K56.pdf [ 6.32MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095782.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095782-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095782-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095782-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095782-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095782-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095782-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095782-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095782.ris

Full Text

INFORMAL  ARGUMENTATION:  TOWARD A U N I F I E D FOUNDATION FOR TEACHING COMPOSITION By Amanda T. K i n g B.A., T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1 9 8 1  A T H E S I S SUBMITTED I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of E n g l i s h  We a c c e p t t h i s  t h e s i s as conforming  to the required  standard  THE U N I V E R S I T Y OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA O c t o b e r 1983 © A m a n d a T. K i n g , 1983  In p r e s e n t i n g  this thesis i n partial  f u l f i l m e n t o f the  requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make it  f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference  and study.  I further  agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the head o f my department o r by h i s o r her r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  Iti s  understood t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain  s h a l l not be allowed without my  permission.  Department o f  English  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date  October 1?,  1983  Columbia  written  ii Abstract  S i n c e the b i r t h of composition emphasis has  been on the  apply w r i t i n g s k i l l s .  i n the n i n e t e e n t h  " p r a c t i c a l " t a s k of e n s u r i n g  Yet  i s u l t i m a t e l y to n e g l e c t  teaching  to have students  o n l y i n f o r m a t i o n but a l s o o p i n i o n . should be to show students  The  that students  practise s k i l l s  the e t h i c a l r a t i o n a l e behind  the world  Perhaps the worst e f f e c t of the  Recently,  composition  not  class  l i n k between  issues. (that  on forms and models above a l l e l s e )  i s t h a t w r i t i n g ceases to be a u n i f i e d , o r g a n i c process opinions.  sake  " s k i l l s o n l y " approach to composition  i s , when i n s t r u c t i o n a l a t t e n t i o n i s focused  i d e a s and  be able to  f o r t h e i r own  o v e r a l l purpose of any  of h u m a n i s t i c  classroom  w r i t i n g : to communicate  t h a t w r i t i n g s k i l l s are a v i t a l  themselves as i n d i v i d u a l s and  century,  both r h e t o r i c i a n s and  of c r e a t i n g and  composition  proposed frameworks c o n s i s t i n g of s e t s of u n i f i e d p r i n c i p l e s ;  shaping  t h e o r i s t s have  however, few  such  frameworks have been a p p l i e d s y s t e m a t i c a l l y to t e a c h i n g w r i t i n g . The  r a t i o n a l e behind  e t h i c a l content to  t h i s paper i s to address the problem of r e i n t r o d u c i n g  to the w r i t i n g c l a s s by r e s t o r i n g a measure of  "opinionable" w r i t i n g .  One  way  of working towards t h i s g o a l i s to adopt  i n f o r m a l argumentative framework f o r t e a c h i n g composition: p r i n c i p l e s and a l l prose and and  supporting  respectability  t h a t i s , a s e t of  s t r a t e g i e s t h a t acknowledges the o p i n i o n a b l e n a t u r e t h a t s y s t e m a t i c a l l y guides  s y n t h e s i s of i n f o r m a t i o n .  purpose of t h i s paper, t h e r e f o r e , i s to d i s c o v e r the t h e o r e t i c a l of i n f o r m a l argumentation, p r i m a r i l y by argument as forms, k i n d s , and the  of  a w r i t e r towards d i s c o v e r i n g  i d e a s through i n d u c t i o n and  an  virtually opinions The  main  principles  t r a c i n g the development of e x p o s i t i o n and  aims of w r i t i n g from the e i g h t e e n t h  century  until  present. Chapter One  explores  L o g i c of Rene D e s c a r t e s ,  the o r i g i n s of e x p o s i t i o n and  i t s r o o t s i n the  New  F r a n c i s Bacon, and John Locke.  Adam Smith and  George  Campbell,  two  eighteenth-century  communication—also  rhetoricians, realized  needed to adopt, a t l e a s t p a r t l y ,  which the e m p i r i c i s t s w i e l d e d  so s u c c e s s f u l l y ;  t o communicate s c i e n t i f i c m a t t e r s . objectivity, he and  and  simplicity  Campbell,  otherwise  Smith's p r i n c i p l e s  f o r h i s p a r t , equipped  o f s y n t h e s i s and  and  and  rhetoric  e x p o s i t i o n , argument, and  these the  persuasion  the p r a c t i c a l t o 1968,  for unifying  skills.  Chapter  Two  through and  and  i m i t a t i o n s of t e x t s w h i c h p r e s e n t  f r o m 1917  to t r u t h .  shows.  A survey  their  logic  were u n i t e d i n  of t e x t s from  Campbell d e l i n e a t e d .  ease of t e a c h i n g through  The  m a j o r i t y of  r u l e and  model;  a t h e o r e t i c a l or e t h i c a l framework tend  foundation  d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s continues w e l l i n t o the t w e n t i e t h century.  classrooms;  r a t h e r t h a n f a c t s , has 1969,  t e a m ; and  lost  argument has  By  form of  been r e l e g a t e d emotions  a l l respectibility.  a year h e r a l d i n g a widespread  theory i n composition  o c c a s i o n , and  p e r s u a s i o n , b e c a u s e o f i t s r e l i a n c e on  lost virtually  to  Three, w h i c h examines t e x t s p u b l i s h e d  r e v e a l s t h a t t h e l o s s o f an i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i v e  to the c o l l e g e debating  of  l o s s of the i n f o r m a l  d i s c o u r s e most e m p h a s i z e d i n c o m p o s i t i o n  regain their  philosophical  Thus, the  e t h i c a l concerns  become t h e a i m ,  rhetorical  issues accurately  p a r t of an o r g a n i c d i s c o u r s e i n  the 1930's, e x p o s i t i o n i n p a r t i c u l a r has  After  of e x p o s i t i o n ; yet  t r a c e s the gradual c o m p a r t m e n t a l i z a t i o n  foundations which Smith  t e x t s emphasize p r a c t i c a l i t y  stress  precision,  to characterize nineteenth-century  t e x t s , as C h a p t e r  the 1850's t o the t u r n of the c e n t u r y  argumentative  of c l a r i t y ,  unable  rhetoric.  These p r i n c i p l e s g e n e r a l l y f a i l e d composition  methods  r h e t o r i c w o u l d be  rhetoric with a  passion together give r i s e  i n d u c t i o n together w i t h these  eighteenth-century  scientific  of communicating h u m a n i s t i c  f o u n d a t i o n i n w h i c h p r e s e n t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n i s one which understanding  t h e new  of d i c t i o n are the cornerstones  a l s o emphasized the importance honestly.  t h a t r h e t o r i c — t h e a r t of  awareness of the r o l e  t e a c h i n g , a r g u m e n t and  ground i n the w r i t i n g  classroom.  of  persuasion begin  Chapter  to  Four describes  how  iv current theorists and F r a n k  (Stephen Toulmin,  Chaim Perelman,  D ' A n g e l o , t o name t h e m a j o r o n e s ) v i e w  informal argumentative  processes  R i c h a r d Young, James  Kinneavy  t h e r o l e o f argument and o f  i n u n i f y i n g e x p o s i t i o n , argument, and  persuasion. In  the f i n a l  c h a p t e r , t h i s paper  attempts  e x t e n t have c u r r e n t c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s adopted  t o answer t h e q u e s t i o n — " T o informal argumentative  principles?"  A s u r v e y o f f o u r t e e n t e x t s p u b l i s h e d b e t w e e n 1969 a n d 1983 r e v e a l s t h a t of  t h e most p o p u l a r and l o n g - l i v e d  a d h e r e t o t h e same  some i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i v e  principles  several  exposition-argument-  p e r s u a s i o n model as d i d t h e i r p r e d e c e s s o r s o f t h e 1890's. adopted  what  O t h e r s , however, have  (such as t h e e t h i c a l  stance  which  p o s i t s w r i t i n g as a v e h i c l e o f o p i n i o n about i s s u e s , o r t h e view o f i n v e n t i o n as a primarily  inductive/synthesizing process).  T h i s chapter concludes w i t h s u g g e s t i o n s , i n t h e form of a classroom for  i n c o r p o r a t i n g i n f o r m a l argumentative  E n g l i s h c l a s s which  to  particularly  combines c o m p o s i t i o n and l i t e r a t u r e .  teaching writing w i l l instructor:  principles,  help f u l f i l l  one o f t h e p r i m e  i n a freshman  Such an approach  purposes.  to  goals of a w r i t i n g  providing students not only with s k i l l s , but with a v i t a l  the world of e t h i c a l  outline,  connection  V  T a b l e of Contents  Abstract  11  T a b l e of Contents  . .  v  Introduction  1  I.  The Foundations of I n f o r m a l Argumentation  3  II.  Foundations L o s t  20  I I I . P r e c e p t s Without P r i n c i p l e s  45  IV.  R e d i s c o v e r i n g I n f o r m a l Argumentation  67  V.  I n f o r m a l Argumentation  84  and T e a c h i n g Composition  Appendix A  103  Appendix B  104  Bibliography  106  1 Introduction  One o f t h e m o s t s e r i o u s f a u l t s i n t e a c h i n g w r i t i n g a t t h e c o l l e g e l e v e l i s a general f a i l u r e  on t h e p a r t o f i n s t r u c t o r s and t e x t b o o k w r i t e r s  an o v e r a l l , u n i f i e d  r a t i o n a l e or purpose f o r l e a r n i n g w r i t i n g  to incorporate  skills.  Since the  n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , c o m p o s i t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n has emphasized t h e " p r a c t i c a l " of  making sure students absorb  and a p p l y v a r i o u s s k i l l s .  c o m p o s i t i o n t e a c h i n g has d i v o r c e d students from writing:  Having  the e t h i c a l r a t i o n a l e behind a l l  f o r changing  that which the  some e x i s t i n g  state.  Johnny produce a p i e c e o f e x p o s i t o r y w r i t i n g , and t h e n a p i e c e o f  argumentative on,  I n doing so,  t o c o m m u n i c a t e , w i t h a minimum o f m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g ,  w r i t e r b e l i e v e s i s good, t r u e , o r n e c e s s a r y  idea  writing,  and n e x t a s h o r t passage o f d e s c r i p t i v e w r i t i n g ,  j u s t f o r t h e sake of e x e r c i s i n g  these  skills,  r u n . I t o n l y s e r v e s t o show J o h n n y t h a t w r i t i n g meaningless  as he'd always  suspected,  and thus  i s often f u t i l e  i s really to hasten  and so  i n the long  as mechanical  and  t h e day t h a t he n o t o n l y  can't w r i t e , b u t won't.  P e r h a p s he c a n ' t w r i t e b e c a u s e no o n e h a s h i n t e d why he  should t r y : w r i t i n g w i l l  h e l p connect  humanistic world of e t h i c a l Nothing understanding so-called  of t h i s  r a t i o n a l e behind  "modes" o f d i s c o u r s e w h i c h  are taught  the s k i l l s  focuses  skills  and s t u d e n t s '  more t h a n t h e t e a c h i n g o f t h e  i n s t r u c t i o n a l a t t e n t i o n on forms o f  When e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , a n d p e r s u a s i o n i n  a s mere s k i l l s ,  i n s t r u c t o r s and s t u d e n t s a l i k e  acknowledge t h a t every aspect  of w r i t i n g  b e g i n n i n g t o see t h i s problem  i n a l l i t s enormity  our  can) t o the  purposes.  d i s r u p t s t h e l i n k between l e a r n i n g w r i t i n g  d i s c o u r s e above a l l e l s e . particular  him (as nothing else r e a l l y  i s unified.  We a r e o n l y now  and e r r o r .  f a i l to really  However, b a s i n g  c o m p o s i t i o n c l a s s e s o n a common f r a m e w o r k f o r d i s c o u r s e i s a d i r e c t means o f  working  towards c o r r e c t i n g  the error.  a s p e c t s o f d i s c o u r s e have been proposed  A l t h o u g h many f r a m e w o r k s u n i t i n g v a r i o u s by r h e t o r i c i a n s and c o m p o s i t i o n  2 t h e o r i s t s , v e r y few  have been w i d e l y  T h i s p a p e r , t h e n , has origins the  two  incorporated i n practise.  main purposes.  of the development m a i n l y  first  o f e x p o s i t o r y and  s e c o n d i s t o show t h a t t h e p r i n c i p l e s g o v e r n i n g  c o n s t i t u t e a framework f o r a l l prose, I  The  define informal argumentation  a w r i t e r gathers  a n a l y s i s ; then  are opinionable i n nature,  and  d i s c o v e r i n g , a n a l y z i n g , and  My  in effect,  first  and  forms of w r i t i n g  can  informal  chapter  i s the idea that v i r t u a l l y  t h a t the process  opinions i n writing:  j u s t a t o o l f o r conveying  discuss primarily  of the e i g h t e e n t h  t h e o r i g i n s and  t r a c e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f e x p o s i t i o n , argument, and  demonstrating  from a general f a i l u r e Chapter Four w i l l to  t o put  conclude  s e c o n d and  persuasion  i n the e a r l y to  i n f o r m a l argumentative  principles  w h i l e the f i n a l o f how  they  chapter  foundation.  evaluate  how  we  can  as  mid-twentieth  into  recent  t r e a t e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , and  w i t h an o u t l i n e p r o p o s i n g  i n f o r m a l argumentative  will  of  third  e x a m i n e s e v e r a l m o d e r n t h e o r i e s a b o u t a r g u m e n t and  teaching composition,  will  and  The  information.  t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b e t w e e n them i n t e x t s  t e x t s from the standpoint and  century.  century  prose  of  principles  chapters  "forms of d i s c o u r s e " i n the n i n e t e e n t h  these.  d e f i n e d a b o v e i s a l s o a means o f  p r e s e n t i n g o n e ' s own i s not  sequence,  a l l pieces of  t o t h e end  century,  time  s y n t h e s i z e s a t h e s i s or o p i n i o n from  that writing will  inductively:  relations  definition,  e x p o s i t i o n up will  argumentation.  of d i s c o v e r i n g o p i n i o n s  comparison, c o n t r a s t , analogy,  C e n t r a l to i n f o r m a l argumentation  realizing,  those  the  writing,  p i e c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n ; f o r m s s u c h "common s e n s e "  b e t w e e n t h e s e p i e c e s as e n u m e r a t i o n , and  argumentative  a framework I c a l l  as a p r o c e s s  i s to explore  teach w r i t i n g  results practice. i t s relation composition persuasion from  an  3  I.  To  The  Foundations  of I n f o r m a l  t r a c e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f e x p o s i t i o n , we  rhetoricians  (Adam S m i t h  and  George Campbell,  Argumentation  need f i r s t  by  gained  e m p i r i c a l methods t o q u i c k l y - e x p a n d i n g  audiences.^  t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , f o r ways o f c o m m u n i c a t i n g new  Essentially,  these  two  d i d a c t i c d i s c o u r s e , and w r i t i n g w i t h reason;  the accumulation both  w o u l d deny t h a t t h i s  expository Smith w i t h new  and  Campbell attempted  t o o l s of reasoning  until  the middle  l o g i c i a n s r e l i e d mainly  and  1555,  rhetoric  connections  proves  knowledge  general  to attempt  to  S m i t h ' s n a r r a t i v e and  between f a c t s  form  the  a g e n e r a l i z a t i o n or p r i n c i p l e .  i s of major importance  to reanimate  rhetorical  No  i n modern  t h e o r y and  t h a t , i n the e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , had A very b r i e f Logic w i l l  a l r e a d y become  l o o k a t t h e s t a t e o f l o g i c and  h i g h l i g h t how  fundamentally  philosophy.  on d e d u c t i v e on  or s c h o l a s t i c reasoning  the proper  P e t e r Ramus's i n c i s i v e  c o n c e p t i o n and  not  change i t s s c h o l a s t i c e m p h a s i s , and  and  delivery only, s k i l l s R h e t o r i c was  r a p i d b i r t h and  not  with l i t t l e  t o be  burgeoning  two  substance  veracity. from  logic  but  r h e t o r i c w i t h s t y l e , memory,  to support  them.2  r e u n i t e d w i t h a method of r e a s o n i n g u n t i l o f t h e new  truth;  propo-  arrangement  things: i t simplified  i t left  as  to a r r i v e at  e x p r e s s i o n of  r e m o v a l o f i n v e n t i o n and  of l o g i c accomplished  did  rhetoric  t h e means o f  t h e i r a n a l y s i s against e s t a b l i s h e d t r u t h s to prove t h e i r  to the realm  practice  of t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y , r h e t o r i c i a n s as w e l l  t h e e m p h a s i s i n i n q u i r y was  After  o f and  c r e a t e s and  i n q u i r y c h a n g e d i n s c i e n c e and  sitions,  s e e how  the  writing.  t h e b i r t h o f t h e New  Up  shall  s o r t of reasoning  de r i g e u r f o r t h e s c i e n c e s . before  We  why  Campbell's system rooted i n mental a s s o c i a t i o n s , l i n k  a r g u m e n t s by w h i c h one one  l e a r n e d and  f i g u r e s were the f i r s t  p e r f e c t e m p i r i c a l methods f o r r h e t o r i c .  and  s p e c i f i c a l l y ) responded to  need, c r i t i c a l through  t o l o o k a t how  l o g i c o f Rene D e s c a r t e s ,  after  the  F r a n c i s Bacon,  and  4 John Locke. be  able  By  this  to w i e l d  altogether  time,  t h i s new  logic;  become i m p e r a t i v e i t s only  a s p e c t s of  S m i t h and  t h e new  o r s c h o l a s t i c i s m , saw propositions r e g a r d e d as  against the  decided that  to the  t h e y saw  t r u t h as  systematic  formation  of  t h i s n e e d , we  discoverable  the  However,  new  chiefly  Descartes, l o g i c and  e x a m i n a t i o n of  of p r o p o s i t i o n s  through the B a c o n , and  was  the  lose  before  The  old  logic,  t e s t i n g of  Locke  new  (generally  i t s a p p l i c a t i o n s to  o n e ' s own  and  must n o t e w h i c h  as m o s t i m p o r t a n t t o r h e t o r i c .  e s t a b l i s h e d ones.  "inventors"  the  area of e t h i c s .  Campbell recognized  logic  that r h e t o r i c respond to  a l t e r n a t i v e would have been to  i t s remaining i n f l u e n c e i n the  e x a m i n i n g how  leading  i t had  e x p e r i e n c e s and  inquiry) observations  s o l e means o f d i s c o v e r i n g  new  knowledge. Rene D e s c a r t e s '  Discourse  dissatisfaction with s t a t e m e n t s on  this  on M e t h o d ( 1 6 3 7 ) was  s c h o l a s t i c l o g i c , and  P a r t Two  intended  t o e x p r e s s one  contains  one  of h i s  man's  strongest  subject:-'  . . . b u i l d i n g s p l a n n e d and e x e c u t e d by a s i n g l e a r c h i t e c t a r e u s u a l l y more b e a u t i f u l and b e t t e r p r o p o r t i o n e d t h a n t h o s e w h i c h o t h e r s h a v e a t t e m p t e d t o i m p r o v e . . . .Thus I came t o t h i n k t h a t t h e s c i e n c e s f o u n d i n b o o k s , a t l e a s t t h o s e whose r e a s o n i n g s a r e made up m a i n l y o f p l a u s i b l e a r g u m e n t s and y i e l d no d e m o n s t r a t i o n s , b u i l t u p , a s t h e y a r e , l i t t l e by l i t t l e , f r o m t h e o p i n i o n s o f many d i f f e r e n t c o n t r i b u t o r s , do n o t g e t so n e a r t h e t r u t h as t h e simple r e a s o n i n g s w h i c h a man o f g o o d s e n s e , m a k i n g u s e o f h i s n a t u r a l powers, can c a r r y out. . . D e s c a r t e s proposed an  a l t e r a t i v e to the  but  emphasized t h a t h i s "four  all  i n t e l l i g e n c e s . His  "will  be  of  some u s e  t r u e which I d i d not  numerous p r e c e p t s o f  rules for reasoning"  m o d e s t h o p e , a i r e d i n P a r t One,  t o some p e o p l e . "  The  e v i d e n t l y know t o be  i n t o p a r t s , o r a n a l y s i s , o f a p r o b l e m "as solution"; simplest,  the and  third  calls  b u i l d i n g up  e n u m e r a t i o n s so  are  for arranging  first  was  necessarily suited that  this  such"; h i s second r e q u i r e s may  be  required  t h o u g h t s i n an  r e v i e w s so g e n e r a l ,  the  to  method  r u l e i s "to accept nothing  t o t h e more c o m p l e x ; and  c o m p l e t e , and  not  scholastic logic,  the  as  division  f o r i t s adequate  order  beginning  with  f o u r t h , " t o make  that I should  be  assured  of  the  5 omitting  nothing."  For  the purpose of examining  critical  rule i s the third:  inductive reasoning. for  rhetoric's  l a t e r adoption  a method o f i n q u i r y c a l l i n g  T h i s r u l e c a n be s a i d  t h e new l o g i c a n d , c o n c e r n i n g  o f t h e new l o g i c , t h e  i n large part f o r  to constitute the basic  w r i t t e n discourse, a cornerstone  foundation of informal  argumentation. Not  much e a r l i e r  than D e s c a r t e s , F r a n c i s Bacon had w r i t t e n The D i g n i t y and  Advancement o f L e a r n i n g extolling inquiry  (1605),  e s s e n t i a l l y a p r o p a g a n d a p i e c e f o r James I  the value of philosophy  i n t o them.  and t h e s c i e n c e s and t h e need f o r f u r t h e r  B a c o n c o n t r i b u t e d a s much t o t h e C a r t e s i a n f o u n d a t i o n ,  as h e d i d t o e s t a b l i s h i n g a new u n i v e r s a l m e t h o d o f i n q u i r y . e x i s t i n g methods o f i n q u i r y and c a l l i n g  Criticizing  f o r a new o n e , B a c o n p r o m o t e d i n The  A d v a n c e m e n t o f L e a r n i n g h i s own novum o r g a n u m a s t h e " g e n u i n e . interpreting nature"—no forthcoming.^  C a r t e s i a n p r e t e n s i o n s o f modesty e i t h e r i n t e n d e d o r  Bacon allowed  that the p r i n c i p l e s  o f s c i e n c e " m i g h t be  f o r m e d b y t h e common i n d u c t i o n , o r by s e n s e a n d e x p e r i e n c e . everywhere a n e c e s s i t y f o r employing in  . .method o f  t h e more g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s ,  justly  . .there i s  a g e n u i n e and c o r r e c t i n d u c t i o n , as w e l l  as i n t h e i n f e r i o r  p r o p o s i t i o n s " (Book F i v e , Ch.  2). For Bacon, n a t u r a l h i s t o r y , best p o t e n t i a l f o r such  o r " t h e works and a r t s o f n a t u r e , " s u p p l i e d t h e  a m e t h o d o f g a i n i n g new k n o w l e d g e .  h i s t o r y as "a c o l l e c t i o n o f m a t e r i a l s f o r a j u s t and s o l i d philosophy not  i s t o be g r o u n d e d "  i n t e r e s t e d merely  intelligences; use  He saw n a t u r a l i n d u c t i o n , whereon  ( B o o k Two, C h . 3 ) . We c a n now s e e t h a t B a c o n was  i n proposing  new l o g i c  f o rcertain isolated,  persevering  a n y o n e w i t h p h i l o s o p h i c a l p r e t e n s i o n s , h e c h a l l e n g e d , m u s t make  of inductive reasoning,  the f r u i t  " o f t h e m i n d o f i t s own n a t u r a l  motion"  ( B o o k F i v e , C h . 2 ) : t h e u n i v e r s a l means by w h i c h a l l men s h o u l d d i s c o v e r a l l truths.  6 We s h o u l d a l s o n o t e t h a t B a c o n saw t h e n e e d f o r b r o a d e n i n g t h e s c o p e o f r h e t o r i c , a l t h o u g h h i s s u g g e s t i o n s w e r e n o t t a k e n up u n t i l century. merely  F i r s t , he e s t a b l i s h e d r h e t o r i c a s a g e n e r a l a r t o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n , n o t  limited  t o p e r s u a s i o n ; second, he l a i d  groundwork f o r t h e f a c u l t y  psychology that Campbell, p a r t i c u l a r l y , would the of  psychologist divided which  deals.  theeighteenth  logic  treats;  see as c e n t r a l t o discourse.  Bacon  t h e mind i n t o compartments: t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g and r e a s o n  and t h e a p p e t i t e , a f f e c t i o n s , and w i l l  w i t h which  ethics  He s a y s  Reason t r a n s m i t s s e l e c t and approved n o t i o n s t o t h e i m a g i n a t i o n b e f o r e t h e d e c r e e i s e x e c u t e d : f o r i m a g i n a t i o n always precedes and e x c i t e s v o l u n t a r y m o t i o n s , a n d i s t h e r e f o r e a common i n s t r u m e n t , b o t h t o t h e r e a s o n and t h e w i l l . . .(Book F i v e , Ch. 1 ) . A t t h e same t i m e , B a c o n t h e r h e t o r i c i a n saw t h a t a r t a s " b u t t o a p p l y a n d recommend t h e d i c t a t e s o f r e a s o n t o t h e i m a g i n a t i o n , i n o r d e r t o e x c i t e t h e a f f e c t i o n s and w i l l , " i m a g e s a s may a s s i s t that reason p r i m a r i l y that rhetoric,  or to " f i l l  t h e i m a g i n a t i o n w i t h such o b s e r v a t i o n s and  r e a s o n , a n d n o t o v e r t h r o w i t " ( B o o k S i x , C h . 3 ) . I t was f o r t h a t Bacon i n d i g n a n t l y  refuted Plato's claim i n the Gorgias  l i k e c o o k e r y , i s mere f l a t t e r y .  He i n s t e a d c o n c e i v e d o f r h e t o r i c  as a v e h i c l e f o r communication  of a l l kinds,  art  Bacon a l s o emphasized  of reasoning Inductively.  communication,  thus also  belonged  t r u t h was s t i l l  the importance of s c i e n t i f i c  i n d i s c o u r s e : h a l l m a r k s o f modern  t h e bounteous  to rhetoric.  R h e t o r i c as a p o t e n t i a l v e h i c l e  continued to build  on t h i s  Perhaps,  principles Bacon  for  c o n s t r u c t by f o c u s i n g  too, Smith and Campbell  communicating  E s s a y C o n c e r n i n g Human  on t h e w o r k i n g s o f t h e m i n d , a n d t h e o r i g i n s a n d d e v e l o p m e n t inductive reasoning.  exposition.  communicate t h e m a t e r i a l which  a t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t , and John Locke's  U n d e r s t a n d i n g (1690)  p r i n c i p l e s of  Advancement o f L e a r n i n g enumerates  which could h e l p speakers or w r i t e r s insisted  ( i n theory at least) with the  l a y i n g e s s e n t i a l groundwork f o r Smith's  o b j e c t i v i t y and f a c t u a l i t y Y e t n o t even  fueled  i n detail  of ideas through  owe t h e i r g r e a t e s t d e b t t o  7 t h i s work. of those  F o r L o c k e ' s a n a l y s i s o f t h e m i n d p a v e d t h e way  objects which a f f e c t  v i e w s o n how  t h e mind and  how  they  do  c e r t a i n ways o f t h i n k i n g a r e m a n i f e s t e d  f o r Smith's  s o , and  analyses  Campbell's  i n various  ends of  discourse. First  and  fundamentally,  L o c k e r e j e c t e d t h e n o t i o n t h a t a l l humans a r e  knowing c e r t a i n u n i v e r s a l p r i n c i p l e s , "Are  there not whole n a t i o n s .  notions  of a d e i t y , without  a c t i o n s or p r a c t i c a l v i e w t h a t a l l new  p r e s e n t i n g w h a t was  . .amongst whom i s n o t  which i t i s hard  principles?"^  k n o w l e d g e i s f o u n d e d on  then devastating  t o be  only  and  logic.  F o r m o r a l l a w s , L o c k e d e m o n s t r a t e d , a s w e l l a s o u r way  laws;  i t can  founded i n d u c t i v e l y .  only r a t i o n a l i z e  i c i a n t o condemn t h e attack a century  them.  The (Nor  o f s c h o l a s t i c and  or the  was  Locke the  "simple  observation  of our minds p e r c e i v e d  ( s e n s a t i o n s ) and ideas";  these  the  internal  ideas, processed  number, i n t u r n g e n e r a t e a l l new  Descartes,  t h a t one  has  C a m p b e l l would echo  ultimately derives  by  ourselves"  s e n s e make up by  simple  the  the f a c u l t i e s  knowledge.  Not  content  such  this  itself  progresses  from s e n s a t i o n s ,  17).  entirety of  of  perception,  to say,  c o n s c i o u s l y i n an  i d e a s , to r e l a t i o n s between simple  g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s or " t r u t h s . "  (Section  comparison through extension  the o p t i o n of r e a s o n i n g  This natural reasoning  c o l l e c t i o n s of  acquiring  philosopher/rhetor-  L o c k e a s s u m e d t h a t a l l n o r m a l humans m u s t r e a s o n i n d u c t i v e l y by natures.  syllogistic  employed e i t h e r about e x t e r n a l s e n s i b l e o b j e c t s ,  r e t e n t i o n , d i s c e r n m e n t , d e n o m i n a t i o n , and and  last  s y l l o g i s m as a f o r m o f r e a s o n i n g .  internal operations  Locke's  also  later.)  and  External objects  of  but  o l d l o g i c i s inadequate f o r forming  " A l l k n o w l e d g e , " L o c k e s t a t e d , " i s f o u n d e d o n and from experience  our  Cartesian  observation,  away f u r t h e r a t t h e c r u m b l i n g  the  or r u l e of  the  chipped  knowledge, are  foundation  law  sanctioned  experience  proof:  f o u n d so much a s  t o i m a g i n e any  Locke not  born  (degree)  like  inductive  their  to simple  i d e a s , and  way,  very ideas,  then  to  to  8 Locke's c o n c e p t i o n  of the r e l a t i o n s between simple i d e a s has  i n A r i s t o t l e ' s common t o p o i .  Degree, cause and  " p l a c e s " l o c a t e d i n the mind, t o o l s to h e l p r e l a t i o n s "complex i d e a s . "  A g a i n , we  can  e f f e c t , and  time a r e , f o r Locke,  process sense d a t a .  see how  i t s antecedents  He  called  t h i s view of mental  such  logical  r e l a t i o n s h i p s broadens i n t o a view of them t h a t i n c l u d e s t h e i r s p e c i f i c uses as ways of r e l a t i n g i d e a s  i n writing.  p r o d u c t s of Locke's work was domain: i n a d v e r t e n t recognized  I n f a c t , one  h i s inadvertent  because Locke was  not  the f a c t t h a t humans must not  a l s o communicate them to o t h e r s these ways, or p a t t e r n s ,  of the many benevolent  r e t u r n i n g of the t o p o i to r h e t o r i c ' s  specifically a rhetorician. o n l y make sense of t h e i r own  i n ways t h a t h e l p  both to name our  i s d e f i n i t i o n (denomination) of simple and  communicate t o o t h e r s  own  e x p e r i e n c e s and  through the use  problem of language p h i l o s o p h y complex i d e a s are f u l l the f a c t t h a t our them. a man  of u n c e r t a i n t y "  only way  i d e a s , and  w i t h i n the realm of s c i e n c e . w i t h t h i s k i n d of l o g i c and s c i e n t i f i c but  i s to name or  scientifically,  Edinburgh from 1748-50) i n t o two r h e t o r i c becomes the  b e l i e v e d not  thus h e l p speakers and  W i l b u r Samuel H o w e l l , a n a l y z i n g  define  form a " p e r f e c t " complex i d e a , "and  to be  and  by  " p r o p e r l y " and  such  defining 87a).  inductive  impossible  Adam Smith, p a r t i c u l a r l y , t r i e d  e t h i c a l i s s u e s as  for  ( S e c t i o n 63), a problem become paradox by  could  others  Among  Locke expressed a fundamental  Such a p e r f e c t d e f i n i t i o n would have to r e l y on f l a w l e s s and  but  we  s t a t e d t h a t the names " t h a t stand  speak p r o p e r l y , d e f i n e p e r f e c t l y and  a c o n d i t i o n he  ideas,  Denomination  g i v e a p e r f e c t account of the nature of t h a t s o r t of t h i n g s " ( S e c t i o n  reasoning,  he  complex  to name those  of communicating complex i d e a s  Y e t Locke hoped t h a t a man may  ( S e c t i o n 63).  of language.  when he  But  imbue them w i t h meaning.  i d e a s , b r i n g i n g about " a f f i r m a t i o n s " of those ideas serves  by-  to  fulfill  to i n f u s e r h e t o r i c  w r i t e r s communicate not  " p e r f e c t l y " as Locke c o u l d  only wish.  Smith's work, d i v i d e s h i s l e c t u r e s ( g i v e n i n general  categories:  communication, wherein  " t h e o r e t i c a l i n s t r u m e n t " f o r a l l communication of ideas;  and  9  forms  of discourse,  courses which ideas communicative,  produce.When  then an equal s i m p l i c i t y  simplicity,  on R h e t o r i c  particularly  o r a t o r i c a l forms  discourse  of style,  n a t u r a l l y follows, at least according  Smith's Lectures  the  one c a n t h i n k o f d i s c o u r s e  (58).  proof:  facts" reader,  of discourse.^  O v e r them r e i g n s  directly,  form, though, d i f f e r s  from the  m e r e l y t h e p r o p o s i t i o n and n o t of the  i n o u r m i n d s ( a n d we s e e L o c k e ' s i n f l u e n c e o v e r S m i t h ' s ways o f  objects).  to described  t h i s means f o r d i s c o u r s e  External  f a c t s must be d e s c r i b e d  to describe  directly,  either directly  underlying  should  i s t h a t a l l forms, even p o e t r y ,  l o g i c becomes i n t h i s  them;  while  i n s t e a d be  light  a futile  a r e founded  an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r , a t t r i b u t a b l e t o d i f f e r i n g form o f w r i t i n g and t h e o t h e r s .  e x e r c i s e , o r so S m i t h  aims and o c c a s i o n s ,  Y e t Smith never defines  We c a n a s s u m e , t h o u g h , t h a t  i tfirst  first  t h e forms as d i f f e r i n g  c o u r s e , t h e a b s e n c e i n h i s t o r i c a l w r i t i n g o f what S m i t h c a l l s  What on  i n their  implies. "proof" i s  between  this  e x a c t l y w h a t h e means b y  r e l a t e s c l o s e l y t o t h e degree of  o r emotion i n the treatment of the evidence i n a d i s c o u r s e , F o r Smith a l s o  or i n -  e x t e r n a l causes o r i n t e r n a l d i s p o s i t i o n s (58-62).  treatment of f a c t s ; t o attempt t o d e l i n e a t e  or i l l .  "Every  some  t h e l a t t e r by t h e e f f e c t t h e y h a v e o n t h o s e who p e r c e i v e  attributed  bias  rule:  t o Smith, n a r r a t i v e w r i t i n g seeks merely t o i n s t r u c t the  i n t e r n a l f a c t s , much m o r e d i f f i c u l t  "proof."  one g e n e r a l  t o l a y o u t f a c t s i n p a r t i c u l a r ways: e x t e r n a l f a c t s o r o b j e c t s , o r t h o s e  dealing with  Of  this p r i n c i p l e of  t o r e l a t e some f a c t o r t o p r o v e  The n a r r a t i v e o r h i s t o r i c a l  According  which take place  this  to Smith.  " t h e h i s t o r i a n . . . a c t s a s i f he were a n I m p a r t i a l n a r r a t o r  (31).  from  thought, and o r g a n i z a t i o n of  and B e l l e s L e t t r e s e x e m p l i f y  d i d a c t i c and o r a t o r i c a l by v i r t u e o f c o n t a i n i n g the  move  i n h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e n a r r a t i v e , t h e d i d a c t i c , and  proposes e i t h e r barely  proposition"  as  and o f i t s forms as t h e v e h i c l e s by w h i c h communications  w r i t e r t o reader, a discourse  o r t h e s t u d y o f t h e " s t r u c t u r e and f u n c t i o n o f a l l t h e d i s -  states that a h i s t o r i a n "sets himself  e i t h e r f o r good  up t o c o m p a r e t h e  10 evidence that i s brought writer"  from time to time  u n d e r l i e s a l l forms facts  f o r the p r o o f . . .assuming (85).  of w r i t i n g  Because the concept  or o r a t o r i c a l .  A writer,  a c c o r d i n g t o t h e aim and Smith's  n a r r a t i v e and structure. Smith  i s predominantly  "puts f o r t h arguments i n t h e i r  are convincing" (58).  aim of i n s t r u c t i n g  s t a t e s t h a t b o t h forms  of may  I h a v e a l r e a d y shown how  t h e r e a d e r l i n k s t h e s e two  share that p a r t i c u l a r  accommodated t o t h i s  these a l t e r a t i o n s i s the presence e i t h e r be a " s t r i c t  end.  one,  applied  (84-5).  prose,  Smith  for their  forms  In fact,  o f p r o o f o r some d e g r e e t o o u r r e a s o n and  . . .the  both  as w e l l , f o r  "the r u l e s  with a  species [didactic] also"  d i d a c t i c d i s c o u r s e , o r one w h i c h by a f f e c t i n g rate"  facts  true light,  have a l r e a d y g i v e n w i t h r e g a r d t o n a r r a t i v e c o m p o s i t i o n w i l l , a l t e r a t i o n s , be e a s i l y  these  narrative,  then, changes the arrangement of  d i d a c t i c d i s c o u r s e depend on a f o u n d a t i o n o f f a c t s  The  facts,  occasion of the d i s c o u r s e In q u e s t i o n .  didactic writing  arguments themselves  of evidence, or  didactic  f o r Smith, i t f o l l o w s that the treatment of  ( p r o o f ) determines whether a p i e c e of w r i t i n g  didactic,  the c h a r a c t e r of a  we  few (113).  of bias;  One  the proof  sound judgement," f o r  the p a s s i o n s "persuades  us a t  i s c a r e f u l to emphasize the " o b j e c t i v e " n a t u r e of  any  didactic  however:  When t h e d e s i g n i s t o s e t t h e c a s e i n t h e c l e a r e s t l i g h t , t o g i v e e v e r y a r g u m e n t i t s due f o r c e , a n d by t h i s means p e r s u a d e us no f u r t h e r t h a n o u r u n b i a s s e d j u d g e m e n t i s c o n v i n c e d , t h a t i s n o t t o make u s e o f t h e o r a t o r i c a l s t y l e ( 8 4 ) . Y e t S m i t h may  have g r u d g i n g l y a d m i t t e d t h a t even t h e most u n e m o t i o n a l  c o n t a i n s some b i a s b e c a u s e c e r t a i n f a c t s h a v e b e e n s e l e c t e d by p r e s e n t a t i o n over other f a c t s  (an i d e a which would  d e v e l o p more f u l l y  R h e t o r i c , 1969).  i n The  seems a l m o s t u n n e c e s s a r y overt persuasion. are  argumentative  And  New  proof  the w r i t e r f o r  w a i t f o r Chaim Perelman  H i s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of the  when t h e i r g r e a t e s t d i s t i n c t i o n i s b e t w e e n d e g r e e s  n e i t h e r the n a r r a t i v e nor the d i d a c t i c  i n the sense  t h a t t h e y t r e a t o f f a c t s and  forms,  their  though  to forms of they  presentation,  11 are o v e r t l y persuasive.  By t h a t c r i t e r i o n the two forms a r e s t r u c t u r a l l y  Fundamental t o Smith's  treatment of d i d a c t i c d i s c o u r s e i s t h e theme of  s i m p l i c i t y , both o f s t r u c t u r e and s t y l e (he uses the terms interchangeably).  He c a l l s  linked.  "form" and " s t y l e "  the d i d a c t i c "more simple than e i t h e r d e l i b e r a t i v e o r  j u d i c i a l " d i s c o u r s e i n terms of s t r u c t u r e (136), and l a y s out two p o s s i b l e ways of a r r a n g i n g i t .  The more i n d u c t i v e A r i s t o t e l i a n method i n v o l v e s the d i s c u s s i o n  of s e v e r a l s u b j e c t s and the g i v i n g of a p r i n c i p l e f o r each phenomenon, whereas the Newtonian method l a y s down c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e s ,  "primary o r proved, i n the  b e g i n n i n g , from whence we account f o r s e v e r a l phenomena, c o n n e c t i n g a l l together."  The l a t t e r ,  says Smith, i s "undoubtedly  the most p h i l o s o p h i c a l .  v a s t l y more i n g e n i o u s and more engaging than the o t h e r " (139-40). note an o v e r t attempt  . .  Here we can  t o f u r n i s h d i d a c t i c and n a r r a t i v e d i s c o u r s e w i t h c e r t a i n  t o o l s used by the new l o g i c :  the aim and o c c a s i o n Smith has i n mind i s s c i e n t i f i c  communication. Smith's  forms o f w r i t i n g were h i s response t o the new,  "more s i m p l e , " l o g i c  of the times, a l o g i c o f s y n t h e s i s r a t h e r than p r i m a r i l y o f a n a l y s i s , as Howell puts i t (563).  Both the n a r r a t i v e and d i d a c t i c forms r e p r e s e n t b a s i c ways o f  t h i n k i n g about and s t r u c t u r i n g prose; they a r e not merely s k i l l s r e p l a c i n g a theory, but m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of a t h e o r y . still  I n s h o r t , Smith's n a r r a t i v e d i s c o u r s e i s  the f o u n d a t i o n , i n many r e s p e c t s , f o r modern e x p o s i t o r y  enumeration  and d e s c r i p t i o n of o b j e c t s o r f a c t s ;  p l a c e , and cause and e f f e c t ; didactic discourse links  objectivity;  and s i m p l i c i t y of d i c t i o n .  writing: u n i t y through time,  Y e t Smith's  concept of  " o b j e c t i v e " and h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d e x p o s i t i o n t o more  argumentative, or more g e n e r a l , aims and o c c a s i o n s f o r d i s c o u r s e .  G i v e n that  Smith saw n a r r a t i v e d i s c o u r s e as a n o n - p e r s u a s i v e form w e l l s u i t e d f o r t r a n s m i t t i n g f a c t s t o a l e a r n e d audience, then we can a l s o see Smith  acknowledg-  i n g , through d i d a c t i c d i s c o u r s e , the need f o r a l e s s s p e c i a l i z e d , more f l e x i b l e form t o communicate both f a c t s and t h e i r h u m a n i s t i c c o n t e x t s t o audiences needing  12 t o be c o n v i n c e d a s w e l l a s i n f o r m e d . S m i t h n e v e r i n t e n d e d t h a t v a r i o u s a i m s , o c c a s i o n s , and arrangments i n discourse should degenerate i n t o d i s c r e t e s k i l l s more u n i f i e d so g r e a t l y  of w r i t i n g .  of f a c t s  Even Campbell's  p h i l o s o p h y o f r h e t o r i c , w h i c h w o u l d i n i t s r e s p o n s e t o t h e new  c o m p l e m e n t a n d u p h o l d S m i t h ' s p r a c t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s , was l a t e r  m i s a p p l i e d i n a s i m i l a r way.  logic  t o be  B u t u n l i k e S m i t h , who makes a p o i n t o f p a r i n g  r h e t o r i c down, a l m o s t R a m u s - l i k e , t o a b a r e minimum o f p r a c t i c a l  precepts,  George Campbell emphasized  One o f t h e  a more h o l i s t i c  theory of r h e t o r i c . ^  p r i m e p u r p o s e s o f h i s P h i l o s o p h y o f R h e t o r i c ( 1 7 7 6 ) was t o e s t a b l i s h r h e t o r i c , o r e l o q u e n c e , as " i n d e e d t h e grand a r t o f communication, n o t o f i d e a s o n l y , b u t o f s e n t i m e n t s , p a s s i o n s , d i s p o s i t i o n s , and p u r p o s e s . " ^  C a m p b e l l saw how  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e human m i n d c o u l d g i v e r i s e and k i n d s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n . "polite"  and " u s e f u l "  ( x l i x ) , which " i s founded i n s c i e n c e .  system, g i v e n a l o g i c and a methodology  l o g i c , would  then l i n k  principles  fully  (xlv).  . . .There i s .  . .a  Eloquence, i n  b a s e d o n t h a t o f t h e new  t h e a r t s a n d s c i e n c e s by o p e n i n g up c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f a l l  thoughts p e r t a i n i n g to a l l He saw a s v i t a l l y  t o c e r t a i n ways  I n a d d i t i o n , h e saw e l o q u e n c e a s a n a r t , b o t h  n a t u r a l r e l a t i o n between t h e s c i e n c e s and t h e a r t s " Campbell's  certain  disciplines.  S u c h was C a m p b e l l ' s  dream.  necessary, then, the systemization of eloquence, i t s  e x p l a i n e d i n t e r m s o f " t h e s c i e n c e o f man" o r human n a t u r e .  content merely t o explore " p r a c t i c a l indeed s c i e n t i f i c ,  inquiry  r h e t o r i c , " Campbell conducted a  Not  logical,  i n t o what i t i s t h a t g i v e s r i s e t o s u c h c o n c e p t s , o r  what c a u s e s d i f f e r i n g ways and forms o f w r i t i n g . Of  first  i m p o r t a n c e t o us i s C a m p b e l l ' s v i e w o f any d i s c o u r s e as a  living  t h i n g , an o r g a n c o n s t a n t l y growing and c h a n g i n g , depending on t h e w r i t e r ' s p u r p o s e o r "end." understanding, the w i l l ;  These ends, a c c o r d i n g t o Campbell, a r e f o u r :  to enlighten the  t o p l e a s e t h e i m a g i n a t i o n , t o move t h e p a s s i o n s , a n d t o i n f l u e n c e  a n y d i s c o u r s e c a n i n c o r p o r a t e more t h a n one e n d , b u t o n l y o n e w i l l  13 emerge as p r i n c i p a l .  L i n k i n g t h e s e ends i s a h i e r a r c h y o f m e n t a l f a c u l t i e s  a s s o c i a t i o n s , each "preceding "knowledge. and,  species" giving rise  . . f u r n i s h e t h m a t e r i a l s f o r the fancy;  by h e r m i m i c a r t , d i s p o s e s  Campbell c l e a r l y the  importance  relationship  the fancy c u l l s ,  t h e s e m a t e r i a l s so a s t h e a f f e c t  the passions are the n a t u r a l spurs o v e r s i m p l i f i e d h i s (and  t o t h e n e x t h i g h e s t , so  to v o l i t i o n or a c t i o n "  that  compounds,  the  (p. 2).  and  passions;  However  o t h e r f a c u l t y p s y c h o l o g i s t s ' ) p i c t u r e o f t h e m i n d may  p e r c e i v e s , as d i d h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s  of l o g i c a l  connectives  be,  D a v i d Hume a n d D a v i d H a r t l e y ,  o r i g i n a t i n g i n t h e m i n d , and  of  to emotions f o r the purposes of c o n v i n c i n g or persuading  their an  audience.^ Understanding,  says  Campbell,  begins  w i t h perceptions, or  from which a l l of our knowledge of f a c t i s generated." k n o w l e d g e more s y s t e m a t i c a l l y by i n f e r e n c e from p a r t i c u l a r s  "direct  through  "those  N e x t , we  acquire  i n s p e c t i o n o f p a r t i c u l a r s " and  experience.  Campbell sees our  p e r c e p t i o n and  f a c t s as a c e n t r a l p r i n c i p l e i n w r i t i n g , a scientific,  primarily  Therefore,  experience  s u p p l i e s m a t e r i a l s needed t o c o n v i n c e ideas thus both  and  formed must, however, connect  t o t h e w r i t e r and  to the audience.  again acknowledging  c a u s a t i o n as  r h e t o r i c a l proof  Campbell enumerates  (with causation relating  through  connections  and  Inferences  or  t o make s e n s e  resemblance,  the most f u n d a m e n t a l k i n d s o f  Making c l e a r  Also,  writing.  to each other i n order  between p e r c e p t i o n s  here.  r h e t o r i c ' s need f o r  p e r s u a d e an a u d i e n c e .  and  experience—xxii-xxiii).  and  underlies logical  c o n t i g u i t y of time,  by  mental arrangements of o b j e c t s or  i n d u c t i v e , method f o r s p e a k i n g  f o r Campbell,  then  Campbell's debt t o Locke's  development of i d e a s f o r the purposes of communication i s obvious l i k e Smith,  things. . .  connections  i n f e r e n c e most d i r e c t l y  b e t w e e n p e r c e p t i o n s and  c o n s t i t u t e s f o r C a m p b e l l t h e c h i e f means o f a p p e a l i n g p r i m a r i l y b u t n o t the u n d e r s t a n d i n g  (xxix),  f o r appealing to the understanding  i s only the  step i n v i r t u a l l y  a l l k i n d s of d i s c o u r s e , Campbell emphasizes.  O n l y one  to  ideas  solely  to  first aim  for  14 discourse  " d i s d a i n s a l l a s s i s t a n c e whatever from the fancy.  demonstration" which  (2-3).  To of  do  f o r the w r i t e r  turns to experience, analogy,  c o n n e c t i o n s between d i s c r e t e i d e a s .  audience  sense  at least  some d e g r e e o f  acknowledges the presence  testimony, or  f r o m t h e s e s o u r c e s makes  the d e s i r e d conduct  d e s i r e s (275).  acknowledges the w r i t e r ' s need to i n c o r p o r a t e t h i s aim.  the w i l l ; In  the l o g i c a l  this  sense  the treatment  conviction,  of f a c t s .  C l e a r l y , Campbell  the  appears  that  influencing both.  synonymous w i t h argument o r  i s the f i r s t  r h e t o r i c i a n to  informal argumentation  as a s t r u c t u r a l f o u n d a t i o n f o r g e n e r a l a i m s and  for  takes i n t o account  discourse.  F o r he  b e t w e e n them; t h e a w a r e n e s s o f how the b u i l d i n g  o f a t h e s i s by  a i m and  i n d u c t i o n and  d i s c o u r s e as a v e h i c l e w h i c h must p r o v e logical  and  occasion determine inference.  e t h i c a l f o u n d a t i o n f o r Campbell's  e n t i r e p h i l o s o p h y of r h e t o r i c . i s not n e a r l y as I m p o r t a n t  Campbell  i m p l i e s , but  m u s t be u n d e r s t o o d .  To  (5-6).  (73-4).  In practise,  e n d s o f d i s c o u r s e , and  s t a n d p o i n t as i n f l u e n c i n g I n f o r m i n g a n a u d i e n c e may  Campbell  calls vivacity,  very l i t t l e  connections  d i s c o v e r y — a l s o forms  " i n o r d e r t o c o n v i n c e me  occasions  and  This p r o c e s s — i n v o l v i n g  by  the  for his  understanding" the w i l l  . .They may,  they  as i t were,  d i s c o u r s e i s u n a c c o m p a n i e d by  reason conjoined w i t h f e e l i n g  to  be a l l v e r y  these arguments,  . . a t t e n d e d t o . . .remembered by me.  be f e l t "  the  propose  these choices;  g a i n " b a r e l y the assent of the  from a moral  a c t i o n or readiness f o r a c t i o n well,  t h e c h o i c e o f f a c t s and  some new  Campbell  C o n v i c t i o n i s the  conviction apply equally to  f o r Campbell,  the  a l l discourse,  t o t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g and  structures building  of  I n other words,  of the aim of c o n v i c t i o n i n v i r t u a l l y  of d i s c o u r s e addressed  calculation  Also, i n order to s a t i s f y  o f j u d g m e n t , one m u s t c o n n e c t  t o the g r a t i f i c a t i o n of t h e i r  "avowed p u r p o s e "  specialization,  audience.  so, a w r i t e r  audience's  and  to i n s t i l l  c h a n c e s ( a g a i n , r e f i n e m e n t s o f t h e t o p o i ) , and  logical  .mathematical  A l l o t h e r aims l a c k t h a t extreme k i n d of  makes i t n e c e s s a r y  c o n v i c t i o n i n the  .  to produce b e l i e f .  what Thus,  15 a form of reasoning  based on e x p e r i e n c e ,  i n f e r e n c e , and i n d u c t i o n , b l e n d e d  with  e m o t i o n , " c o n s t i t u t e s t h a t vehemence o f c o n t e n t i o n , t o w h i c h t h e g r e a t e s t e x p l o i t s o f eloquence ought d o u b t l e s s  t o be a s c r i b e d . . . .Thus p a s s i o n i s t h e  mover t o a c t i o n ,  (77-8).  reason  I s the guide"  strong here i n that reason dictory,  and p a s s i o n a r e seen as complementary, n o t c o n t r a -  i n rhetoric.  Campbell's u n i t y o f reason inductive reasoning  and p a s s i o n , o f t r u t h and goodness, combined w i t h  from perceptions t o connected  a r e u n i o n w i t h l o g i c and e t h i c a l p u r p o s e . ^ C a m p b e l l does n o t p r e s e n t does S m i t h . writing  and  I n terms o f c o m p o s i t i o n ,  But h i s methodology i s c l e a r l y  that appeals  o f everyday  ideas, constitutes for rhetoric  us w i t h as c l e a r - c u t a s e t o f p r a c t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s as  primarily  communication a l o g i c  proposes t h i s p r i m a r i l y  f l e x i b l e enough t o i n c l u d e n o t o n l y  to a specialized,  l e s s k n o w l e d g e a b l e o r more s c e p t i c a l o n e . realm  Bacon's i n f l u e n c e i s e s p e c i a l l y  learned audience,  I n o t h e r w o r d s , he e x t e n d s  t h a t a p p l i e s t o "everyday"  i n d u c t i v e s t r u c t u r e f o r a l l prose.  s t r u c t u r e i n f o r m a l argumentation.  but also t o a  That t h i s  into the  situations,  I h a v e named  s t r u c t u r e s h o u l d form t h e base f o r  our modern e x p o s i t i o n , argument, and p e r s u a s i o n i s t h e argument t o w h i c h I devote the r e s t of t h i s In  and L o c k e ,  paper.  and Campbell,  b o l s t e r e d b y t h e new l o g i c o f D e s c a r t e s ,  i n s p i r i n g a permanent f o u n d a t i o n o f i n d u c t i v e p r i n c i p l e s  l i n k i n g and u n d e r l y i n g i t s d i f f e r i n g  s t r u c t u r e based on i n f o r m a l l o g i c . nineteenth century little  The f a c t  nature  Bacon,  for a l l  a i m s a n d o c c a s i o n s w i t h a common that composition  teaching i n the  i n s t e a d emphasized w r i t i n g as a s e t o f d i s p a r a t e s k i l l s  o r no s e n s e o f a common f o u n d a t i o n t o them i s d u e a t l e a s t p a r t l y  changing unified  will  a d i f f e r e n t , more o r d e r l y u n i v e r s e t h a n t h i s , we m i g h t h a v e s e e n t h e  r h e t o r i c of Smith  prose,  this  of faculty  psychology.  I n Campbell's time  with  tothe  i t was c o n c e i v e d  as a  p i c t u r e o f t h e mind's o p e r a t i o n s ; by t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y i t had  become a way o f c o m p a r t m e n t a l i z i n g  f u n c t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e mind, such as  16  writing, ceased all  and h a d p a s s e d  the zenith  of i t spopularity.  E v e n l o n g a f t e r i t had  t o be i n v o g u e , t h i s n e a t , c o m p a r t m e n t a l i z e d v i e w o f t h e m i n d l e n t  t o o e a s i l y t o a breakdown o f Campbell's  foundations into  (and l a t e r A l e x a n d e r  f o r m u l a e i n t e n d e d f o r f e e d i n g t o rows o f b o r e d  s t u d e n t s f o r t h e n e x t c e n t u r y and a h a l f  t o come.  itself  Bain's) composition  17 ^1 w i l l n o t d i s c u s s t h e c l a s s i c a l r h e t o r i c i a n s s e p a r a t e l y , b e c a u s e c l a s s i c a l n o t i o n s o f t h e f o r m s o f w r i t i n g , a n d o f p o e t i c s , n e c e s s a r i l y do n o t take i n t o account the post-Renaissance s h i f t towards e m p i r i c a l reasoning, which demanded new p r o s e s t r u c t u r e s . H o w e v e r , some c l a s s i c a l r h e t o r i c a l i n f l u e n c e s appear i n e i g h t e e n t h - c e n t u r y r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r i e s , the major ones u n d o u b t e d l y b e i n g what W i l b u r Samuel H o w e l l d e s c r i b e s as " t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n i n h e r i t a n c e i n l o g i c , " and t h e New C i c e r o n i a n movement o f 1700 t o 1 7 5 9 . Howell ( i n Eighteenth C e n t u r y B r i t i s h L o g i c and R h e t o r i c ; see f o o t n o t e 6 f o r f u l l c i t a t i o n ) d e s c r i b e s t h e a t t e m p t s o f s e v e r a l " p e r i p a t e t i c s , " i n f l u e n t i a l up u n t i l 1 8 2 5 , t o " r e s t o r e t h e l o g i c o f A r i s t o t l e t o i t s f o r m e r p r e - e m i n e n c e i n e d u c a t i o n and l e a r n i n g " (13). T h i s a l s o c o n s t i t u t e d a r e b e l l i o n o f s o r t s a g a i n s t P e t e r Ramus's sixteenth-century reforms. George C a m p b e l l ' s vehement a t t a c k on t h e s y l l o g i s m i n The P h i l o s o p h y o f R h e t o r i c u n d e r s c o r e s t h e c o n t i n u i n g i n f l u e n c e o f A r i s t o t e l i a n l o g i c as a m e t h o d o f i n q u i r y t h r o u g h o u t t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y . The New C i c e r o n i a n s , more c o n c e r n e d w i t h c o m m u n i c a t i o n t h a n w i t h l o g i c , e x e m p l i f i e d e v e n i n t h e i r reforms a d e s i r e to r e s t o r e to r h e t o r i c a concern w i t h i t s c l a s s i c a l r o l e as the a r t of c o m m u n i c a t i o n . I n l a r g e p a r t because of the eighteenth-century I n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o c l a s s i c a l r h e t o r i c , the t r a d i t i o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i v e powers of r h e t o r i c began t o reawaken. W i l b u r Samuel H o w e l l , i n h i s L o g i c and R h e t o r i c i n E n g l a n d , 1550-1700 (New Y o r k : R u s s e l l and R u s s e l l I n c . , 1 9 6 1 ) , e m p h a s i z e s t h a t a l t h o u g h Ramus r e f o r m e d t h e r u l e s o f l o g i c , he d i d n o t i n t r o d u c e any new c o n c e p t s , o r c h a n g e t h e e s s e n t i a l n a t u r e o f s c h o l a s t i c i s m e x c e p t f o r e l i m i n a t i n g some o f i t s r e d u n d a n c i e s . A f t e r R a m i s m d i e d o u t i n E n g l a n d a c e n t u r y o r s o a f t e r i t was i n t r o d u c e d , the z e a l f o r s i m p l i f y i n g the a r t s remained a l i v e , f o r the New C i c e r o n i a n s saw f i t t o p a r e down C i c e r o ' s p l a c e s o r a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r a s s e m b l i n g p r o o f , and t h u s h e l p e d f u r t h e r t o r e d u c e t h e s t a t u s o f r h e t o r i c a l i n v e n t i o n i n the minds of e d u c a t o r s . I n s h o r t , w h a t w i t h one w e l l m e a n i n g r e f o r m a f t e r a n o t h e r , r h e t o r i c u n d e r w e n t a p e r i o d o f a l m o s t two h u n d r e d y e a r s — f r o m Ramus u n t i l Adam S m i t h — d u r i n g w h i c h i t h a d l i t t l e t o b o a s t o f b u t s k i l l s f r a g m e n t e d from theory. N o r was t h i s t h e l a s t t i m e s u c h w o u l d be t h e c a s e i n r h e t o r i c ' s h i s t o r y ; l a t e nineteenth-and e a r l y twentieth-century composition teaching e x e m p l i f i e d t h e i n a d e q u a c y f o r w r i t i n g o f s k i l l s whose t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e had been f o r g o t t e n . 2  ^Norman Kemp S m i t h , D e s c a r t e s ' P h i l o s o p h i c a l W r i t i n g s ( L o n d o n : M a c m i l l a n & C o . , L t d . , 1 9 5 2 ) , P a r t Two. A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l be c i t e d i n s h o r t f o r m p a r e n t h e t i c a l l y i n the t e x t . ^ F r a n c i s B a c o n , A d v a n c e m e n t o f L e a r n i n g and Novum Organum, r e v i s e d e d i t i o n (New Y o r k : The C o l o n i a l P r e s s , 1 9 0 0 ) , B o o k F i v e , Ch. 4. A l l further references w i l l be c i t e d i n s h o r t f o r m p a r e n t h e t i c a l l y i n t h e t e x t . ^ J o h n L o c k e , An E s s a y C o n c e r n i n g t h e U n d e r s t a n d i n g , K n o w l e d g e , O p i n i o n and A s s e n t , B e n j a m i n Rand, ed. (Cambridge: H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1931), S e c t i o n 4. T h i s i s a n e d i t i o n o f t h e d r a f t o f L o c k e ' s E s s a y C o n c e r n i n g Human Understanding. A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l be c i t e d i n s h o r t f o r m p a r e n t h e t i c a l l y i n the t e x t . W i l b u r Samuel H o w e l l , E i g h t e e n t h C e n t u r y B r i t i s h L o g i c and R h e t o r i c ( P r i n c e t o n , N . J . : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 7 1 ) , p. 5 4 8 . A l l further r e f e r e n c e s w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . 6  7  Adam Smith, L e c t u r e s  on R h e t o r i c and  B e l l e s L e t t r e s , J o h n M.  Lothian,  ed.  18 (Carbondale: Southern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1971), p. x v i i . A l l further r e f e r e n c e s w i l l b e c i t e d b y p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . I n L e c t u r e 21, Smith n o t e s t h a t a h i s t o r y a n d a h i s t o r i c a l poem d i f f e r i n f o r m o n l y , a n d l a y s down what he sees a s t h e end o f p o e t r y : " I t i s e v i d e n t , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e a u t h o r ' s d e s i g n i n w r i t i n g [ p o e t r y ] i s t o amuse u s . . .amusement a n d e n t e r t a i n m e n t [ i s ] the c h i e f design o f t h e poet" (113-14). Smith's b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s governing n a r r a t i v e w r i t i n g , such as u n i t y o f time and p l a c e and c h a r a c t e r d e s c r i p t i o n , apply t o poetry as w e l l . Thus, t o Smith, t h e l o g i c a l foundations of poetry c o r r e s p o n d t o t h o s e o f n a r r a t i v e w r i t i n g ; o n l y t h e ends d i f f e r . % t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s n o d i r e c t c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n S m i t h ' s L e c t u r e s a n d C a m p b e l l ' s P h i l o s o p h y o f R h e t o r i c . H o w e v e r , H u g h B l a i r b a s e d much of t h e m a t e r i a l f o r h i s L e c t u r e s on R h e t o r i c and B e l l e s L e t t r e s ( i n c l u d i n g t h e t i t l e ) o n S m i t h ' s w o r k ; a n d C a m p b e l l , who c o r r e s p o n d e d f r e q u e n t l y w i t h B l a i r , would l i k e l y have been a c q u a i n t e d w i t h Smith's l e c t u r e s even b e f o r e they were p u b l i s h e d i n 1762. ^George C a m p b e l l , The P h i l o s o p h y o f R h e t o r i c , L l o y d F. B i t z e r , e d . (Carbondale: Southern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1963), p. x l i x . A l l further r e f e r e n c e s w i l l b e c i t e d b y p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . l O c a m p b e l l i s i n d e b t e d h e r e t o Hume a n d H a r t l e y f o r t h e i r i d e a s o n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p among p e r c e p t i o n s , i d e a s , p a s s i o n s , t h e i m a g i n a t i o n , a n d t h e w i l l . I n A T r e a t i s e o f Human N a t u r e ( 1 7 3 9 ) , o f w h i c h P a r t T h r e e i s d e v o t e d t o a n e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e w i l l a n d " d i r e c t " p a s s i o n s , Hume a f f i r m s " f r o m e x p e r i e n c e , t h a t o u r a c t i o n s have a c o n s t a n t union w i t h o u r m o t i v e s , tempers, and c i r c u m s t a n c e s " ( D a v i d Hume: T h e P h i l o s p h i c a l W o r k s , Thomas H i l l G r e e n a n d Thomas Hodge G r o s e , e d s . , V o l . I I , S c i e n t i a V e r l a g A a l e n , 1 9 6 4 , p . 1 8 2 ) . U n i o n between a c t i o n s o f t h emind, and t h e I n f e r e n c e s thus e s t a b l i s h e d , a r e " n a t u r a l and n e c e s s a r y " ; i n f a c t , w h a t Hume c a l l s m o r a l e v i d e n c e i s " n o t h i n g b u t a c o n c l u s i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e a c t i o n s o f men. . . n a t u r a l a n d m o r a l e v i d e n c e . . . a r e o f t h e same n a t u r e , a n d d e r i v ' d f r o m t h e same p r i n c i p l e s " ( 1 8 6 - 7 ) . F r o m t h e r e , Hume shows t h a t , b e c a u s e human a c t i o n s s t e m f r o m t h e n e c e s s a r y a c t i o n s o f t h e m i n d , human i m p u l s e s t o a c t i o n o r p a s s i o n s subsume r e a s o n a s " a motive t o any a c t i o n o f t h ew i l l " (193). "Reason a l o n e c a n n e v e r produce any a c t i o n , o r g i v e r i s e t o v o l i t i o n , " he emphasizes (194); y e t g i v e n t h a t a l l a c t i o n s a r i s e o u t o f n e c e s s i t y , p a s s i o n s "can n e v e r , i n a n y s e n s e , be c a l l e d unreasonable" (196). The f a c u l t y o f i m a g i n a t i o n c l o s e l y i n f l u e n c e s t h e p a s s i o n s a s w e l l , i n t h a t by p r o d u c i n g I n t h e m i n d "a p a r t i c u l a r a n d d e t e r m i n a t e i d e a . . . [ a p a s s i o n ] o p e r a t e s o n t h e w i l l w i t h more v i o l e n c e " ( 2 0 3 - 4 ) . " N o t h i n g , " Hume s a y s , " i s more capable o f i n f u s i n g any p a s s i o n i n t o t h emind, than eloquence, by which o b j e c t s a r e r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e i r s t r o n g e s t and most l i v e l y c o l o u r s " ( 2 0 4 ) . Therefore, eloquence p l a y s a major r o l e i n moving t h e p a s s i o n s t o i n f l u e n c e t h ew i l l . From t h i s , Campbell d e r i v e s h i s i d e a o f t h e importance o f v i v a c i t y i n c o n v i n c i n g an audience. D a v i d H a r t l e y , i n h i s O b s e r v a t i o n s o n Man ( 1 7 4 9 ) , p r e s e n t s d o c t r i n e s w h i c h , as he s a y s , a r e " t a k e n from the H i n t s " o f Newton and L o c k e c o n c e r n i n g s e n s a t i o n , m o t i o n , a n d a s s o c i a t i o n o f i d e a s ( D a v i d H a r t l e y , O b s e r v a t i o n s o n man, h i s f r a m e , h i s d u t y , a n d h i s e x p e c t a t i o n s , V o l . I , New Y o r k : G a r l a n d P u b l i s h i n g I n c . , 1 9 7 1 , p. 5 ) . I n t h e s e c o n d s e c t i o n o f V o l . I , H a r t l e y shows t h a t s i m p l e i d e a s p l u s t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s o f p l a c e , t i m e , a n d r e s e m b l a n c e , a r e t h e m i n d ' s way o f t r y i n g t o r e t a i n " c o p i e s " o f t h e " I m p r e s s i o n s ( s e n s a t i o n s ) made o n t h e E y e a n d E a r " ( 5 6 ) . He f u r t h e r o b s e r v e s , "And i t seems r e a s o n a b l e t o e x p e c t , t h a t , i f a s i n g l e Sensation can leave a p e r c e p t i b l e E f f e c t , Trace, o r V e s t i g e , f o r a short time, a  19 s u f f i c i e n t R e p e t i t i o n o f a S e n s a t i o n may l e a v e a p e r c e p t i b l e E f f e c t o f t h e same k i n d , b u t o f a more p e r m a n e n t n a t u r e , i . e . a n I d e a " ( 5 7 ) . Thus, f o r H a r t l e y , resemblance i n p a r t i c u l a r produces v i v i d i d e a s , a concept which Campbell incorporates i n t o h i s r h e t o r i c a l theory. ^-Campbell's u n i t y o f r e a s o n and p a s s i o n , t r u t h and goodness o r i g i n a t e s w i t h F r a n c i s B a c o n ' s c o n c e p t o f t h e r o l e and s c o p e o f r h e t o r i c — " t o a p p l y and recommend t h e d i c t a t e s o f r e a s o n t o t h e i m a g i n a t i o n . " C l e a r l y , Campbell sees v i v a c i t y as a f o r c e w h i c h l i n k s l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e s o f d i s c o u r s e w i t h e t h i c a l p u r p o s e : a g o a l met p a r t i c u l a r l y when t h e s p e a k e r o r w r i t e r i s e n g a g e d i n p e r s u a s i o n f o r t h e good o f h i s a u d i e n c e .  20 II.  By  the beginning  Foundations  of the nineteenth  century,  e q u i p p e d w i t h a n e f f e c t i v e method o f l o g i c a l and  from the study  o f human n a t u r e .  r h e t o r i c a l theory  i n q u i r y a d a p t e d f r o m t h e New  writers pieces  or e x p l i c i t l y  Logic  o r framework f o r d i s c o u r s e , a framework I  i n f o r m a l argumentation, which acknowledges that v i r t u a l l y  implicitly  had been r e -  I h a v e shown how Adam S m i t h ' s a n d G e o r g e  Campbell's t h e o r i e s form a foundation call  Lost  to e s t a b l i s h proof.  Informal  a l l prose  seeks  argumentation then  t o i n q u i r e i n t o a s u b j e c t i n s u c h a way t h a t t h e y  build  from  o f i n f o r m a t i o n t o c o m p l e x s y n t h e s e s o f them t h r o u g h a p r o c e s s  guides  simple primarily of  induction. S m i t h augmented t h i s  framework w i t h t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f c l a r i t y  of d i c t i o n as w e l l as o b j e c t i v i t y , o r c o n c e r n w i t h f a c t s .  and s i m p l i c i t y  I n doing  s o , he n o t  o n l y f o u n d e d w h a t we c a l l  expository w r i t i n g but a l s o , i m p l i c i t l y , l i n k e d  scientific  discourse  and h i s t o r i c a l  its  validity.  For  h i m , r e a s o n and p a s s i o n ,  ethical  to the aim of convincing  general  Campbell, f o r h i s p a r t j combined i n d u c t i v e l o g i c and t r u t h and goodness, s e r v e d  audiences of psychology.  to reunite rhetoric with  purpose.  C l e a r l y , b o t h men t h o u g h t o f e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , a n d p e r s u a s i o n offspring the  o f i n d u c t i v e l o g i c and e t h i c s .  eighteenth  inquiring into the to  century, the realm  l e v e l of teaching  takes  communication.  human n a t u r e  opinionable, using nineteenth  anew t h e t a s k o f  o f e t h i c s n o t o n l y on a t h e o r e t i c a l l e v e l , b u t a l s o a t The s t a g e  o r , I n other  was s e t f o r s t u d e n t s  t o be  taught  words, t o see t h a t a l l t h e s k i l l s  i n l e a r n i n g t o w r i t e stem from t h e e t h i c a l f o u n d a t i o n  necessarily  The  I t was a t t h a t p o i n t , n e a r t h e e n d o f  t h a t r h e t o r i c had t h e p o t e n t i a l t o b e g i n  view discourse h o l i s t i c a l l y  involved  as t h e  that  communication  i n t o a c c o u n t by d e a l i n g c o n s t a n t l y w i t h t h e  i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i v e methods o f i n q u i r y . century  d i d not f u l f i l l  t h i s promise.  Contemporary  students  21 o f r h e t o r i c and  composition theory look at t h i s  c e n t u r y as a t i m e  f r a g m e n t a t i o n , when t h e o r i e s o f d i s c o u r s e f i n a l l y Nowhere i s t h i s more o b v i o u s  t h a n i n t h e way  t r e a t e d e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , and  i n f o r m a l argumentation  c a n be  away f r o m  pedagogy.  composition texts of t h i s  persuasion.  t h e m o d e r n "modes" o f d i s c o u r s e m a i n l y  fell  of  Indeed,  we  owe  the e x i s t e n c e of  to the f a c t t h a t the p r i n c i p l e s  separated i n t o  formulae  time  of  as r e a d i l y as t h e y can  be  united. This formularization received increasing colleges  toward  support  a more p r a c t i c a l e d u c a t i o n , w h i c h  detachment of the t h e o r y of f a c u l t y psychology discourse. f o r him, their  (Campbell  had  from  t h e movement i n  e n c o u r a g e d a t t h e same t i m e  from  I t s manifestations i n  also incorporated i t s sister  theory of a s s o c i a t i o n i s m ;  the d i f f e r e n c e s between the ends o f d i s c o u r s e were l e s s  similarities.)  P a r a d o x i c a l l y , even as  the  important  f a c u l t y psychology  than  became l e s s  and  l e s s f a s h i o n a b l e , r h e t o r i c a l pedagogy c o n t i n u e d t o t r e a t d i s c o u r s e as i f i t s s t r u c t u r e s and The  goals sprang  theme f o r my  examination  century i s d i v i s i o n — t h e  My  aim  e x p o s i t i o n f r o m a r g u m e n t , and c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s up  through  to d i s t i n g u i s h  i s t o see what happens t o  persuasion during this  s t r u c t u r e s are r e l e g a t e d to each?  mind.  of r e p r e s e n t a t i v e t e x t s of the  pedagogical tendency  d i s c o u r s e from each o t h e r . a r g u m e n t , and  our o f s e p a r a t e compartments o f the  time;  I n order  argument from  nineteenth  "elements" exposition,  i n o t h e r words, what purposes t o show how  the tendency  to  the t u r n of the century, I w i l l  first  U n i t e d S t a t e s and  to  the mid-nineteenth  i n f l u e n c e many t e x t b o o k w r i t e r s a f t e r A r i s t o t l e ' s and  from  the  1906.  R i c h a r d W h a t e l y ' s E l e m e n t s o f R h e t o r i c (1828) s e r v e d as a until  separate  look at  then examine r e p r e s e n t a t i v e t e x t s p r i m a r i l y  " p r a c t i c a l r h e t o r i c " up  and  p e r s u a s i o n , became more p r o n o u n c e d i n  R i c h a r d W h a t e l y ( 1 8 2 8 ) , and C a n a d a up  of  Campbell's views  c e n t u r y , and  the 1850's.  definitive continued  to  G r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d by  o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o g i c and  rhetoric,  22 Whately r e j e c t e d both ornamental,  as w e l l a s  I  he  propose,"  Composition, from L o g i c .  "narrow view"  the o v e r l y broad  . . W h a t e l y  or  v i e w o f i t as  i n prose.  exclusively; hoped not  a l s o t o r e d r e s s w h a t he  and  of r h e t o r i c as o n l y p e r s u a s i v e  states i n his introduction,  g e n e r a l l y , and  r h e t o r i c but ignorance  the  utter misconception  "all  "to t r e a t of  composition  Argumentative  c o n s i d e r i n g R h e t o r i c . . .as a n  o n l y t o broaden the scope of saw  of the nature  and  o b j e c t of L o g i c " ( 9 ) .  v a r i o u s c l a s s e s of arguments form the b a s i s of r e a s o n i n g  Campbell,  he  In this  sense,  e x a m i n e s a r g u m e n t and  he  unifies  similar.  p r o p o s i t i o n s and  i n argumentative  and  d i s c o u r s e , f o r l i k e Smith  p e r s u a s i o n and  finds that  e m o t i o n i s t h e m a i n d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n them; t h e i r otherwise  classroom  as C a m p b e l l ' s " g r e a t d e f e c t . . . h i s  W h a t e l y p r o v i d e s i n h i s t e x t a s y s t e m a t i c a n a l y s i s o f how  persuasive discourse.  off-shoot  logical  " I t i s e v i d e n t t h a t Argument must be,  t h e b a s i s o f P e r s u a s i o n , " he w r i t e s i n h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n . d i s c u s s i o n o f p e r s u a s i o n , W h a t e l y e l a b o r a t e s on t h i s  and  degree of b i a s  or  s t r u c t u r e s are i n most cases  at  least,  Later, i n his  theme o f  unity:  P e r s u a s i o n [ i s ] the a r t of i n f l u e n c i n g the W i l l . . . i n order t h a t t h e W i l l may be i n f l u e n c e d , two t h i n g s a r e r e q u i s i t e ; v i z . 1. t h a t t h e p r o p o s e d O b j e c t s h o u l d a p p e a r d e s i r a b l e ; and 2. t h a t t h e Means s u g g e s t e d s h o u l d be p r o v e d t o be c o n d u c i v e t o t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f t h a t o b j e c t ; and t h i s l a s t , e v i d e n t l y m u s t d e p e n d on a p r o c e s s o f R e a s o n i n g . . . . P e r s u a s i o n , t h e r e f o r e , depends on, f i r s t , A r g u m e n t , ( t o p r o v e t h e e x p e d i e n c y o f t h e Means p r o p o s e d ) a n d s e c o n d l y , w h a t i s u s u a l l y c a l l e d E x h o r t a t i o n , i e . t h e e x c i t e m e n t o f men t o a d o p t t h o s e M e a n s . . . ( 1 1 7 118). Whately, l i k e Smith "rules"  of p e r s u a s i o n ;  almost  f o r Whately, these  t h e b a s i s o f c o n v i c t i o n , "an means by w h i c h W h a t e l y a l m o s t s t r u c t u r e s and one  a century e a r l i e r ,  refuses to elaborate  r u l e s h a v e a l r e a d y b e e n s t a t e d and  e s s e n t i a l p a r t of P e r s u a s i o n " f u s e s a r g u m e n t and  e v e n , t o an e x t e n t , t h e i r  (117).  persuasion's  aims: f o r the aim  certainly  according to Whately, Smith,  and  This i s  form one  underlying  logical  of p e r s u a s i o n  (moving  to a c t i o n ) presupposes c o n v i c t i o n (adherence to a concept  action),  on  Campbell.  tied  i n with that  23  W h a t e l y has  subsumed t h e a i m s o f e x p o s i t i o n i n t o a r g u m e n t ,  t h a t a r g u m e n t s o r p r o o f s may i n s t r u c t i o n t o t h o s e who  "give s a t i s f a c t i o n  are ready  treatment  of r h e t o r i c as a r g u m e n t a t i v e  the long run to narrow r h e t o r i c ' s t h a t he  o v e r l o o k many o f t h o s e  including  and  p a s s i o n on t h e b a s i s o f a i m  and  convey  "to compell Yet  the  Whately's  sense only serves  H i s d e f i n i t i o n of r h e t o r i c  narration.  I n f a c t he  treated,  A l s o , the l i n e  h i s more c l a s s i c a l v i e w admits  a gap  in  dictates  of e x p o s i t o r y w r i t i n g which Smith  o f argument, and  p e r s u a s i o n , i s not a t a l l a f i n e one.  (70-71).  i n a formal l o g i c a l  scope.  aspects  as w e l l as  opponent"  t h e s t r u c t u r i n g o f d e s c r i p t i o n and  Whately's formal treatment  t o a c a n d i d m i n d , and  to receive i t , "  a s s e n t , o r s i l e n c e the o b j e c t i o n s , of an  acknowledging  between  of  between  reasoning  structure:  When e n g a g e d i n r e a s o n i n g . . . o u r p u r p o s e n o t o n l y n e e d n o t be c o n c e a l e d , b u t may. . . w i t h o u t p r e j u d i c e t o t h e e f f e c t , be d i s t i n c t l y d e c l a r e d . . . e v e n when t h e f e e l i n g s we w i s h t o e x c i t e a r e s u c h a s o u g h t t o o p e r a t e , s t i l l o u r p u r p o s e and d r i f t s h o u l d be. . . n o t o p e n l y d e c l a r e d . . . T h i s c i r c u m s t a n c e f o r m s a r e m a r k a b l e d i s t i n c t i o n between [ p e r s u a s i o n ] and A r g u m e n t a t i o n (129-30). Two  things are evident i n Whately's t e x t .  rhetoric nature  i s rooted i n l o g i c ,  (broadening  rhetorical  composition  sees as i m p o r t a n t  a i m s and  f o u n d a t i o n c o n s t r u c t e d w h o l l y of f o r m a l l o g i c . argumentative,  and  on  formal logic,  discourse.  achieving  f o r d i s c o u r s e on  occasions as w e l l ) .  the 1820's, c l a s s i f y i n g r a t h e r t h a n by  shall  see,  by  demonstrates  the  a  foundation unites  (though  again,  However, Whately's  p i n s h i s hopes f o r r h e t o r i c  S u c h a f r a m e w o r k c a n o n l y , as we  it,  argumentative  entirely  d e p e n d i n g on i t o n l y t o f o r m t h e f r a m e w o r k f r o m w h i c h t o  a r g u m e n t a p a r t f r o m o t h e r a i m s and After  he  t o be  In theory, t h i s  to convince  main weakness i s t h a t , u n l i k e A r i s t o t l e ,  implies that, since  S e c o n d , he  occasions  p e r s u a s i v e a i m s and  i n s t r u c t i v e d i s c o u r s e seeks i m p l i c i t l y  he  tends  immensely the scope of argument).  d e p e n d e n c y o f w h a t he  instructive,  First,  build  serve e v e n t u a l l y to  set  occasions. d i s c o u r s e a c c o r d i n g t o i t s p u r p o s e and  t h e f o r m i t t o o k on p a p e r ( s u c h a s a l e t t e r  ways o f or  24  n a r r a t i o n ) began s l o w l y t o appear i n t e x t s .  i n f a c t , by t h e 1 8 5 0 ' s i t was  2  q u i t e n o r m a l f o r t e x t b o o k w r i t e r s t o t r y t o do two t h i n g s a t o n c e : t y p e s and aims o f d i s c o u r s e  to a i d i n their  w h a t t h e y saw a s p r o b l e m s c r e a t e d versus  earlier  (1850),  i n the areas of r h e t o r i c a l  theory  I n h i s Elements of the A r t of R h e t o r i c  Day a t t e m p t e d t o r e i n t r o d u c e  i n v e n t i o n t o r h e t o r i c , t o " r e d u c e t o a more  system" t h e elements o f d i s c o u r s e  p r i n c i p l e s , " and emphasize p r a c t i c a l merely as a s c i e n c e . H e  confines  explains h i s choices  explanation, i n this  h i e r a r c h y Day g i v e s  i s n o t t o s a y t h a t he f a i l s discourse;  of pure  f o r t h e o b j e c t s o r immediate ends o f a l l  c o n v i c t i o n , e x c i t a t i o n , and p e r s u a s i o n .  i s similar  t o C a m p b e l l ' s , though Day does n o t  "specific  He c h o o s e s r a t h e r t o e m p h a s i z e  character"  and "immediate end" ( 3 2 ) .  their This  t o show how a f e w b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s c a n u n i f y  he a d o p t s , f o r e x a m p l e , t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n v i e w t h a t a l l  be r e d u c e d t o e s s e n t i a l l y  compositions  two p a r t s , t h e p r o p o s i t i o n a n d t h e d i s c u s s i o n , a n  i n t r o d u c t i o n and p e r o r a t i o n b e i n g  o p t i o n a l f o r Day ( 4 5 ) .  p o i n t of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g the objects and, i m p l i c i t l y , from each other.  He  c o n c e p t i o n i s produced, i s by a new j u d g e m e n t i s p r o d u c e d , i s t h e s e n s i b i l i t i e s i s e f f e c t e d by and i n t h e W i l l , by t h a t o f P e r -  emphasize a s s o c i a t i o n s between these ends. structures, their  Belief"  passage:  The p r o c e s s b y w h i c h a new E x p l a n a t i o n ; t h a t by w h i c h by C o n v i c t i o n ; a c h a n g e i n the process o f E x c i t a t i o n ; suasion ( 4 2 ) .  differing  or the a r t of producing  t o cover "the e n t i r e f i e l d  d i s c o u r s e , " and s t a r t s by a c c o u n t i n g  The  and embarrassments o f t h a t v i e w which  i t t o mere a r g u m e n t a t i v e c o m p o s i t i o n ,  discourse:  to strict philosophical  b e g i n s by s t r o n g l y c r i t i c i z i n g W h a t e l y f o r n o t  ( P r e f a c e , v ) . I n s t e a d , Day i n t e n d s  "proper"  " i n conformity  i n s t r u c t i o n i n r h e t o r i c "as an a r t , and n o t  redeeming r h e t o r i c from "the shackles  can  and a t t e m p t t o r e d r e s s  practice.  H e n r y Day was one s u c h w r i t e r .  exact  instruction,  classify  I n explanation,  according  H o w e v e r , he makes a  the structures of  t o Day, t h e o b j e c t  discourses  of discourse  i s to  25 inform or instruct, already  existing  " t o l e a d t o a new c o n c e p t i o n  i n t h e mind.  o r n o t i o n , o r t o m o d i f y one  . .The o b j e c t o f e x p l a n a t o r y  o b j e c t o r t r u t h t o be p e r c e i v e d "  (51-2).  Included  discourse  i n the processes  i s some of  e x p l a n a t i o n a r e n a r r a t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , a n a l y s i s , e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n , and comparison and c o n t r a s t ; here, explains Yet these  Day r e i n c o r p o r a t e s many o f S m i t h ' s p r i n c i p l e s , a n d  t h e i r uses i n explanatory when D a y d i s c u s s e s  writing.  c o n v i c t i o n ( o r c o n f i r m a t i o n , a s he a l s o c a l l s i t ) ,  p r i n c i p l e s v a n i s h , a n d i n s t e a d we s e e the e s s e n t i a l d i s t i n c t i o n between e x p l a n a t i o n and confirmation. While both processes address the understanding, t h e f o r m e r s e e k s t o p r o d u c e a new o r d i f f e r e n t p e r c e p t i o n , t h e l a t t e r , a new o r d i f f e r e n t b e l i e f o r j u d g e m e n t ( 8 6 ) .  The  process  of confirmation rests,  l i k e W h a t e l y ' s , on a f o r m a l  logical structure:  i n c l u d i n g a c a r e f u l d i v i s i o n and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f v a r i o u s p r o o f s , t o p i c s , r e f u t a t i o n s , and arrangements o f m a t e r i a l . different formal  forms o f d i s c o u r s e  addressing  logical principles, while  What D a y h a s d o n e i s c r e a t e two  the understanding.  the other  One i s b a s e d o n  i s essentially  the Informal  a r g u m e n t a t i o n o f S m i t h , C a m p b e l l , a n d t h e New L o g i c i a n s o f t h e century.  Where do t h e s e  Persuasion  seventeenth  two f o r m s m e r g e ?  i s p e r h a p s one p l a c e .  Although  Day i s o l a t e s p e r s u a s i o n  as he  d o e s t h e o t h e r ends o f d i s c o u r s e , he e m p h a s i z e s t h a t i t " a d m i t s a l l t h e p r o c e s s e s before  described  "different,  specific"  explain motives, processes  action.  ends o f d i s c o u r s e .  convince  (153).  only i n e n t i r e subserviancy  C l e a r l y , Day i s e c h o i n g  can i n t e r r e l a t e f o r that noblest I n this  thus l i n k i n g the  A s D a y e x p l a i n s i t : "One w i l l  t h e j u d g e m e n t . . .move p a s s i o n s .  must be i n t r o d u c e d  of t h e w i l l " discourse  o f e x p l a n a t i o n , c o n v i c t i o n , and e x c i t a t i o n , "  need t o  . .but a l l these  t o t h a t e n d — t h e moving  C a m p b e l l , who shows how t h e e n d s o f  purpose: the moving of the w i l l t o  s e n s e , t h e n , Day h a s a l s o u n i f i e d  different writing  processes  26 under persuasion,  w h i c h becomes t h e  a d d i t i o n to persuasive  techniques)  e x p l a i n i n g a c o n c e p t , and U n f o r t u n a t e l y , Day w i t h the be  emotional, different  and  of t h r e e  conflict  unified  and  of times A  (151).  The  says about p e r s u a s i o n  synthesized  w i t h the  r e s u l t of t h i s b e l i e f are  created  in this  and  p r a c t i c a l aspects  readily  c l a s s i f y and  which i t i s the  thus r e t u r n i n g broadly  we  out  see  and  separately.  s t r u c t u r e s can  be  t h a t r e c u r s a number  thought processes  flaw.  u n d e r l i e the (1859).  of arguments.  domain Hope  . .in s t i l l  emphasizes (as d i d  Hope s t a t e s o n p a g e one  t h e l a w s o f human n a t u r e  o b j e c t of R h e t o r i c  t e x t , and  c o n s t i t u t e s t h e i r major  r e m e m b e r e d r e l a t i o n s , " and  simplify  two  laid  P r i n c e t o n T e x t Book of R h e t o r i c  of c o m p o s i t i o n . ^  i s that  but  that discourse  may  intellectual,  through persuasion,  c o n c e r n f o r how  H o p e ' s The  discourse  d i s c o u r s e aims  "the u l t i m a t e grounds of the v a l i d i t y  more f o r c i b l e ,  belief.  how  t h e a c t u a l p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e m a t e r i a l i s one  text that r e f l e c t s  for  and  t e x t s , and  (in  t h a t "the mind addressed  s t a t e s " corresponding  between the w r i t e r ' s b e l i e f  o f r h e t o r i c i s M.B.  should  expository techniques f o r i n d u c i n g a new  the b e l i e f  the understanding  i n nineteenth-century  sets forth  times,  different  a c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n w h a t Day  This  the  active faculties  become, n o t  c o n s c i o u s l y use  may  overshadowed t h i s p o t e n t i a l l y h o l i s t i c view of  forms a d d r e s s i n g  occasions  f o r w r i t i n g when one  argumentative techniques  "mental s c i e n c e " of  i n e i t h e r one  sole occasion  clear, Day)  that rhetoric  underlying  "the  t o a c c o u n t f o r . . . c o n v i c t i o n and  phenomena persuasion,"  t o W h a t e l y ' s d e f i n i t i o n o f r h e t o r i c ' s s c o p e w h i c h Day  so  criticized. Hope t h e n d i f f e r e n t i a t e s  clearly  b e t w e e n c o n v i c t i o n and  persuasion:  The f o r m e r [ c o n v i c t i o n ] i s an e f f e c t u p o n t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g — t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l or l o g i c a l f a c u l t i e s — t h e l a t t e r , ( p e r s u a s i o n ) i s an e f f e c t u p o n t h e w i l l , p r o d u c i n g a c h a n g e e i t h er of c h a r a c t e r , or conduct ( 2 ) . One  important  way  of c o n v i c t i o n .  i n which t h i s  Influenced  text differs  f r o m W h a t e l y ' s i s Hope's  treatment  by F r a n z T h e r e m i n ' s E l o q u e n c e A V i r t u e , Hope s e e s  the  whole r h e t o r i c a l p r o c e s s , an argumentative a n o t h e r mind.-*  one, as designed t o convey  truth to  A n e t h i c a l v i e w p o i n t c o l o r s n o t o n l y Hope's d i s c u s s i o n o f  i m p a s s i o n e d d i s c o u r s e b u t a l s o h i s d e f i n i t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n : "the statement mind pass  o f an i n t e r m e d i a t e o r m i d d l e t e r m " whose f u n c t i o n i s t o l e t t h e  " i n t h e way o f p r o o f , f r o m known t o unknown t r u t h "  definition i s particularly be n a r r o w  i n scope  (7).  Hope's  important because a " t r u t h " thus proven  and a p p l i c a t i o n :  f o r example, " t r u t h s "  i s likely to  proven u s i n g the  f o r e n s i c o r c o u r t r o o m a p p l i c a t i o n o f a r g u m e n t a t i v e p r o c e s s e s t o become s o p o p u l a r in  later  decades.  Hope a l s o d i f f e r s  from Whately  descriptive, analytical, s e c t i o n on c o n v i c t i o n , end  by d i s c u s s i n g a n d e x p l a i n i n g  e x e m p l i f i c a t o r y , and comparative p r i n c i p l e s w i t h i n h i s  t h o u g h Hope s p e c i f i c a l l y  relates  o f i n s t r u c t i o n , w h i c h he c a l l s a t y p e o f c o n v i c t i o n .  a c t u a l argumentation w i t h formal l o g i c ; structured  narrative,  these processes to the Y e t Hope s t i l l  equates  i n h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of proofs, the less  p r o o f s b y e x a m p l e , s i g n , a n a l o g y , a n d i n d u c t i o n come n e a r  t h e bottom  of h i s h i e r a r c h y . Hope r e l a t e s  conviction to persuasion i n the faculty psychologists'  t h a t t h e p a s s i o n s put c o n v i c t i o n s i n t o a c t i o n , but adds, thus c l e a r l y in  d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from c o n v i c t i o n ,  e x p e r i e n c e and f a c t "  sense  "While p e r s u a s i o n i s  i n theory, i t i s not less  ( 7 7 ) . He t h u s s a n c t i o n e d t h e g r o w i n g  distinct  practical  emphasis  on d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n b e t w e e n a i m s a s w e l l a s s t r u c t u r e s i n d i s c o u r s e , a c a s e o f t h e o r y becoming i n c r e a s i n g l y detached  from  practice.  T h i s p r a c t i c a l emphasis found a p o w e r f u l a l l y Bain's view of r h e t o r i c as e s s e n t i a l l y  stylistic,  f o r d i v i s i o n of d i s c o u r s e i n t o t h e f o u r forms  i n S c o t t i s h educator  Alexander  s e t t i n g an important  precedent  o r "modes" f o r e a s e  of  teaching.  Y e t we h a v e now s e e n t h a t t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f d i s c o u r s e i n t o d i f f e r e n t and  types  s t r u c t u r e s b e g a n l o n g b e f o r e 1 8 6 6 , when B a i n ' s E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n a n d  R h e t o r i c was f i r s t  published i n Britain.  28 B a i n was  an  t h a t t i m e , he  associationist.  overtly allied  e s p e c i a l l y w i t h C a m p b e l l , and  U n l i k e the m a j o r i t y of t e x t book w r i t e r s a t  h i m s e l f not  o n l y w i t h W h a t e l y and  therefore perceived  but  l o g i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s between  h i s modes o f d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , e x p o s i t i o n , and handling  Hugh B l a i r ,  persuasion.**  o f t h e modes i s a l s o , i n some w a y s , r e m i n i s c e n t  Bain's  of Smith's methodology.  L i k e S m i t h , he m e n t i o n s e x p o s i t i o n o n l y a f t e r a n a n a l y s i s o f d e s c r i p t i o n and n a r r a t i o n , and facts."  Bain  shows how shows how  e x p o s i t i o n i s b a s e d on f a c t s can  be  "the  classified,  e x i s t e n c e of  expressed  as a g e n e r a l  c o n t r a s t e d w i t h o t h e r s , b r o k e n down i n t o c o n s t i t u e n t n o t i o n s , a n d t h r o u g h e x a m p l e and ideas.  illustration,  and  Bain's  treatment  dealt  thus i n d u c t i v e l y b u i l d i n g towards  T h e s e a r e m e t h o d s b o t h S m i t h and  writing,  individual  C a m p b e l l saw  r e f l e c t s h i s own  as  importance  of  with their  Bain  d e s c r i p t i o n , f o r a l l forms of d i s c o u r s e but  particularly by  exposition, i s able  e l e m e n t s o f more p e r v a d i n g  t o u c h e d by Bain  the  i s trying  different  in cultivating  the necessary  t a k i n g i n t o account the agreement (which  level.  exposition  he  o b j e c t s of sense" (161). C l e a r l y ,  of d i s c o u r s e  so t h a t t h e y u n d e r l i e a l l  sees (as d i d Campbell) experience  as e s s e n t i a l  f a c t s on w h i c h t o b a s e a p i e c e o f w r i t i n g .  By  r e l a t i o n s h i p s of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , r e t e n t i v e n e s s ,  and  similar  P e r h a p s more t h a n any  u n i f y a l l aspects  principles  f o r an a s s o c i a t i o n i s t  t h a t h i s modes m a n i f e s t  most  human i n t e r e s t , " t o a c k n o w l e d g e " t h e f e e l i n g s  t o draw t o g e t h e r occasions;  Moreover,  to " s o f t e n the r i g o u r s of s c i e n t i f i c  s p e c i a l o b j e c t s of s c i e n c e as  a i m s and  manifestations.  of  a s s o c i a t i n g thought processes shows t h a t n a r r a t i o n and  stylistic  with  complex  integral parts  view of the  law,  logical  other  o f d i s c o u r s e by  cement a l l t h o u g h t p r o c e s s e s ) , s t r u c t u r e s — a t l e a s t at the  t e x t book w r i t e r a t t h a t t i m e ,  illuminating  Bain  argues  stylistic Bain  strove  to  s i m i l a r i t i e s more t h a n d i f f e r e n c e s  b e t w e e n them t h r o u g h a s s o c i a t i o n i s m . If  t h i s i s the case,  fragmentation  i n discourse  why  d i d B a i n become a c a t a l y s t o f d i v i s i o n  r a t h e r than the great  "unifier"?  First,  and h i s modes o f  d i s c o u r s e c o u l d be b o t h classes  ( l a t e r , Bain's  Primarily Great  Bain's  t o 1872,  r e m e m b e r e d and  formalization, Bain's  b a s e and  E n g l i s h Composition  to obscure,  structurally  Bain's  than Whately's,  6).  text circulated widely  and R h e t o r i c was 1886,  and  reprintings  and  r e p r i n t e d each  eleven American  i n t h e l o n g r u n , B a i n ' s more c o m p l e x  year  editions  theoretical  o f h i s "modes."  of argument, though a t f i r s t  more u n i f e d  e v e n t u a l l y descends i n t o f o r m a l i z a t i o n .  t o B a i n , i s " e x p o s i t i o n by p r o o f .  throughout  I n s h o r t , the v e r y p o p u l a r i t y of  the c o m p a r t m e n t a l i z a t i o n  treatment  composition  footnote  s o o n f o l l o w e d by  t h e n f i v e more t i m e s u n t i l  i n s t e a d hastened  Secondly,  can use  was  as o p p o s e d t o o n l y f o u r i n B r i t a i n .  t e x t served  n e a t l y packaged f o r  w o r k became m o r e f o r m a l i z e d ; s e e  t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s and  hosts of i m i t a t i o n s .  came o u t  own  because of t h i s  B r i t a i n and  f r o m 1866  easily  . .part of persuasion"  (165-6).  argument i n e x p o s i t i o n o r p e r s u a s i o n , p r o o f s themselves  Argument,  Although  one  are  r e s o l v a b l e i n t o a l l e g a t i o n s of s i m i l a r i t y or d i s s i m i l a r i t y . . . . t h e f a c t s o r p r i n c i p l e s a d d u c e d m u s t be a d m i t t e d , and s u f f i c i e n t l y b e l i e v e d i n , by t h e h e a r e r s . . . S e c o n d l y , a c e r t a i n s i m i l a r i t y m u s t be a d m i t t e d t o h o l d b e t w e e n t h e f a c t s o r p r i n c i p l e s a d d u c e d a n d t h e p o i n t t o be e s t a b l i s h e d . ( 1 8 7 - 8 ) C l e a r l y , argumentative  s t r u c t u r e f o r m s t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r e x p o s i t i o n and  persuasion i n this  treatment  being  of p r o o f ) , but  the presence  formal l o g i c a l processes  ( t h e d i f f e r e n c e between e x p o s i t i o n and the d e t a i l e d  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the  o f argument w h i c h B a i n g i v e s o b s c u r e s  L i k e W h a t e l y , B a i n d i s t i n g u i s h e s a r g u m e n t and pathos present  In each.  human s u s c e p t i b i l i t i e s  communication" feelings;  One  p e r s u a s i o n by  various link.  the degree of  " A l l P e r s u a s i o n s u p p o s e s t h a t t h e r e a r e some f e e l i n g s t o work upon.  or d i m i n i s h the f e e l i n g s themselves; u n d e r them" ( 2 0 0 ) .  this  argument  I n A r g u m e n t , no  attempt  i t i s c o n s i d e r e d o n l y how  can b a s e p e r s u a s i o n on  " t h e modes o f  i s made t o  " i s a i d e d by a l l t h e a r t s  heighten  to b r i n g a  case  simple  ( d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , e x p o s i t i o n ) , on a r g u m e n t , o r on  B a i n adds t h a t p e r s u a s i o n  or  t h a t can  the strengthen  30 t h e bonds t h a t cement i d e a s i n t h e m i n d " s u c h as t h e f i g u r e s o f s p e e c h . B a i n s e e s p e r s u a s i o n as b o t h and  as a v i t a l  link  to poetics  Argument i n B a i n ' s t h a t w h i c h can  scheme, t h e n ,  increasingly  decreasing concern  a l i k e had  facts  choice.  composition  o r t h a t t h e modes,  either  I n the l a t t e r  composition  be to  the c o n f l i c t between v a l u e s  theorists  the aim  of  (persuasion)  theoretical  or p s y c h o l o g i c a l , f o r however,  t o i n c r e a s i n g demands f o r p r a c t i c a l c o l l e g e  ( I n c l u d i n g Day's and H o p e ' s ) began t o e m p h a s i z e " s k i l l s " treatment  o f e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , and  persuasion,  1880's e x e m p l i f y the c o n t e s t skills,  as  certain  between  or treating writing and  passion, truth  as and  well.  G e o r g e P.  Quackenbos's Advanced Course of Composition  p u b l i s h e d i n 1854,  had  and  Rhetoric,  t r e a t e d d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , a r g u m e n t , and  " c o n s t i t u e n t p a r t s " of d i s c o u r s e i n g e n e r a l . d i d not  needed  argument o r p e r s u a s i o n as  the e x t e n s i o n of a r h e t o r i c a l theory encompassing "reason  "He  rhetoric's  t e x t b o o k w r i t e r s and  decades of the n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y ,  t e x t s w r i t t e n i n response  In their  lent  should  the l e a r n i n g of s k i l l s  t e a c h i n g w r i t i n g as a s e r i e s o f f a c t - c o m m u n i c a t i n g  as  h i s work  that discourse, reflecting  organizational, ethical,  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e t e x t s o f t h e 1 8 7 0 ' s and  g o o d n e s s " as  Yet  M o s t w e r e a b l e t o p r o v i d e some s o r t o f  l e v e l w r i t i n g courses t h e i r aim.  1866,  an e x t e n t a l s o r e f l e c t i n g  (argument).  audience.  factual.  between f o r e g r o u n d i n g  foundation or r a t i o n a l e , their  stance  isolated,  intelligent  from each o t h e r .  accommodate e a s i l y  shortly after  vacillated  rhetoric—to and  and  isolated  popular  c o m m u n i c a t e t h a t w h i c h i s s e e n as until  prose,  s i d e of d i s c o u r s e ,  w i t h the communication of that which i s probable,  broken i n t o f r a g m e n t s — t o  Up  represents the l o g i c a l  i n t e n d t h a t a r g u m e n t be  o r a i m s o f d i s c o u r s e be  c r e d e n c e t o an  modes o f  (184-6).  l e n d d i s c o u r s e c o h e r e n c e i n the minds o f an  C l e a r l y , B a i n d i d not elements,  t h e s y n t h e s i s o f a l l s t r u c t u r e s and  Thus  d i s t i n g u i s h between argument and  first  speculation  Says K i t z h a b e r of Quackenbos,  persuasion"  (196-7).  I n the  edition  31 r e v i s e d by J o h n Q u a c k e n b o s but  strictly  i n 1884,  by form: l e t t e r s ,  d i s c o u r s e s ) , and o r a t i o n s .  kinds  o f p r o s e a r e d i s t i n g u i s h e d n o t by a i m  narratives, fiction,  essays,  " A l l the parts of composition"  7  theses  (argumentative  a r e now  d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , argument, e x p o s i t i o n , and s p e c u l a t i o n  (381).  t h e n drew c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n s between e x p o s i t i o n and argument, w i t h bellettristic  focus  intentions, defines  i n mind  (see footnote  terms, and p r e s e n t s  1):  a  e x p o s i t i o n e x p l a i n s an  doctrines or principles  p r o p o s i t i o n , made w i t h t h e v i e w o f i n d u c i n g b e l i e f as p a r t o f argument  i n others"  author's  for instructional  p u r p o s e s , w h i l e argument i s " t h e s t a t e m e n t o f reasons f o r o r a g a i n s t  sees persuasion  Quackenbos  (354).  a However,  (quite contrary to Bain), f o r i n a  one " l a y s down a p r o p o s i t i o n , a n d e n d e a v o r s t o p e r s u a d e o t h e r s  he  thesis,  that i ti s true"  (385-6). Quackenbos's s h a r p e s t  division,  then,  i s between t h e a i m o f e x p o s i t i o n and  t h a t o f a r g u m e n t / p e r s u a s i o n , and i t i s l i k e l y function plays a s i g n i f i c a n t  role i n this  " e n a b l e s us t o d i s c e r n f a u l t s and b e a u t i e s  that h i s conception  split.  F o r Quackenbos, r h e t o r i c  i n the compositions  . . . i t t e a c h e s us t o e x p r e s s  a n d e m b e l l i s h o u r own t h o u g h t s ,  t h e most f o r c i b l e  (154).  impression"  aims and o c c a s i o n s The S c i e n c e  o f o t h e r s ; and so as t o produce  I n s h o r t , t h i s t e x t bases i t s d i s t i n c t i o n  between e x p o s i t i o n and argument on t h e b e l l e t r i s t i c stylistics—therefore  of rhetoric's  concept o f r h e t o r i c as  d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g , not unifying, underlying  structures f o r  f o r discourse.  of Rhetoric  (1877) by D a v i d J . H i l l b e g i n s , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d ,  by p l a c i n g a l l d i s c o u r s e and a l l purposes f o r i t under a s e t o f "laws": "Mind, I d e a ,  and Form.  L i k e Whately, H i l l "producing  . .the r e l a t i o n between thought and i t s e x p r e s s i o n . " ^  sees t h e f u c t i o n s of d i s c o u r s e as p r i m a r i l y  some c h a n g e i n t h e m i n d a d d r e s s e d . "  change b e , i t i s p r o d u c e d by i d e a s . the  those o f  laws of e f f e c t i v e d i s c o u r s e "  But H i l l  argumentative,  adds "whatever t h i s  . . .Rhetoric i s , t h e r e f o r e , the science of  (37).  Indeed, l i k e Campbell, H i l l  insists  on a  32  r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o g i c , w h i c h " g i v e s w h i c h l e t s us " c o n f i r m Hill's  looking  At f i r s t  at discourse  glance, t h i s  structure—a  from simple t o p r o g r e s s i v e l y  (107).  and argument ( d e a l t w i t h  i n an a n a l y s i s o f types,  "parts" or things. of  (them) t o t h e mind o f a n o t h e r "  treatment of e x p o s i t i o n  Idea") i s rooted  us t h e t e s t o f arguments," and r h e t o r i c ,  descriptions  u n d e r "Laws o f  o f , a n d r e l a t i o n s among  t r e a t m e n t seems t o o f f e r a u n i f i e d way  movement, i n t h e t r u e L o c k e i a n  tradition,  more c o m p l e x i n t e r r e l a t i o n s among i d e a s .  But H i l l  o b s c u r e s t h e s e i n t e r r e l a t i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y when h e comes t o d e s c r i b i n g t h e p r a c t i c e of exposition in  and argument.  such an a n a l y s i s o f a general  notion  of which i t i s the sign"  through d e f i n i t i o n ;  The a i m o f e x p o s i t i o n , he s a y s ,  term as w i l l (95).  through i t s r e l a t i o n s with  make c l e a r t o t h e m i n d t h e g e n e r a l  One may i n c r e a s e  extend the notion  comprehension of a  through analysis or d i v i s i o n ;  other notions  sees as r e l a t i n g p r o p o s i t i o n s  receives  treatment i n v o l v i n g a f u l l  formal  t y p e s and n a t u r e o f v a r i o u s  arguments.  a scheme i n w h i c h c l a s s i c a l  argument, w h i l e  inductive, synthetic  to  or explain i t  conclusions)  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the  N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g i t s dense  e x p o s i t i o n here i s once a g a i n i n f o r m a l l y a r g u m e n t a t i v e . created  notion  (example, c o m p a r i s o n , cause and e f f e c t ) .  However, argument ( w h i c h H i l l t h e now u s u a l  "consists  definition,  L i k e Day, H i l l has  scholastic l o g i c provides the structure f o r l o g i c provides another,  separate  structure—exposition.^ Few, i f a n y , o f t h e c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s e x a m i n e d s o f a r h a v e p r e s e n t e d a n y p r i n c i p l e s g o v e r n i n g c o m p o s i t i o n which have n o t appeared e a r l i e r t h e o r y i n some f o r m o r a n o t h e r .  One w r i t e r , J . S c o t t  Clark,  i nrhetorical  admits i n A  P r a c t i c a l Rhetoric  f o r I n s t r u c t i o n i n E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n and R e v i s i o n  t h a t he i n t r o d u c e s  " f e w new p r i n c i p l e s , " b o r r o w i n g e x t e n s i v e l y  Blair,  Campbell, Whately, Bain,  divides discourse and  Quackenbos, H i l l ,  and o t h e r s .  1 0  from  Aristotle,  Clark  i n t o t h e forms of d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , e x p o s i t i o n ,  i n t e r e s t i n g l y , persuasion rather  than argument.  Exposition  (1886)  oratory,  i s "the statement  33 and  d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e e s s e n t i a l a t t r i b u t e s o f some a b s t r a c t o r g e n e r a l  theme,"  and  C l a r k s p e c i f i c a l l y warns t h e student  other  forms"  (283-4).  I n this  he  C l a r k i s concerned  cites  i t with  s e n s e t h e " p r a c t i c a l i t y " o f t h e t e x t i s a m e a s u r e o f how  e a s i l y one c a n d i s t i n g u i s h sense,  t o "avoid confounding  t h e forms o f d i s c o u r s e from each o t h e r .  I n another  about t h e a n a l y s i s and c r i t i c i s m o f l i t e r a r y works, f o r  c h a r a c t e r s k e t c h e s , book r e v i e w s , and p l o t  of e x p o s i t i o n on w h i c h c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s  summaries as p r i m e  examples  ought t o f o c u s .  P e r s u a s i o n r e c e i v e s a f a m i l i a r d e f i n i t i o n from C l a r k : " t h a t form of composition the w i l l  designed  t o influence the b e l i e f  of the w r i t e r . "  a n d t h e c o n d u c t o f men a c c o r d i n g t o  He a d d s  Of a l l t h e f o r m s o f c o m p o s i t i o n , t h i s i s d o u b t l e s s t h e most i m p o r t a n t . . . .One may s e l d o m f e e l i t n e c e s s a r y t o e n g a g e i n formal description,, n a r r a t i o n , or exposition; but there i s hardl y a n A m e r i c a n c i t i z e n whose i n t e r e s t s do n o t o f t e n d e p e n d u p o n his a b i l i t y t o i n f l u e n c e t h e b e l i e f and conduct o f h i s a s s o c i ates (288). U n l i k e many o t h e r as a s e c o n d a r y designed [the] says  textbook w r i t e r s ,  part of persuasion.  end" ( 2 8 9 ) . this:  as Quackenbos, C l a r k sees argument  Thus he c o n c u r s  t o e n s u r e t h a t " t h e means p r o p o s e d .  w i t h B a i n t h a t argument i s  . .be p r o v e d  t o be c o n d u c i v e  to  And as f o r t h e m a t e r i a l w i t h w h i c h arguments a r e formed, C l a r k  "The w r i t e r m u s t t h i n k , " f a l l  Though C l a r k ' s t r e a t m e n t and  such  b a c k o n h i s own k n o w l e d g e  (288).  o f argument i s r e f r e s h i n g l y d e v o i d o f f o r m a l  logic,  t h o u g h he s t a t e s i t s l i n k w i t h p e r s u a s i o n , h e r e p e a t s Q u a c k e n b o s ' s a n d H i l l ' s  refusal  t o l i n k argument t o e x p o s i t i o n .  a l r e a d y been quoted here; citizen's mainly  practical  C l a r k ' s reason  " f o r m a l " e x p o s i t i o n has l i t t l e  interests.  In this  f o rthis  c h o i c e has  t o do w i t h a n A m e r i c a n  text, exposition i s the isolated  because C l a r k equates i t not w i t h everyday  form,  discourse but with  belle-lettres. By  c o n t r a s t , T h e o d o r e W. H u n t i n T h e P r i n c i p l e s  of Written Discourse  p u b l i s h e d i n 1884) t a k e s a p s y c h o l o g i c a l a p p r o a c h t o r h e t o r i c and  (first  composition  34 teaching. are.  H i s aim i s t o " e s t a b l i s h guiding  . .pressed  i n place  of organic  principles.  principles,  . . [ f o r ] when  precepts  the entire a r t [of discourse]  descends t o t h e l e v e l o f p e d a n t r y and i s n o t worthy o f t h e d e v o t i o n o f intelligent minds." true philosophy  Hunt i n t e n d s  1 1  o f t h e mind," and y e t n o t n e g l e c t  p r a c t i c a l knowledge o f t h e w o r l d , awesome t a s k f o r a n y  in a  language, l i t e r a t u r e ,  a  o r the "moral elements i n d i s c o u r s e " — a  truly  textbook.  Hunt c r i t i c i z e s Whately f i r s t logic  t o "reveal the basis of discourse  and r h e t o r i c t o g e t h e r  (a seemingly popular  (12).  pastime) f o rc o l l a p s i n g  H i s r e t a l i a t i o n i s to divide discourse  t y p e s o n t h e b a s i s o f "Human P o w e r s o f I n t e l l e c t , F e e l i n g s , a n d W i l l " ;  into  this  p s y c h o l o g i c a l s l a n t y i e l d s e x p o s i t i o n and argument f o r t h e i n t e l l e c t , and persuasion  f o r the w i l l ,  scheme ( 2 0 8 - 9 ) .  (Again,  used t h i s conception "sole office not  discourse  of discourse  i n t h e i r own w o r k s . )  . . .As i t s i m p l y  t h e t r u t h o f a p r o p o s i t i o n , i t h a s no p l a c e  impression,  persuasion have  F o r Hunt,  i n this already  exposition's  aims t o e s t a b l i s h t h e meaning and f o r t h e c o n v i n c i n g and  Y e t Hunt emphasizes t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n " i s t h e b a s i s o f c o n v i c t i o n , and p e r s u a s i o n "  cannot persuade without this  preceding  we h a v e s e e n how C a m p b e l l , D a y , a n d H i l l  i s to instruct.  persuasive."  and  with emotional  foundation  (224-6).  ensuring  L i k e C a m p b e l l , Hunt b e l i e v e s t h a t one  t h a t an audience understands a concept  of f a c u l t y psychology accounts f o r Hunt's  first,  seemingly  m e c h a n i c a l t r e a t m e n t o f t h e "human p o w e r s . " Hunt c l a r i f i e s and in  h i s conception  argument " i n t h a t t h e f i r s t that often the best  then discusses  stance,  t h i n g i n argument i s t h e e x p o s i t i o n o f t e r m s , and  way o f e x p l a i n i n g a n i d e a i s t o p r o v e i t " ( 2 2 4 - 6 ) .  argumentative proof,  p o i n t o f what he c a l l s  of t h e c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between e x p o s i t i o n  t r e a t i n g i t both f o r m a l l y and from t h e view-  the "Topical A r t , " or informal proofs.  t h a t t h e w r i t e r must c o n s i d e r  definitions, proofs,  He  human v a l u e s ,  colors this  His ethical discussion;  t o p i c s a r e l i n k e d by e t h i c a l p u r p o s e ( 2 2 7 - 5 5 ) .  Y e t Hunt  35 denies  t h a t argument " i s e q u i v a l e n t  itself.  and p u r p o r t  insists  t h a t a r g u m e n t " i s b u t o n e among o t h e r s , " a n d t h a t ,  h e h a d t o c h o o s e a f o r m t o subsume a l l o t h e r s , i t w o u l d b e p e r s u a s i o n  Persuasion,  t o Hunt, i n c l u d e s the highest  e t h i c a l purpose: i n t h i s  s e n s e , he r e i t e r a t e s C a m p b e l l and B a i n .  p u r p o s e s f o r w r i t i n g w i t h a common u n d e r l y i n g being  a focal point f o r explanation, proof,  i n s i s t e n c e on d i s t i n g u i s h i n g t h e aims and o c c a s i o n s  and  E x p o s i t i o n , alone  persuasive,"  i n i t s vacuum o f h a v i n g  r e f l e c t s Hunt's i m p l i c i t  Y e t H u n t was o n e o f a s t u b b o r n  i n t h e t e x t between h i s  "no p l a c e  r e l i a n c e on a d y i n g  theoretical foundation.  By t h e 1890's, t h i s f o u n d a t i o n  of  f o r the convincing faculty  with at least  of formula  over philosophy  psychology.  some s o r t o f  was s w i f t l y  E x p o s i t i o n , argument, and p e r s u a s i o n — r e f l e c t i n g t h e  metamorphoses d u r i n g A brief  f o r teaching  b r e e d o f r h e t o r i c i a n s who r e a l i z e d t h e  p r a c t i c a l precepts  triumph  o f t h e mind," and h i s  of discourse  importance of supporting  from t e x t s .  persuasion  and e t h i c a l / e m o t i o n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s .  t h e o r y o f r h e t o r i c based on "a t r u e p h i l o s o p h y  purposes.  time t o r e u n i t i n g  s t r u c t u r e f o r them,  problem w i t h Hunt, however, l i e s w i t h a c o n f l i c t  holistic  (226-7).  d e g r e e s o f e m o t i o n , immediacy., a n d  H u n t h a d come c l o s e r t h a n many t e x t b o o k w r i t e r s a t t h i s  The  to discourse  . . .This view o f t h e s c i e n c e i s undoubtedly extreme and  misleading.He if  i n i t s province  i n teaching  disappearing growing  composition—began their  t h i s decade i n t o d i s c r e t e "forms" o r " t y p e s "  final  of discourse.  l o o k a t some t e x t s u s e d i n t h e e a r l y 1 8 9 0 ' s shows t h a t o n l y a f e w t a t t e r s  f a c u l t y psychology s t i l l  clung  to composition  theoretical rationale fordifferentiating  theory  and p r a c t i c e , p r o v i d i n g a  e x p o s i t i o n from argument.  J o h n G.R. M c E l r o y ' s T h e S t r u c t u r e o f E n g l i s h P r o s e  ( s i x t h e d i t i o n 1890)  e x e m p l i f i e s t h e k i n d o f t e x t t h a t equated forms o f d i s c o u r s e w i t h t h e understanding,  f e e l i n g s , and w i l l .  Repeating  argument as d e a l i n g w i t h  judgments, p e r s u a s i o n  " e x p l a n a t i o n " as s e t t i n g  f o r t h the nature  many e a r l i e r  ideas, McElroy  as i n f l u e n c i n g t h e w i l l ,  of terms—defining  them.  defines  and  "Inp r a c t i c e ,  36 the processes  o f E x p l a n a t i o n a n d A r g u m e n t , e t c . c a n n e v e r be c a r r i e d o n  alone," McElroy  admits,  suggesting  t h a t i f one  b e t w e e n t h e p a r t s o f a n a r g u m e n t , t h e two persuasion and  he e c h o e s H u n t h e r e ( 3 2 5 ) .  from each other s t r u c t u r a l l y  Walter  o f H a l i f a x , N.S.  argumentation  enjoyed  as a f o r m o f d i s c o u r s e .  A w r i t e r must p r e s e n t  (71-3).  H e r e we  f o r m a l l o g i c as  see  If  one  and,  1895,  learned  and  has  a s i t s end  to develop  the  of  & W  not  "production and  of  then  prove  bolstered with  r e l a t i o n s h i p as w e l l I n other  as  words,  f o r the i n c r e a s i n g p o p u l a r i t y of  time, i t would probably  be  the work of  a s s i s t a n t p r o f e s s o r o f E n g l i s h , he was  a systematic course  i n debate.  r e p r i n t i n g s up  source  The  of i n s t r u c t i o n i n  well-known " b r i e f " or formal  h i s P r i n c i p l e s of Argumentation, t o as l a t e as 1925.  " f o r e n s i c s " from Baker's courses  Generations  and  texts.  p r e s t i g e t h a t t h e B a k e r s y s t e m q u i c k l y became w i d e s p r e a d ; certainly  f o u r by A  e x p o s i t i o n but  real attention.  particular  An  h i s c r e a t i o n , and  their  remain  the world of o p i n i o n ) i s i g n o r e d .  particularly,  enjoyed  presented  t h e m e t h o d o f p r o o f , w h i l e "common s e n s e "  Baker of H a r v a r d .  o u t l i n e was  p r i n t i n g s and  a r g u m e n t subsumed w i t h e x p o s i t i o n and  c o u l d p o i n t t o any  t e x t book w r i t e r  argument  H i s I n t r o d u c t o r y Text-Book  e i t h e r a p r o p o s i t i o n , or a term,  f o r m a l l o g i c a l argument i n t e x t s a t t h i s G e o r g e P.  "fair  A r g u m e n t , s a i d D a l g l e i s h , c o n s t i t u t e s one  emotional/ethical proofs receive l i t t l e p e r s u a s i o n (and  t o be  t o e x p l a i n more s y s t e m a t i c a l l y  twelve Edinburgh  up u n t i l 1893)  i n order  e x p o s i t i o n and  argument.  types of e x p o s i t o r y composition,  belief." it  (which  Interestingly,  1  text.  S c o t t D a l g l e i s h , however, attempted  E n g l i s h Composition  o f two  linked." -*  Still,  in this  t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between e x p o s i t i o n and  MacKinlay  be  "explanations  " i n v o l v e s E x p l a n a t i o n , Argument, and E x c i t a t i o n "  judicious";  isolated  may  inserts  strictly  first  argumentation argumentative  first  published i n  of budding  S u c h was this  the  trend  lawyers  Harvard's almost  c o n t r i b u t e d t o the "detachment" of i n f o r m a l methods of argument i n  composition  t e x t s and  t h e i r gradual replacement  w i t h an  i s o l a t e d b l o c k of  formal  37 l o g i c a l methods o f  reasoning.  Many t e x t b o o k w r i t e r s , h o w e v e r , i n s i s t e d exposition, reasons  on a r g u m e n t ' s l i n k  even i f they weren't a b l e t o a r t i c u l a t e the n a t u r e  behind  i t s existence.  s a i d , " I t m u s t be Exposition.  A r l o Bates,  with  of the l i n k or  the  i n T a l k s on W r i t i n g E n g l i s h (1896)  e v i d e n t t o anyone t h a t Argument i s c l o s e l y a l l i e d  . . since i f a truth i s clearly  set f o r t h i t i s l i k e l y  with to carry  conviction with i t . "  H i s d e c l a r a t i o n t h a t " i n E x p o s i t i o n the w r i t e r d e c l a r e s ; i n  A r g u m e n t he  and  "defense"  defends,"  could almost  significantly, discourse.  Bates  emphasizing.  c o u l d be  h a v e b e e n w r i t t e n by B a k e r .  r e j e c t s p e r s u a s i o n as h a v i n g  "Persuasion, i n the s t r i c t  of c o m p o s i t i o n ,  ( f o r one)  h i s d i s c u s s i o n of the formal proofs i n v o l v e d i n t h i s  but  B a i n ' s work had  reduced  t o mere s t y l i s t i c  students'  — s p e e c h e s , essays,  i s of course quotes Bates  to a l o g i c a l  embellishment  and  discussions—largely  as  end,  though Hunt  a real  are  He  suited  a l s o saw  " A c t i n g on composition  to communicating than  the t u r n of the c e n t u r y .  He  both  his of whether  a l i n k between argument,  from persuasion e x p o s i t i o n  i n t h e o r y , i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o k e e p them s e p a r a t e poignant  need  ( 1 ) . I m p l i c i t h e r e i s an  o c c a s i o n as t h e d e t e r m i n a n t s  "However d i s t i n c t  ( 1 ) , a n u n i n t e n t i o n a l and  p r a c t i c e by  ( 1 8 9 8 ) saw  y e a r s ' work I n E n g l i s h  argumentative"  formal or i n f o r m a l .  values  "facts."  MacEwan d e a l t w i t h a r g u m e n t d i f f e r e n t l y  persuasion:  argumentation  two  approach i s best  r e c o g n i z i n g p u r p o s e and  a n a r g u m e n t s h o u l d be e x p o s i t i o n , and  last  of  not a k i n d  t e c h n i c a l approach to w r i t i n g w i t h the l i t e r a r y .  values.  contemporaries,  of  E s s e n t i a l s of Argumentation  assumption that the argumentative  and  sense of the term,  a t l a s t been c a r r i e d  t h i s c o n v i c t i o n [ t h e w r i t e r ] made t h e  practice"  very  would have shuddered to t h i n k t h a t h i s v e h i c l e f o r communicating  for mixing  and  and  no p l a c e among t h e f o r m s  a q u a l i t y of s t y l e , " K i t z h a b e r (211)  E l l a s J . MacEwan, i n The  "facts"  Finally,  reminder  o f t h e gap  c o n t i n u e s — " O n e may  between wish  in  in theory  38 the  same a d d r e s s t o i n f o r m ,  to convince,  to arouse,  to e x p l a i n a f a c t ,  e s t a b l i s h a t r u t h , o r t o I n f l u e n c e an a c t i o n " ( 1 - 2 ) . discourse  as d i v i d e d i n t o f o r m s , modes, o r t y p e s .  methods of r e l a t i n g "persuasive  MacEwan c l e a r l y  Rather,  he  l e a v i n g room t o c o m m u n i c a t e v a l u e s  and  d i d not  see  tended to place a l l  i d e a s u n d e r a g e n e r a l h e a d i n g w h i c h c o u l d be  writing,"  to  called  opinions  as w e l l  as  facts. MacEwan, h o w e v e r , c o u l d n o t a r g u m e n t , and He  was  persuasion  r e c o n c i l e the c o n f l i c t  as b e i n g  different  i n theory  among e x p o s i t i o n ,  and  similar  f o r c e d t o a d m i t t h a t some s o r t o f u n i t y among them e x i s t s b e c a u s e o f  d i r e c t i o n he  took i n h i s t e x t , u n i t i n g d i s c o u r s e  t h r o u g h p u r p o s e and  even though the f a c u l t y psychology-based t e x t s k e p t i n s i s t i n g the  o t h e r h a n d , J o h n G e n u n g was  able  i n v e n t i o n , not  faculty  psychology.  i n s t e a d of f o u r ( p e r s u a s i o n as m a n i f e s t a t i o n s  of the  One  as w e l l a s  (1899), of the  i n v e n t i o n a l process.  s t a t e d , "may  foundation  n a r r a t i o n and  description"  c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f t h o u g h t , and  decided  i n ordinary that the  reasoning  (as opposed to p u r e l y  (245),  discourse could  to a w r i t e r ' s purpose. (values) or w i t h  t r u t h s , s u c h as  are  the  fact,  subjects  the  can  be  a d a p t e d t o c l e a r and  facts.  Persuasion,  of  and  saw  forensic) literary simple  argument as  and  and  tasks"  (407-8).  n a t u r a l progress  demonstrating  truth  effective  of  the  through  e x p l o i t i n g the v a r i o u s g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s ( c r e a t e d through e x p o s i t i o n ) between and  of  subjects  what forms of argument a r e most u s e f u l  t o p o i c o n s t i t u t e d "the  thought" In discourse  forms  (407-8).  Genung c h o s e t o i n q u i r e "how  prevalent  for  five  forms of  t h a t i s , e i t h e r w i t h t r u t h g e n e r a l i z e d i n t o n o t i o n s , s u c h as a r e particular  On  rhetorical  C e r t a i n "mental a p t i t u d e s "  deal e i t h e r with ideas  e x p o s i t i o n , o r w i t h i n d i v i d u a l and  occasion—  to present  a r g u m e n t ) , Genung saw  the  separation.  a t e x t based on  l a s t authors  i n f l u e n c e the arrangement of m a t e r i a l a c c o r d i n g " A r g u m e n t a t i o n , " he  on  to construct a t h e o r e t i c a l  h i s t e x t , P r a c t i c a l Elements of R h e t o r i c  He  i n practice.  meanwhile, communicated " p r a c t i c a l ,  personal  truths,  ideas  39 impulse"  (447).  This  treatment  of d i s c o u r s e i n d u c t i v e l y  progress  f r o m o b s e r v a t i o n ( d e s c r i p t i o n and  ( e x p o s i t i o n ) to communicating these  traces a writer's  n a r r a t i o n ) to g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s  t o an a u d i e n c e  ( a r g u m e n t and  persuasion).  s u c h , G e n u n g ' s t e x t comes c l o s e s t i n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h t h e m a j o r i t y o f o t h e r s the 1890's t o a v i e w of p r o s e inductive inquiry order of In  as b a s e d o n  w i t h argument d e f i n e d as  "intended  statement"  through  and  developed  and  proofs.  are  "of the nature  completely  Sykes's Elementary  t h e f o r m u l a r i z a t i o n o f argument and  p u b l i s h e d by Copp C l a r k o f T o r o n t o ,  A brief  the t e x t l i s t s to convince  r e f e r e n c e notes  and  the  t o p i c s such as  "elementary,"  but  this  the standard  one  structure.  (199).  Certainly  o f d i s c o u r s e was  Composition  (1899),  the reader  the reader  of everyday  t r e n d was  also intended by  t o do  logical  Carpenter's  intended  the p r o p o s i t i o n , t o our  sympathy" as  this  limited  here  text i s  to form a  firm  to emphasize similarities  the or  their  E l e m e n t s o f R h e t o r i c and E n g l i s h  for high schools.  p r o o f , we  call  call  " W r i t i n g that attempts  argument; w r i t i n g  persuasion"  the now-ubiquitous  a t t e n t i o n i n h i s chapter  a  o°pinion.  s o m e t h i n g , we  p r o p o s i t i o n , f o r m a l p r o o f s , and Carpenter's  G.R.  of  Even expository w r i t i n g ,  d i f f e r e n c e between d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s r a t h e r than t h e i r  Continuing this  f o u r "modes,"  of the t r u t h or f a l s i t y  c o l l e g e courses, which would continue  a p p l i c a t i o n to the world  First  o f o c c a s i o n s , i s more o r l e s s  "Making Peanut B r i t t l e "  foundation for later  of d i s c o u r s e .  t e x t sees forms of d i s c o u r s e  i n n a t u r e , f u n c t i o n , and  I t s treatment  Composition  t h a t "arguments t h a t a p p e a l  of p e r s u a s i o n , " but  separate  English  formal induction, deduction,  which other t e x t s a p p l i e d to a v a r i e t y  induce  whereby  into a subject creates g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s (syntheses)  g r e a t c o n t r a s t , F r e d e r i c k H.  convince  one  in  ideas.  (1900) exemplifes  to  Informal argumentation,  As  on a r g u m e n t .  adds p r o v o c a t i v e l y t h a t " p e r s u a s i o n p a r t a k e s  (107).  that attempts  the penultimate  of the nature  to  Such t o o l s as  b r i e f r e c e i v e the bulk On  to  the  of  page  of b o t h argument  he and  40 exposition.  . .partly  into detail.  The  somehow d i s t a n t l y t a k e n as By  to convince.  reader  and  a result  of i n f o r m a l argumentative  c o n t r a s t , e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n , and  fell  events.  i t had  likely  and  t o be  concerned  go are  course, can  be  and  "fact,"  tended  c o m m o n l y , was  to fade i n t o  the treatment fragmented  a t l e a s t up  i n c r e a s i n g emphasis on  classroom,  t o and  able to "preach  (so c e n t r a l  to the  to  unconverted."  now  the form and  most l i k e l y  emotion,  t h e means by  d i s t r u s t e d by  (as i n A r l o Bates' t e x t ) ,  students  o r more  "specialized" oratory.  p e r s u a s i o n c o n t i n u e s t o be  including  the 1960's.  s k i l l s , on  texts,  a  Submerged and  smothered  communication of " f a c t s "  as a v e h i c l e f o r c o m m u n i c a t i n g  i n the  values  emerged i n t r e a t m e n t s  of e x p o s i t i o n .  Some  However,  lifeblood  of r h e t o r i c , o p i n i o n a b l e d i s c o u r s e , c o n t i n u e d t o d r a i n s t e a d i l y out  classroom  i n s t r u c t i o n d u r i n g t h e f i r s t few  It  i s extremely  significant,  also,  to  Though p e r s u a s i o n r e t a i n e d  f o r a l o n g , dry p e r i o d i n the h i s t o r y of c o m p o s i t i o n t e a c h i n g .  i t s principles occasionally  As  of  look at twentieth-century composition  specialized  i n f o r m a l argumentation  disappeared  that a b i l i t y  t o some s o r t o f a c t i o n ,  stylistics  i n my  definition,  unfortunately, also to formal l o g i c .  o f e x p o s i t i o n , argument, and  one,  lost  emotional—but  subsumed i n t o a r g u m e n t a s  A s w i l l become a p p a r e n t  such as  o c c a s i o n a l l y n a r r a t i o n and  the debating t a b l e .  become m a i n l y  settled  E x p o s i t i o n , designed  with general audiences,  a n c i e n t aim o f i n d u c i n g an a u d i e n c e i t d i d so had  concepts  f o r m a l r e a s o n i n g , a r g u m e n t was  c o n c e n t r a t e on t h e c o u r t r o o m  of  But  to argumentation,  o f t h i s f o c u s on  discourse least  by  f a i l s to  p e r s u a s i o n had  t o t e a c h , " p r a c t i c a l " modes.  and C a m p b e l l ' s p h i l o s o p h i e s ) t o be  T h a t t a s k now  of  of the w r i t i n g  t h e t u r n o f t h e c e n t u r y , e x p o s i t i o n , argument, and  d e s c r i p t i o n o f f a c t s and  which  but  discrete.  comparison  its  (107)  "chunks" of d i s c o u r s e which  r e l a t e d , but, f o r the purposes  i n s t r u c t , made u s e  Smith's  to induce"  i s l e f t with separate  i n t o r e a d i l y remembered, easy to  . .partly  decades of t h i s  century.  t h a t t h i s p e r i o d ( t h e 1890's t o  the  the of  1960's) corresponds both to a n o t i c e a b l e l o s s c l a s s r o o m and  of r h e t o r i c ' s  respectability  o f i t s s t a t u s a s a means f o r d i a l o g u e a b o u t e t h i c a l  purposes.  i n the  42 ^ A l e x a n d e r B a i n , E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n and R h e t o r i c : A M a n u a l (London: L o n g m a n s , G r e e n , and Co., 1 8 6 6 ) . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . I n 1 8 8 7 , B a i n ' s r e v i s e d E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n and R h e t o r i c was published. The f i r s t p a r t o f t h i s t e x t , " I n t e l l e c t u a l Q u a l i t i e s o f S t y l e , " e l i m i n a t e d t h e " s o - c a l l e d k i n d s o f c o m p o s i t i o n " i n o r d e r t o f o c u s on " o t h e r connexions" ( v i ) : the forms of l i t e r a r y a r t . Here, B a i n emphasized o b s e r v a t i o n , a n a l y s i s , and c r i t i c i s m o f w o r k s ( 2 3 3 ) and how s t y l e c a r r i e s i n t e l l e c t u a l and emotional q u a l i t i e s . I n e f f e c t , he u n i f i e d d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r a l l y t h r o u g h w h a t he h a d e a r l i e r r e f e r r e d t o ( i n 1866) a s " t h e b o n d s t h a t c e m e n t i d e a s i n t h e mind." ^ G e o r g e P. Q u a c k e n b o s , A d v a n c e d C o u r s e o f C o m p o s i t i o n a n d R h e t o r i c : A S e r i e s o f P r a c t i c a l L e s s o n s , r e v i s e d by J o h n D. Q u a c k e n b o s (New Y o r k : A m e r i c a n B o o k Company, 1 8 8 4 ) , p. 3 5 5 . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number i n the t e x t . D a v i d J . H i l l , The S c i e n c e o f R h e t o r i c : A n I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e L a w s o f E f f e c t i v e D i s c o u r s e (New Y o r k : S h e l d o n & Company, 1 8 7 7 ) . A l l further references w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . 8  ^ I n h i s l a t e r t e x t , The E l e m e n t s o f R h e t o r i c and C o m p o s i t i o n : A T e x t - B o o k f o r S c h o o l s and C o l l e g e s , new e d i t i o n (New Y o r k : S h e l d o n & Company, 1 8 8 6 ) , H i l l a g a i n u n i t e d grammar and l o g i c w i t h r h e t o r i c , " t o add t o c o r r e c t n e s s and c o n c i s e n e s s s u c h f o r c e and a t t e n t i v e n e s s a s t o make o u r t h o u g h t s c l e a r and interesting." He d i d n o t m e n t i o n modes o r f o r m s o f d i s c o u r s e . I n s t e a d , H i l l w a n t e d t h e l e s s e x p e r i e n c e d w r i t e r t o m a s t e r w h a t was b a s i c a l l y a n i n f o r m a l argumentative s t r u c t u r e f i r s t . " F a c t s , I l l u s t r a t i o n s , or arguments" are e s s e n t i a l t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n i n a p i e c e o f w r i t i n g , he s a i d , and w e n t o n t o show how one c o u l d a r r a n g e t h e s e e i t h e r a n a l y t i c a l l y o r s y n t h e t i c a l l y ( 1 6 - 2 2 ) . J . Scott Clark, A P r a c t i c a l Rhetoric for I n s t r u c t i o n i n English C o m p o s i t i o n and R e v i s i o n i n C o l l e g e s a n d I n t e r m e d i a t e S c h o o l s (New Y o r k : H e n r y H o l t a n d Company, 1 8 8 6 ) , p. v i i . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . 1  0  ^ T h e o d o r e W. H u n t , The P r i n c i p l e s o f W r i t t e n D i s c o u r s e , s e c o n d e d i t i o n (New Y o r k : A.C. A r m s t r o n g and S o n , 1 8 8 6 ) , p p . 8-11. A l l further references w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number I n t h e t e x t . l ^ H u n t was, o f c o u r s e , r i g h t g i v e n t h a t a r g u m e n t was i n c r e a s i n g l y b e i n g e q u a t e d w i t h a f o r m a l l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e w h o s e o n l y g o a l , i t s e e m e d , was t o s h a r p e n s t u d e n t s ' a b i l i t i e s t o f e r r e t o u t f a l l a c i e s and f a c t s . O b v i o u s l y Hunt d i d not w i s h t o see a l l of r h e t o r i c reduced t o t h i s k i n d of s o p h i s t r y . l ^ H e r e , i n c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r d e r , i s an a n n o t a t e d l i s t o f c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s e x a m i n e d p u b l i s h e d b e t w e e n 1890 and 1906: J o h n G.R. M c E l r o y , The S t r u c t u r e o f E n g l i s h P r o s e : A M a n u a l o f Composition a n d R h e t o r i c , s i x t h e d i t i o n ( T o r o n t o : R o s e P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1 8 9 0 ) . I n a sense, t h i s t e x t e x e m p l i f i e s t h e a l r e a d y w i d e gap b e t w e e n r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r y and p r a c t i c e i n c o l l e g e s by t h e 1 8 9 0 ' s . I n h i s p r e f a c e , M c E l r o y s a y s t h a t he i n t e n d s t o d e v o t e most space i n h i s book t o s t y l e , b e c a u s e q u e s t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o i n v e n t i o n " a r e l a r g e l y t h e o r e t i c a l " and n o t o f c o n c e r n t o " y o u n g e r c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s . " S t y l i s t i c c o n c e r n s s u c h a s grammar, v o c a b u l a r y , s e n t e n c i n g , a n d o t h e r " q u a l i t i e s " t a k e up o v e r 230 p a g e s o f t h i s 3 3 6 - p a g e t e x t . McElroy bases h i s d i s c u s s i o n of i n v e n t i o n and a r r a n g e m e n t on w h a t a r e e s s e n t i a l l y A r i s t o t e l i a n t o p o i , b u t a s p r o m i s e d , t h e a i m s , o c c a s i o n s , and s t r u c t u r e s o f d i s c o u r s e g e t s h o r t s h r i f t . I  43 ^ R i c h a r d W h a t e l y , E l e m e n t s o f R h e t o r i c ( B o s t o n : J a m e s M u n r o e a n d Company, 1 8 5 1 ) , p . 5. A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l b e c i t e d b y p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . Whately's attempt t o equate argumentative composition w i t h r h e t o r i c i t s e l f r e f l e c t e d h i s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t r h e t o r i c a n d l o g i c be r e u n i t e d i n p e d a g o g y . H i s t e x t , t h e n , p l a c e s r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r y and c o m p o s i t i o n w i t h i n one f o r m a l l o g i c a l f r a m e w o r k , a n d t h i s i s why E l e m e n t s o f R h e t o r i c i s one o f t h e v e r y f e w " c o r n e r s t o n e " t e x t s t h a t does n o t d i v i d e d i s c o u r s e i n t o s e p a r a t e f o r m s . Whately's r e j e c t i o n of r h e t o r i c as ornamental i s i t s e l f a statement f o r a u n i f i e d t h e o r y o f r h e t o r i c , b e c a u s e t h e o r n a m e n t a l o r b e l l e t r i s t i c movement c o n c e i v e d o f r h e t o r i c as t h e a r t w h i c h aims s o l e l y t o c u l t i v a t e t a s t e and form style. L a r g e l y n e g l e c t i n g i n v e n t i o a n d d i s p o s i t i o , t h e b e l l e t r i s t i c movement f o c u s e d on t h e canons o f e l o c u t i o and p r o n u n t i a t i o . S t u d y i n g t a s t e , s t y l e ( i n c l u d i n g schemes a n d t r o p e s ) , a n d e l o q u e n c e , a n d c r i t i c a l l y a n a l y z i n g w o r k s f o r t h e s e . t r a i t s , was a n d s t i l l i s t h o u g h t t o p r e p a r e s t u d e n t s f o r w r i t i n g t h e i r own c o m p o s i t i o n s and l e a r n i n g t o a p p r e c i a t e e x c e l l e n c e i n o t h e r s ' w r i t i n g . One o f t h e l e a d e r s o f t h e b e l l e t r i s t i c movement was Hugh B l a i r , w h o s e L e c t u r e s o n R h e t o r i c a n d B e l l e s L e t t r e s ( 1 7 8 3 ) l a i d down w h a t was i n e f f e c t a d e t a i l e d c o u r s e o f s t u d i e s ; i t was h i g h l y i n f l u e n t i a l i n c o l l e g e s t h r o u g h o u t much o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y b o t h i n G r e a t B r i t a i n and t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . The b e l l e t r i s t i c movement was a c o r n e r s t o n e o f t h e l a t e r e s t a b l i s h m e n t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e U.S., o f E n g l i s h d e p a r t m e n t s d o m i n a t e d by l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m a n d c o m p o s i t i o n r a t h e r than r h e t o r i c i n i t s c l a s s i c a l sense. ^A.R. K i t z h a b e r , i n h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n " R h e t o r i c i n American C o l l e g e s , 18501 9 0 0 " ( U n i v e r s i t y o f W a s h i n g t o n , 1 9 5 3 ) m e n t i o n s S a m u e l Newman a s o n e o f t h e f i r s t textbook w r i t e r s i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s t o d i v i d e d i s c o u r s e i n t o forms a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r aims and s t r u c t u r e s , n o t t h e i r l i t e r a r y t y p e . Newman, i n h i s P r a c t i c a l System o f R h e t o r i c (1827) c i t e d d i d a c t i c , p e r s u a s i v e , and a r g u m e n t a t i v e forms, and d i s t i n g u i s h e d p e r s u a s i o n and argument i n t h a t t h e f o r m e r i n d u c e s a c t i o n through the w i l l , w h i l e the l a t t e r only convinces the understanding ( K i t z h a b e r , 195-6). ^ H e n r y W. D a y , E l e m e n t s o f t h e A r t o f R h e t o r i c : A d a p t e d f o r U s e i n C o l l e g e s a n d A c a d e m i e s , a n d f o r P r i v a t e S t u d y , f o u r t h e d i t i o n (New Y o r k : A . S . B a r n e s a n d B u r r , 1 8 6 6 ) . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l b e c i t e d b y p a g e number i n the t e x t . I s h o u l d add t h a t Whately and Day were b o t h a i m i n g t o p r o v i d e composition teaching w i t h a p h i l o s o p h i c a l f o u n d a t i o n , but took e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t approaches. ^M.B. H o p e , T h e P r i n c e t o n T e x t B o o k i n R h e t o r i c ( P r i n c e t o n , N . J . : J o h n T. R o b i n s o n , 1 8 5 9 ) . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l b e c i t e d b y p a g e number i n t h e text. ^Franz Theremin, Eloquence A V i r t u e : An O u t l i n e of a Systematic R h e t o r i c , t r a n s . W i l l i a m T. S h e d d ( P h i l a d e l p h i a : S m i t h , E n g l i s h a n d C o . , 1 8 5 9 ) . I should p o i n t o u t t h a t S h e d d ' s t r a n s l a t i o n was f i r s t p u b l i s h e d i n 1 8 4 4 . "Eloquence," as Theremin s t a t e s i n h i s second chapter, "seeks t o separate t h e t r u e from t h e f a l s e , and t o s a t i s f y t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g by argument." H e r e , Theremin o b l i q u e l y shows how e x p o s i t i o n a n d a r g u m e n t c a n b e l i n k e d s t r u c t u r a l l y t h r o u g h t h e i r i n f u s i o n w i t h e t h i c a l purpose. Theremin's v i e w o f t h e r o l e o f argument, j o i n i n g e x p l a n a t i o n t o p e r s u a s i o n , i n s p i r e d H o p e ' s comment t h a t d u r i n g impassioned d i s c o u r s e r h e t o r i c becomes " a n e t h i c a l p o w e r , r u l i n g o v e r t h e f r e e s p i r i t o f man."  44 Walter S c o t t D a l g l e i s h , I n t r o d u c t o r y Text-Book of E n g l i s h Composition, r e v . e d i t i o n ( H a l i f a x : A & W MacKinlay, 1893). T h e t e r m s n a r r a t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , and e x p o s i t i o n come i n t o t h i s l i t t l e h a n d b o o k u n d e r t h e h e a d i n g "The S t r u c t u r e o f Paragraphs." I n h i s A d v a n c e d T e x t - B o o k o f E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n , i n P r o s e and V e r s e , p u b l i s h e d s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , D a l g l e i s h b r i n g s i n "prose themes" w h i c h a r e b a s e d on n a r r a t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , and e x p o s i t i o n . He d i v i d e s e x p o s i t i o n i n t o " d i s c u r s i v e " and " a r g u m e n t a t i v e " k i n d s ; t h e l a t t e r b o r r o w s i t s t e c h n i q u e s f r o m W h a t e l y ' s f o r m a l l o g i c and i t s o r g a n i z a t i o n f r o m t h e c l a s s i c a l f i v e - p a r t s p e e c h . A r l o B a t e s , T a l k s o n W r i t i n g E n g l i s h : F i r s t S e r i e s ( C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . : The R i v e r s i d e P r e s s , 1896). B a t e s ' l e c t u r e s p r o g r e s s f r o m p r i n c i p l e s o f d i c t i o n and " q u a l i t y " t o e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , d e s c r i p t i o n , and n a r r a t i o n , a n d f i n a l l y t o c h a r a c t e r , p u r p o s e , and c r i t i c i s m . H i s f o c u s i s w i t h o u t doubt a b e l l e t r i s t i c one. E l i a s J . MacEwan, The E s s e n t i a l s o f A r g u m e n t a t i o n ( B o s t o n : D.C. H e a t h and Co., 1 8 9 3 ) . MacEwan f i r s t s a y s o f h i s s t u d e n t s a t K a l a m a z o o ' s a g r i c u l t u r a l c o l l e g e "They h a d n o t t i m e t o s t u d y a l l t h e n i c e t i e s o f l i t e r a r y e x p r e s s i o n . " F o r MacEwan, r h e t o r i c i s i m p l i c i t l y t h e s t u d y o f a r g u m e n t and p e r s u a s i o n r a t h e r than of b e l l e - l e t t r e s . H i s t e x t t r e a t s the i n t r o d u c t i o n , o r g a n i z a t i o n , k i n d s of e v i d e n c e , and c l a s s e s o f a r g u m e n t i n some d e t a i l , and p r o v i d e s b a c k g r o u n d on b o t h f o r m a l l o g i c a l a r g u m e n t a s w e l l a s a r g u m e n t b a s e d on " u s e , f o r c e , and s o u r c e . " C e r t a i n l y f o r m a l l o g i c a l a r g u m e n t d o e s n o t i n a n y way d o m i n a t e t h i s t e x t . J o h n F. G e n u n g , The P r a c t i c a l E l e m e n t s o f R h e t o r i c ( B o s t o n : G i n n and Company, 1 8 9 9 ) . Genung d e a l s f i r s t w i t h s t y l e ( d i c t i o n and f i g u r e s o f s p e e c h ) , t h e n moves on t o s y n t a x and grammar. I n h i s s e c t i o n o n " I n v e n t i o n , " Genung t i e s t h o u g h t p r o c e s s e s and t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n i n t o d e s c r i p t i o n ( o b j e c t s ) , n a r r a t i o n ( e v e n t s ) , e x p o s i t i o n ( g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s ) , a r g u m e n t a t i o n ( t r u t h s ) , and p e r s u a s i o n (practical issues). He t h e r e f o r e d e a l s n o t s o much w i t h f o r m s o f d i s c o u r s e a s he does w i t h what F r a n k D'Angelo would c a l l " m a n i f e s t a t i o n s o f t h o u g h t p r o c e s s e s . " H i s o r g a n i c t r e a t m e n t o f d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s , u n i f i e d t h r o u g h how we i n t e r p r e t o u r e x p e r i e n c e s , o b v i o u s l y h a s i t s a n t e c e d e n t s i n t h e New L o g i c a n d i n Adam Smith's L e c t u r e s , but i s unique f o r i t s p a r t i c u l a r time. F r e d e r i c k H e n r y S y k e s , E l e m e n t a r y E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n ( T o r o n t o : The Copp C l a r k Company L t d . , 1 9 0 2 ) . S y k e s t r e a t s n a r r a t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , e x p o s i t i o n , and argument ( w h i c h i n c l u d e s p e r s u a s i o n ) as d i s c r e t e u n i t s o f d i s c o u r s e , each c h a p t e r p e p p e r e d w i t h i t s own e x e r c i s e s and l e s s o n s on grammar and s t y l e . G.R. C a r p e n t e r , E l e m e n t s o f R h e t o r i c a n d E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n : F i r s t and S e c o n d H i g h S c h o o l C o u r s e s (New Y o r k : The M a c m i l l a n Co., 1 9 0 6 ) , p . 1 0 7 . I n the F i r s t High S c h o o l Course, Carpenter l o o k s a t such g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s as d i c t i o n , s e n t e n c i n g , c l e a r n e s s , f o r c e , and e l e g a n c e . The S e c o n d H i g h S c h o o l C o u r s e f o c u s e s on d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t and p e r s u a s i o n , and v e r s e , a l l r e l y i n g h e a v i l y on r u l e s a n d e x e r c i s e s .  45 III.  Precepts  Without  Principles  E v e n t h e most f o r m u l a i c n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y their  treatments  of discourse  f a c u l t y psychology. its  o n some k i n d o f r a t i o n a l e ,  Y e t , long after  psychology,  t e x t s tended t o base  such as t h e theory o f  t h e 1 8 9 0 ' s , when t h i s  s t a t u s as t h e k e y t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g  philosophy,  composition  theory  began t o l o s e  and e x p l o r i n g thought p r o c e s s e s i n  and e s p e c i a l l y r h e t o r i c ,  composition  texts generally  r e t a i n e d as a t e a c h i n g  framework t h e p r i n c i p l e  correspond  to distinct  areas o f t h e mind: t h e understanding,  the w i l l .  T h e p r o b l e m w i t h t h i s v i e w , h o w e v e r , was t h a t i t l e n t i t s e l f  easily the  t o a focus  on d i s c o u r s e  as h a v i n g  this  teaching  framework (which  was v i r t u a l l y  psychology i n r h e t o r i c ) dominated composition come.  The d e a r t h  models s o l i d i f i e d  the stereotypes  l o g i c a l appeals,  a l ltoo  a l l that remained of f a c u l t y  teaching  and would f o r decades t o  o f e x p o s i t i o n , argument, and  was e q u a t e d w i t h e m o t i o n a l  by  By t h e t u r n o f t h e  o f a new t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e f o r t h e r e s u l t i n g  t h e 1920's, p e r s u a s i o n  formal  t h e f e e l i n g s , and  d i s c r e t e f o r m s — a problem exacerbated  l o s s o f any t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e f o r such a v i e w .  century  By  t h a t d i s c o u r s e aims and s t r u c t u r e s  appeals,  and e x p o s i t i o n w i t h t h e c l e a r ,  r u l e s and  persuasion. argument  with  objective e l u c i d a t i o n of  facts. Certainly the  t h i s growing emphasis i n t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y  on e x p o s i t i o n as  p r i m e v e h i c l e f o r c o m m u n i c a t i n g " f a c t s " and " i n f o r m a t i o n , " as " o b j e c t i v e " and  therefore s c i e n t i f i c a l l y  valid,  d i d a c t i c forms of w r i t i n g . Campbell's, e t h i c a l  stance  communicating not j u s t  h a s i t s a n t e c e d e n t s i n Adam S m i t h ' s n a r r a t i v e a n d  B u t t h i s modern descendent l a c k s S m i t h ' s , and George on t h e r o l e o f n a r r a t i v e and d i d a c t i c w r i t i n g as  f a c t s , b u t what i s good as w e l l a s t r u e .  This  i s one  r e a s o n why e x p o s i t i o n t r e a t e d a s a "mode o f d i s c o u r s e " f a l l s  f a r short of  encompassing i n f o r m a l argumentation ( t h e s y n t h e s i s of pieces  of information  theses  or discoveries) f i r s t  laid  into  down b y t h e New L o g i c i a n s a n d , f o r r h e t o r i c a l  46 t h e o r y , by Smith  and Campbell.  argument and p e r s u a s i o n  Without  t h e c o n n e c t i o n s and a s s o c i a t i o n s w i t h  ( a s w e l l as n a r r a t i o n and d e s c r i p t i o n ) which  S m i t h and  Campbell d e l i n e a t e d , e x p o s i t i o n ' s p l a c e as p a r t o f t h e e n t i r e i n f o r m a l argumentative Although connections  f r a m e w o r k was  lost.  twentieth-century composition  e x i s t between such  f a c u l t y psychology  convinced."  examining  such  a d a g e t h a t "one n e e d s t o u n d e r s t a n d  here,  and o n l y u n d e r s t a n d i n g . exposition i s usually  Argument i s developed brief,  tend t o r a t i o n a l i z e  connections with the  something  before  being  T h u s , e x p o s i t i o n h a s i t s own r u l e s a n d s t r u c t u r e s t o h e l p b r i n g  about understanding be  that  forms o f w r i t i n g as e x p o s i t i o n and argument, o r  argument and p e r s u a s i o n , t h e y s t i l l old  t e x t b o o k s do q u i t e o f t e n s t a t e  through  such  I n the representative texts I  allied  w i t h d e f i n i t i o n and a n a l y s i s .  s t r u c t u r e s as t h e s y l l o g i s m and t h e f o r e n s i c  and i s a l s o a s s o c i a t e d w i t h cause and e f f e c t , a n a l o g y ,  circumstance.  Finally,  will  persuasion i s r a r e l y developed  t e s t i m o n y , and  systematically as are  argument and e x p o s i t i o n , b u t i s r a t h e r a s s o c i a t e d w i t h e m o t i o n a l a p p e a l s and sometimes a s p e c t s o f w r i t i n g  "style"  such as t h e f i g u r e s o f speech.  But i n the  u t i l i t a r i a n h i e r a r c h y o f t h e f o r m s o f d i s c o u r s e , e x p o s i t i o n comes f i r s t i n u s e f u l n e s s and t h e r e f o r e importance;  i t s connections with the " s p e c i a l s k i l l s " of  argument o r p e r s u a s i o n a r e g i v e n s h o r t In  effect,  century tends such  composition  text published i n the f i r s t  t o be t h e e p i t o m e o f p e d a g o g y w i t h o u t  f i g u r e s a s Wayne B o o t h , K e n n e t h B u r k e ,  rhetorical role  the typical  shrift.  theory through  i n human a f f a i r s ,  t h e i r attempts  failed  degree before the 1960's.  1  Even t h e works o f  a n d R i c h a r d W e a v e r , who  t o i n f l u e n c e c o m p o s i t i o n t e a c h i n g t o any g r e a t  While  rhetorical  theorists after and pathos  t h e 1930's began i n everyday  t e x t book w r i t e r s c o n t i n u e d t o b u i l d  logos o n l y , a logos fragmented  revivified  t o r e d e f i n e and r e s t r u c t u r e r h e t o r i c ' s  o n c e more t o a c k n o w l e d g e n o t o n l y l o g o s b u t e t h o s communication, composition  theory.  half of this  into discrete  elements.  t h e i r c l a s s e s on  47 My  e x a m i n a t i o n of n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y t e x t s r e v e a l s  d i v i d e elements of d i s c o u r s e twentieth  from each o t h e r .  century texts, covering  illustrate  the  r e s u l t s of  structures  of e x p o s i t i o n ,  this  a period  a r g u m e n t , and  fact, virtually  Ashmun's The  Exposition, foundation  according f o r or  persuasion,  a f t e r 1910  structure.^  w e r e m o d e l e d on  and  mid-1960's, aims  the  Ashmun, e x p o s i t i o n a s  conception.  . .with  understood" (241),  a  L o m e r and  Margaret  (1917) p r e s e n t e d a  can  be  the  the  used "to  "explanation  p u r p o s e o f m a k i n g any  s e l d o m s t a n d s on  i t s own  of  in practice.  argumentation works develops f u r t h e r t h i s  i d e a of  in  exposition-  deviant  two.^ lay  a  to a s s i s t d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , or argument" (242).  . .object.  and  perpetuating  argument were but  authors' d e f i n i t i o n ,  w o r d s , s t a t e L o m e r and  how  c r e a t i n g and  G e r h a r d R.  of which e x p o s i t i o n  to the  to the  i n c o m p o s i t i o n b e f o r e 1920;  P r a c t i s e of W r i t i n g E n g l i s h  n i n e forms of d i s c o u r s e ,  representative  d i s s o c i a t i o n between the  established  a l l texts published  S t u d y and  I  to  teaching.  were f u l l y  argument-description-narration  following  f r o m W o r l d War  same d i v i s i o n :  t h e o r e t i c a l vacuum i n c o m p o s i t i o n Forms of d i s c o u r s e  The  a pedagogical tendency  of a  term,  In  other  ideas,  them c l e a r l y  Their  illustration  exposition's  of  large role i n  discourse: A r g u m e n t a t i o n has c o n s t a n t use f o r e x p o s i t i o n . . . . I t d i f f e r s f r o m mere e x p o s i t i o n i n h a v i n g a somewhat d i f f e r e n t p r o b l e m . E x p o s i t i o n s e e k s t o make t h e unknown known; a r g u m e n t a t i o n t r i e s t o r e m o v e u n c e r t a i n t y and u n b e l i e f . . . . ( 2 5 4 - 5 ) Yet texts.^  here are  e c h o e s o f a p a r a d o x u n e a r t h e d I n a number o f  W h i l e seeming to r e a l i z e t h a t  foundation,  L o m e r and  essentially  d i f f e r e n t p u r p o s e s and  doing f o r decades.  Ashmun s t i l l  Thus, the  L o m e r and  Ashmun a l s o  can  be  built  c o n c e i v e d of e x p o s i t i o n patterns,  and  on  one  common  a r g u m e n t as  a s m o s t t e x t b o o k w r i t e r s had  a s s o c i a t i o n b e t w e e n a r g u m e n t and  l a r g e l y o b s c u r e d i n p r a c t i c e , and with.  discourse  nineteenth-century  exposition  two been became  " p r a c t i c e " i s what t h e i r t e x t i s c o n c e r n e d  f o l l o w an  established  path i n making p e r s u a s i o n  a  48 p a r t o f a r g u m e n t , f o r a r g u m e n t t o them n o t objections  (which  i s essentially  "convinces  a reader  o n l y p r o v e s s o m e t h i n g and a n t i c i p a t e s  the t a s k of f o r m a l argumentation) but  o r a n a u d i e n c e t h a t some s t a t e m e n t i s t r u e a n d  s p e c i f i c a t t i t u d e or a c t i o n i s a d v i s a b l e or necessary" t a s k of  a r g u m e n t , and  p e r s u a s i o n were b e i n g  Sears Baldwin,  dichotomy.  treated at t h i s  i n College Composition  ( B a l d w i n had  Composition,  felt  the  same way  f o r r e s e a r c h i n t o r h e t o r i c and  " o v e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n " of popular  treatments  i n 1902, was  s t r u c t u r e s as  feeling."  7  Also rejecting  i s also  the  expands p e r s u a s i o n ,  . .the whole f i e l d by  at the  the l o g i c versus  usual  emotion  Kitzhaber notes.^)  abandoning  p o e t i c s , a t t a c k e d w h a t he o f a r g u m e n t and  College  saw  as  persuasion:^  feeling without  t h e f o u r m o d e s , he  saw  the  "We  reason,  or  discourse  into discussion,  persuasion."  Most i m p o r t a n t l y , B a l d w i n  understood  exposition,  c o n t r a s t , however,  l a s h e d out  " o v e r l a p p i n g , " wherein " i n f o r m a t i o n passes over  discussion into  i n s t e a d he  By  on t h e v e r g e o f  so c r u d e l y t w o f o l d t h a t i t i s easy t o f i n d  reason without  time.  (1917),  persuasion:  p u b l i s h e d at the time Baldwin  composition  sense.  This  w e l l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e way  d i s t i n c t i o n d r a w n b e t w e e n a r g u m e n t and  are not  t h a t some  persuasion.  L o m e r and Ashmun's t e x t i s f a i r l y  Charles  (254).  also  does not  subsume p e r s u a s i o n  b r i n g s i t out  of h i d i n g , t o cover  of the composition  the a n c i e n t s " (93).  into  argument; " i n the l a r g e s t  of i d e a s , or of r h e t o r i c  Argument, f o r Baldwin,  as  i s always "part  of  persuasion.  . .essentially  the g i v i n g of reasons f o r or a g a i n s t a p r o p o s i t i o n "  ( 9 4 - 5 ) , and  e x p o s i t i o n , i n c l u d e d w i t h argument under t h e s e c t i o n on d i s c u s s i o n ,  i s a l m o s t a l w a y s p a r t o f argument and  focuses  on  t h e g a t h e r i n g and  presenting  of  facts. In  this  text, Baldwin  the banner of c l a s s i c a l  has  taken  giant steps  r h e t o r i c a l theory.  towards u n i f y i n g d i s c o u r s e  I n d e e d , as w i t h S m i t h a n d  o n l y t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h a d i s c o u r s e "moves men"  differentiates  under  Campbell,  i n f o r m a t i v e from  49 d i s c u r s i v e , and  d i s c u r s i v e from persuasive w r i t i n g .  e x a m i n a t i o n of argument as (133)  " t h e commonest means o f p e r s u a s i o n . . . u s u a l l y  oral"  serves only to d i s s o c i a t e i t from the i n f o r m a t i o n / d i s c u s s i o n / p e r s u a s i o n  p r o c e s s b e c a u s e he  t r e a t s i t i n t h e s t a n d a r d f o r m a l manner: t h r o u g h  evidence, l o g i c a l , processes forensic brief.  c o v e r i n g most aims and d e d u c t i v e , and Yet  s u c h a s t h e s y l l o g i s m and  L i k e D a v i d J . H i l l a n d H e n r y Day  i n a d v e r t e n t l y c r e a t e d two  less  Unfortunately, his  b a s i c s t r u c t u r e s f o r p r o s e : one  too " s p e c i a l i z e d "  f o r m o s t a i m s and  the c o n t r a s t between Baldwin's  than a decade l a t e r  t h e enthymeme, and  b e f o r e him,  o c c a s i o n s f o r d i s c o u r s e ; and  treatment  i s quite remarkable.  what R o b e r t J . Connors c a l l s  analysis,  Baldwin  largely  the  has  inductive  and  the other f o r m a l , l a r g e l y occasions f o r writing.  of d i s c o u r s e and  that i n texts  T e x t s of the 1920's e x e m p l i f y  t h e " r e i g n o f t h e modes," a t i m e when  I n t e r m s o f new i n s i g h t s , t h e t e a c h i n g o f c o m p o s i t i o n was f r o z e n i n i t s t r a c k s . . .and d e s p i t e a f e w n o v e l t r e a t m e n t s and u p - t o - d a t e a p p e a r a n c e s , I c a n n o t f i n d a s i n g l e t e x t t h a t i s not d e r i v a t i v e of the authors of the [eighteen] n i n e t i e s (449). Nor  could I .  The  Elements  of Composition  Opdyke d e f i n e s e x p o s i t i o n as to  be made c l e a r , " a n d  a statement.  "an  John  explanation of. . .anything, indeed, that  argument as  "an a t t e m p t  . .to convince or persuade  proposition," persuasion i t s e l f  ( 1 9 2 5 ) by H e n r y S. C a n b y and  to prove  a n o t h e r mind of the t r u t h o f a  i n this  has  or d i s p r o v e the c l a i m  h i d d e n away a g a i n u n d e r argument.**  b a s i c precept of f a c u l t y psychology  B.  We  given see  passage:  E x p o s i t i o n appeals to the understanding. I t does not a p p e a l p r i m a r i l y t o the w i l l or the f e e l i n g s or the imagination. I t s p u r p o s e i s t o make c l e a r . . . . t h e b a s i c l a w s of c l e a r n e s s a r e t h e laws o f e x p o s i t i o n ( 3 8 1 ) . T h i s e x p l a n a t i o n causes  t r o u b l e f o r t h e a u t h o r s when t h e y l a t e r  argument, a l s o , appeals  to the understanding  insist  that  i n a d d i t i o n to convincing or  a  of  50 persuading  someone, a n d t h a t i t s a i m " i s a l m o s t i n v a r i a b l y a c h i e v e d  dynamic use of o t h e r up  separate  (582).  For this  aims and s t r u c t u r e s f o r d i s c o u r s e , o n l y  some way u n i f i e d . separate  forms of d i s c o u r s e "  Of c o u r s e ,  t e x t has c a r e f u l l y s e t  t o a s s e r t that they  arei n  t h i s c o n t r a d i c t i o n shows c l e a r l y how i n a d e q u a t e t h e  f o r m s a r e a s a way o f t e a c h i n g  lack t h e o r e t i c a l support.  through the  composition  meaningfully  when t h o s e  forms  A s i f t o make u p f o r t h e i r m o m e n t a r y b r e a c h o f  c o n t r a c t w i t h t h e modes p e d a g o g y , t h o u g h , C a n b y a n d O p d y k e t r e a t a r g u m e n t a s a h i g h l y f o r m a l , f o r e n s i c system o f p r o p o s i t i o n s , p r o o f s , and b r i e f s .  They a r e  back on t h a t f a m i l i a r  wherein  t e r r i t o r y of separate  structures f o r discourse  argument i s as s p e c i a l i z e d and as f a r removed from e x p o s i t i o n a s p o s s i b l e . H o w a r d B. G r o s e ' s d e f i n i t i o n o f e x p o s i t i o n : " t o i n f o r m , e x p l a i n " also serves  to differentiate  i tfrom other  C o l l e g e C o m p o s i t i o n ( p r i n t e d o n l y once) d e s c r i b e s d e f i n i t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , and process texts called  (thelast  t o make c l e a r , o r  discourse.^  H i s 1926 t e x t  e x p o s i t i o n as concerned  two b e i n g  " e x p o s i t o r y " d e s c r i p t i o n and n a r r a t i o n ) .  p r i m a r i l y what  with  other  Y e t take note of t h i s  passage: Argument i s t h a t t y p e o f w r i t i n g i n w h i c h t h e i n t e n t i o n I s to convince o r persuade. I t sfundamental processes a r e d e f i n i t i o n and d i v i s i o n ; and i n f o r m i t i s sometimes d i f f i c u l t o r i m p o s s i b l e t o d i s t i n g u i s h from e x p o s i t i o n . (166) U n f o r t u n a t e l y , G r o s e i s n o t m a k i n g a c a s e h e r e f o r a common f r a m e w o r k f o r e x p o s i t i o n and argument i n c o m p o s i t i o n  teaching;  the  He c a n g e t o u t o f i t o n l y b y i n v o k i n g t h e  same p a r a d o x a s L o m e r a n d Ashmun.  sacred  i n s t e a d h e h a s become t r a p p e d i n  name o f p r a c t i c a l i t y :  But f o r t h e p r a c t i c a l purposes o f t h i s d i s c u s s i o n t h e r e n e e d b e no s e r i o u s c o n f u s i o n , b e c a u s e a r g u m e n t , a s we s h a l l use t h e term, i s c o n c e r n e d o n l y w i t h m a t t e r s about w h i c h t h e r e i s an e v i d e n t and unmistakable d i f f e r e n c e o f o p i n i o n . (166) What G r o s e e n d s u p d o i n g  i s d i v i d i n g a r g u m e n t i n t o two c l a s s e s .  "seeks t o i n f l u e n c e thought alone,"  The  first  and t h e second " t o i n f l u e n c e thought and  produce a c t i o n "  (224).  The  n e v e r d o e s j u s t i f y why, while  the  first  i s treated  therefore,  second i s t r e a t e d  as  f u n d a m e n t a l l y as  a separate type c a l l e d " e x p o s i t i o n "  i f i t were debate: the  as  a n o t h e r t y p e o f a r g u m e n t ) c a n ' t be  G r o s e s t a t e s , b e c a u s e i t i s so faculty psychologist reflect  a s p e c t s o f human n a t u r e , t h e  the  t e x t book w r i t e r s of by  i n text While  discourse the  and  Persuasion  early  i m p l i c a t i o n o p i n i o n ) was  o t h e r t e x t s , b o t h p r i n t e d i n 1929,  E f f e c t i v e E n g l i s h , by J.R. directly  on G e o r g e P.  Exposition,  books, the  structures twentieth  better  left  and  V.B.  also deserve b r i e f mention.  Hulbert,  b a s e d i t s s e c t i o n on  Baker's o r i g i n a l b r i e f format introduced  a p r o c e s s o f d e f i n i t i o n and  argument, a c c o r d i n g  explanation,  to the H u l b e r t s .  could  I n e f f e c t the  argument  first  also  system of formal successful discourse  argument c o u l d  informal  teach s t u d e n t s "the  a r g u m e n t and  much e x p o s i t i o n . "  remained s e p a r a t e d b o t h i n aim  t o show how,  exactly,  formal  and  in  1895.  s e r v e as p a r t  authors  of  placed  e x p o s i t i o n below argument i n importance; l i k e W h a t e l y , they b e l i e v e d  failed  i s needed)  specialists.  Two  formal  learned  a t t e m p t e d t o show how  c e n t u r y d e c i d e d t h a t human n a t u r e ( a n d for  effect.  c l o s e l y a l l i e d w i t h human n a t u r e .  r h e t o r i c i a n s had  (Grose  brief, propositions,  p r o o f t h r o u g h t e s t i m o n y , c i r c u m s t a n c e , a n a l o g y , c a u s e , and (mentioned b r i e f l y  exposition  that  a  structure which underlies a l l 1 0  However, t h e i r t y p e s  structure.  I n o t h e r words,  argument r e l a t e s to o t h e r forms  of  they  of  discourse. Yet ignored  Raymond W.  argument a l t o g e t h e r .  explaining  the  development of  good p u r p o s e w i l l e x p o s i t i o n and and  Pence's C o l l e g e  be  C o m p o s i t i o n (1929; r e p r i n t e d  I t receives, the  s e r v e d i n t r y i n g t o d r a w any  argumentation."  1 1  formal  a footnote  1930)  i n which Pence,  "expository-argumentative" paragraph, says,  Exposition  persuasion disappears i n this text.  t o o l of  literally,  in  subsumes argument  Even the  a r g u m e n t a t i o n , Pence s e e s as  d i s t i n c t i o n here  one  of  proposition, the  "No  between  completely, traditionally  "principal materials"  the of  52 exposition.  I n a sense, discourse  i s c e r t a i n l y u n i f i e d here,  d e v e l o p s t h i s t e x t on t h e b a s i s t h a t a l l " n o n - i m a g i n a t i v e " something c l e a r ,  t o e x p l a i n , heralding the hosts  y e t the author  w r i t i n g a i m s t o make  of expository-writing-only texts  t o a p p e a r i n t h e 1930's and 4 0 ' s . I n s h o r t , Canby and Opdyke, G r o s e , t h e H u l b e r t s , and Pence a l l e x e m p l i f y t h e s t r u g g l e t o b u r y any " c o n f u s i n g " d i s c o u r s e under t h e c o m f o r t i n g  s i g n s o f a t h e o r e t i c a l u n i f y i n g framework f o r  practicality  and ease o f t e a c h i n g  the separate  forms. The  1 9 3 0 ' s was a t i m e when t h e "modes o f d i s c o u r s e " b e g a n t o l o o s e n  s t r a n g l e h o l d on c o m p o s i t i o n texts introduced  teaching, but there  communicate f a c t s , part of the text,  definition, caution  few s i g n s  a common s t r u c t u r a l f r a m e w o r k i n t h e i r p l a c e .  Modern C o m p o s i t i o n and R h e t o r i c  opinionated,  are relatively  express  critical  D a n a 0. J e n s e n ' s  incidents.^  I n t h e second  " f o r m s " a r e b r o k e n down i n t o e x p o s i t i o n  exposition (theresearch  review);  that  three purposes f o r d i s c o u r s e : t o  opinions, or narrate  the resulting  personal);  (1935) c i t e s  their  paper);  n a r r a t i o n ; and f i n a l l y ,  (factual,  exposition (the precis,  description.  The  authors  that  Few t h e m e s a r e w h o l l y n a r r a t i v e , d e s c r i p t i v e , e x p o s i t o r y , or argumentative. . . . B u t t h e s t u d e n t . . .must s e t t l e o n n o n e u n t i l he h a s t h o r o u g h l y t e s t e d t h e f i t n e s s o f a l l f o r h i s p a r t i c u l a r purpose (20). L i k e the freshman chemistry  student  to see i t t u r n c o l o r , the student required  who d i p s l i t m u s p a p e r i n t o v a r i o u s  u s i n g M o d e r n C o m p o s i t i o n a n d R h e t o r i c was  t o t r y o u t t h e forms s e p a r a t e l y t o determine which best  t o be w r i t t e n .  Yet this  solutions  s u i t e d t h e theme  t e x t a t t e m p t s t o move a r g u m e n t a t i v e d i s c o u r s e c l o s e r t o  e x p o s i t i o n i n s t r u c t u r e by c a l l i n g  argument " o p i n i n a t e d " e x p o s i t i o n , w h e r e i n a  writer  s h i f t s h e r emphasis " f r o m t h e f a c t s t o what t h e w r i t e r t h i n k s about t h e  facts"  (180). But the authors  provide  an o r g a n i z a t i o n a l guide t h a t r e l i e s ,  like  53 informal  argumentation, f a i r l y  reader.  But t h i s glimpse of informal  unifying discourse,  heavily  a r g u m e n t i s more t a n t a l i z i n g t h a n u s e f u l i n  f o r t h e t e x t f o c u s e s o n how t o w r i t e  primary purpose of e x p l a i n i n g " opinion  on t h e use o f examples t o c o n v i n c e a  and i s s u e s ,  (180).  and i n s t e a d  pieces  " f o r t h e one  I n e f f e c t , t h i s text ignores the world of  teaches the w r i t i n g of " f a c t u a l "  A n o t h e r 1935 t e x t , P u r p o s i v e P r o s e ; S e l e c t i o n s  pieces.  i n Exposition,  b e g i n s more  conservatively:  " A l l that  you w r i t e  ( o r speak) f a l l s  i n t o one o f f o u r  discourse.'"^  A brief explanation  of each f o l l o w s .  Argumentation's  is  conviction  forth"  "as t o t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y  but  of p u b l i c  argument, which they equate w i t h  speaking"—a revealing  f o r m a l l o g i c , because i nEnglish  composition  summary o f t h e l o w l y  argument and p e r s u a s i o n i n c o m p o s i t i o n t e a c h i n g .  Instead,  for  i t as t h a t  i t , t h e a u t h o r s f o c u s on e x p o s i t i o n ,  defining  and so  However, t h e a u t h o r s  i s "almost u n i v e r s a l l y t a u g h t nowadays n o t i n c l a s s e s i n classes  purpose  or as t o t h e t r u t h of t h i s ,  ( a r g u m e n t h a s a g a i n subsumed p e r s u a s i o n h e r e ) .  choose not t o deal w i t h it  of that,  'forms o f  state of  a w a r e o f t h e demand f o r m w h i c h "aims t o  make c l e a r " p r i m a r i l y b y d e f i n i t i o n a n d a n a l y s i s . C l e a r l y , t h i s t e x t a s w e l l a s Jensen's exemplifies presentation  a growing " s c i e n t i s m i c " concept that a c l e a r ,  o f f a c t s i s more t r u s t w o r t h y  a n d more c o r r e c t  unbiased  than w r i t i n g  that  takes an e t h i c a l stand. One o f t h e f e w C a n a d i a n c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s i n u s e a t t h i s t i m e was M. Mawdsley and M a r j o r i e Collegiates  (1935).  Leeming's Modern C o m p o s i t i o n f o r H i g h S c h o o l s and Both from the U n i v e r s i t y  p r e s e n t e d modes o f d i s c o u r s e (narration), The  section  school  discourse,  of B r i t i s h Columbia, the authors  organized according t o p r i n c i p l e s such as u n i t y  c o h e r e n c e and emphasis ( d e s c r i p t i o n ) , and arrangement  (exposition).  o n a r g u m e n t a t t h e e n d o f t h e t e x t was i n t e n d e d " c h i e f l y a s a n a i d i n  debating";  exposition,  Dorothy  though t h e authors admit o f t h e " c l o s e  t h e y do n o t d i s c u s s instead  i t .  1  ^  r e l a t i o n " o f argument t o  T h i s t e x t h a s no new t r e a t m e n t s o f  choosing the popular option  of emphasizing exposition  at the  54 expense o f argument and  persuasion.  E a r l i e r we saw e v i d e n c e t h a t many t e x t s s e n s e a u n i t y b e t w e e n e x p o s i t i o n a n d argument I n theory A Book o f E n g l i s h go  while  i n p r a c t i c e they remain separate.  (1936) repeats  hand i n hand i n o r d i n a r y  given  this paradoxical  idea.  speech and c o m p o s i t i o n , "  d e f i n i t i o n s o f e x p o s i t i o n and argument l i t t l e  Charles  H. Raymond's  " E x p o s i t i o n and argument  he s t a t e s .  N e x t we a r e  changed s i n c e  1890:^  E x p o s i t i o n e x p l a i n s s o m e t h i n g . . . .Argument c o n s i s t s i n g i v i n g r e a s o n s t o show t h e t r u t h o r f a l s i t y o f a proposition. I t spurpose i s t o convince a person of a way o f b e l i e f o r t o p e r s u a d e h i m t o a c t i o n . Exercise and  t o p i c s f o r themes i n t h i s  the "should  t e x t a r e o f t h e "how t o " t y p e f o r e x p o s i t i o n  be" t y p e f o r argument, r e i n f o r c i n g t h e s e p a r a t i o n  of aim and s t r u c t u r e .  What we s e e i n t e x t s i n t h e 1 9 3 0 ' s i s a s t r u g g l e f o r  d o m i n a t i o n between e x p o s i t i o n (both  I n i t s "pure" form as explanatory  and  as "opinionable")  but  as s e p a r a t e i n a i m and s t r u c t u r e .  century.  Those t e x t s t h a t s t i l l  u s e t h e modes t e n d  i n the century,  o r even t h e  Those t h a t f o c u s on e x p o s i t i o n g e n e r a l l y  expense o f argument and p e r s u a s i o n , Neither  discourse  a n d t h e modes p e d a g o g y , o r a l l f o r m s a s e q u a l i n u s e f u l n e s s  t o r e t a i n t h e same f o r m a t s a n d m e t h o d s a s e a r l i e r late nineteenth  b e t w e e n t h e two  refusing to deal with  do s o a t t h e  the world  of opinion.  s i d e operates under a t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e .  Strangely  e n o u g h , t h e U.B.C. l i b r a r y ' s  supply  of superannuated  composition  t e x t s l a c k s m a t e r i a l f r o m t h e l a t e 1 9 3 0 ' s t h r o u g h m o s t o f t h e 1 9 4 0 ' s , f o r c i n g me to i n f e r  (besides  n o t i n g W o r l d War Two's d i s r u p t i v e e f f e c t s ) t h a t  c l a s s e s a t U.B.C. d u r i n g perceived  t h i s time used o l d e r  as p e d a g o g i c a l l y  m e n t i o n s w h a t we now c a l l occasion,  giving discourse  as w e l l , f o r i t s t i l l reflect  valid.  composition  t e x t s because they were  One, F u n d a m e n t a l s o f Good W r i t i n g  still (1949),  t h e " c o m m u n i c a t i o n s t r i a n g l e " : medium, s u b j e c t , a n d an o v e r a l l purpose.  f o c u s e s on " f o u r k i n d s  four basic intentions of a w r i t e r .  Yet, this i s a text i n transition  of discourse" Authors Cleanth  which i n t h i s  case  B r o o k s and R o b e r t  55 Perm Warren a r e s t i l l p l a i n t o see i n t h i s  v e r y much c e n t e r e d  i n separate discourse  s t r u c t u r e s , as i s  passage: *' 1  Though most w r i t i n g i n v o l v e s a m i x t u r e o f t h e k i n d s o f d i s c o u r s e , we c a n b e s t s t u d y them i n i s o l a t i o n . . . . I t i s o n l y a f t e r one u n d e r s t a n d s t h e k i n d s o f d i s c o u r s e i n a p u r e f o r m t h a t o n e c a n make t h e m w o r k t o g e t h e r t o g i v e unity to a larger discourse. E x p o s i t i o n and argument i n t h i s exposition "explains writing"  text receive  or c l a r i f i e s a subject  informal  logical  description,  processes l i k e  I n t e r e s t i n g l y , a n a l y s i s and d e f i n i t i o n a r e i n c l u d e d developing  an e x p o s i t o r y  piece.  treatments:  [ a n d ] i s t h e m o s t common k i n d o f  (38), developed through i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ,  n a r r a t i o n , and o t h e r  standard  illustration,  comparison and c o n t r a s t . i n this l i s t  o f ways o f  Argument, however, appeals " o n l y "  tothe  u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d i s " u s e d t o make t h e a u d i e n c e t h i n k o r a c t a s t h e a r g u e r desires"  (125).  that w i l l  Most i m p o r t a n t l y ,  resurface  i n t h e 1950's because o f argument's l o n g  classroom as debate. proposition, before,  argument " i m p l i e s c o n f l i c t "  t e s t i m o n y , a n a l o g y , t h e s y l l o g i s m , and t h e b r i e f .  a u t h o r s h i n t a t common means o f d e v e l o p m e n t , b u t m a i n t a i n  the  artificial  purpose of studying  s e p a r a t e forms f o r  o f e x p o s i t i o n and argument i s a l s o e v i d e n t (the third  I n a s c i r c u l a r a d e f i n i t i o n a s one c o u l d  the  e x p o s i t i o n as " W r i t i n g  t h o u g h i t may n o t b e p u r e e x p o s i t i o n .  i n Donald  e d i t i o n o f w h i c h was  p u b l i s h e d i n 1953).  needs no e l a b o r a t i o n .  argument.  non-contentious w r i t i n g .  D a v i d s o n ' s A m e r i c a n C o m p o s i t i o n and R h e t o r i c  author explains  seen  them i n " i s o l a t i o n " a n d f o r t h e i m m e d i a t e  purpose a l s o o f emphasizing f a c t u a l , separation  ones: t h e  A s we h a v e  and i n f o r m a l  The  an idea  incarceration i n the  I t s methods o f development i n c l u d e t h e u s u a l  e x p o s i t i o n and argument c o n s t i t u t e h e r e f o r m a l  The  (131),  ever wish t o see,  that tends toward e x p o s i t i o n , E x p o s i t i o n b y now,  "Argument," D a v i d s o n c o n t i n u e s ,  even  apparently,  " w i l l n e c e s s a r i l y appear  when i t i s p r o p e r t o s u p p o r t a n o p i n i o n , " b u t e x p o s i t i o n i s " b y f a r " t h e m o s t prevalent  f o r m , he a d d s .  He e c h o e s o t h e r  t e x t book w r i t e r s by l a y i n g o u t  56 c l e a r l y e x p o s i t i o n ' s i s o l a t e d purpose as "to e x p l a i n r a t h e r than to d e s c r i b e , r e l a t e , or c o n v i n c e " analysis,  (45).  Y e t argument, f o r him,  "which a r e e x p o s i t o r y i n n a t u r e "  t h i s i d e a of argument's e x p o s i t o r y n a t u r e , through the s y l l o g i s m , i n d u c t i v e and  (45).  contains d e f i n i t i o n Davidson never r e a l l y  but r a t h e r shows how  deductive  and develops  argument  l o g i c , use of evidence,  develops  and  a  " r a t h e r simple p l a n " he c a l l s the " a r t i c l e of o p i n i o n , " which i s e s s e n t i a l l y c l a s s i c a l r h e t o r i c a l scheme f o r a r r a n g i n g d i s c o u r s e (507-8). "simple  p l a n , " has  disappeared,  except  Persuasion,  the  i n this  f o r a v e r y b r i e f mention as being p a r t of  argument. A Canadian t e x t , A Handbook of Composition technical writers.  (1953), i s aimed mainly  N e i t h e r argument nor p e r s u a s i o n i s d e a l t w i t h here;  focus i s on e x p o s i t i o n as " w r i t i n g which has  To D i g An I n d i a n W e l l " f o r simple  sometimes c l a s s i f i e d as a separate  exposition. reader"  necessary.  form of w r i t i n g , we  not making any  However, the author  attempt to show s t r u c t u r a l u n i t y .  c e r t a i n r u l e s and  s t r u c t u r e s to produce c l e a r and  1950's was  a p e r i o d when c o m p o s i t i o n  i n t e r e s t s of p r a c t i c a l i t y , only a few r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of t h e i r time.  Yet  and  argument  s h a l l c o n s i d e r i t as t o persuade  the  d e a l s w i t h d i s c o u r s e on a f o r m a l b a s i s o n l y , Such t e x t s r e f l e c t  p r e v a i l i n g s c h o o l of thought t h a t good w r i t i n g i s simply a  The  "Although  . .an e x p l a n a t i o n of the w r i t e r ' s views presented  (43-4).  an  sample theme t o p i c i s  exposition; for "objective/impersonal  p e r s u a s i v e " t o p i c s , more " f o r m a l " e x p o s i t i o n was is  the  as i t c h i e f purpose the making of  e x p l a n a t i o n or the p a s s i n g on of i n f o r m a t i o n . O n e "How  at  factual  then  craft—combining prose.  t e x t s began to p r o l i f e r a t e .  of them w i l l be examined i n any  two  the  In  detail  the as  t h i n g s about these t e x t s stand out: a  g e n e r a l adherence to t e a c h i n g w r i t i n g through d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g the "pure" forms of d i s c o u r s e from each o t h e r , and 1955  t h e i r emphasis on the c r a f t of w r i t i n g f a c t s .  A  t e x t , E x p o s i t o r y Prose: An A n a l y t i c Approach, aims not so much a t t e a c h i n g  e x p o s i t o r y w r i t i n g as h e l p i n g a student understand  b e t t e r the e x p o s i t o r y  prose  57 "his  teachers.  . .expect  very broadly at f i r s t another,"  him  as  t o be a b l e t o r e a d . " ^  Exposition i s defined  1  " t h e p l a i n l a n g u a g e i n w h i c h men  t h e n more n a r r o w l y  as  "concerned  w i t h t h e why  m e t h o d s o f d e v e l o p m e n t i n c l u d e d e f i n i t i o n , p r o o f , and s p e l l s out  and  (1-2).  This text i s typical  s t a t u s of not t h e o n l y one  together comprise other people  writing,  by  other forms, and  a broad  communicative premise:  took  thus  elevating i t to  to venture  in  There  views of the forms over  into  had,  we  can best study In  subject. and  them i n  i n effect  and  t e x t book  however, been a  the mid-50's t e x t s  four b a s i c i n t e n t i o n s of a w r i t e r .  "Though m o s t w r i t i n g  the  ways t h a t  the l a s t decade,  The  t h e i r methods kept  involves a mixture  especially  presented  modes o f  Y e t , I emphasize t h a t these purposes were s t i l l  this:  of  communication  s e p a r a t e , and R i c h a r d W e a v e r r e i n f o r c e d s e p a r a t i o n w i t h s t a t e m e n t s such as  but  A Course i n W r i t i n g  m e t a m o r p h o s i n g i n t o p u r p o s e s f o r d i s c o u r s e and  development.  " I t i s by  separating exposition  " E d u c a t i o n and  the f o u r forms approach.  g i v e n t h e i n f l u e n c e o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n s t h e o r y ; by forms as r e f l e c t i n g  text  the only major r h e t o r i c a l s c h o l a r of  of t h i s century other than Baldwin  nonetheless  the  from other kinds  the a r t of saying something that i s worthwhile  change i n t e x t book w r i t e r s '  w e r e now  finally,  place.  Weaver's t e x t , C o m p o s i t i o n :  can u n d e r s t a n d . W e a v e r ,  half  and  one  Specific  occasion for writing,  r e a l l y worth l e a r n i n g i n the f i r s t  (1957) has  differs  i n i t s i n s i s t e n c e on  o n l y the most p r a c t i c a l aim  S i m i l a r l y , R i c h a r d M.  the f i r s t  analysis;  explanatory that e x p o s i t o r y prose  p u r i f y i n g i t from contamination  Rhetoric  of t h i n g s . "  i t s r a t i o n a l e f o r s e p a r a t i n g e x p o s i t i o n from o t h e r forms:  v i r t u e of i t s being prose"  communicate w i t h  discourse of  largely i n his text  of the k i n d s of d i s c o u r e ,  isolation."  Weaver's t e x t , e x p o s i t i o n i s the k i n d of d i s c o u r s e t h a t " e x p l a i n s a .  . t o make t h e r e a d e r u n d e r s t a n d "  analysis.  Argumentation,  (26-8) through  the use  of  definition  however, i s " d i s t i n g u i s h e d from the o t h e r  forms i n t h a t i t s f u n c t i o n i s to prove"  three  ( 2 6 - 8 ) ; h e r e , Weaver b o t h b r o a d e n s  and  58 narrows  the scope of argument:  The m e t h o d s o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n a r e a b o d y o f s c i e n t i f i c a l l y a n a l y z e d p r o c e s s e s , w h i c h m u s t be f o l l o w e d s t r i c t l y t o y i e l d a c o r r e c t r e s u l t . . . . A r g u m e n t a t i o n . . .embraces t h e f i e l d i n w h i c h men d e l i b e r a t e a b o u t c h o i c e s , a n d t h e r e f o r e i t demands a c o m b i n a t i o n o f l o g i c and r h e t o r i c ( 2 6 - 8 ) . The  first  s e n t e n c e i s a s u r p r i s i n g one  " s c i e n c e " a s one narrowed  of t h e age's  f r o m a man  who  gently  " u l t i m a t e t e r m s , " f o r h e r e we  see argument a g a i n  down t o t h e l a b o r a t o r y p r o c e d u r e s o f s c h o o l d e b a t e .  sentence widens  argument i n t o t h e f i e l d  o f human a f f a i r s ;  i n f l u e n c e i s v y i n g f o r a p l a c e above t h e r i g i d  derided  Yet the  the  second  rhetorical  h i e r a r c h y of d i s c o u r s e forms  and  formulae. One  more t h i n g  s h o u l d be s a i d a b o u t W e a v e r ' s t e x t .  r a t i o n a l i z e i t s use of the f o u r forms  of  I t , at least,  tries  to  discourse:  . . . t h e r e i s enough i n h e r e n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e f o u r forms t o j u s t i f y l e a r n i n g them. . . . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e forms o f d i s course are important t o o l s of a n a l y s i s (28-9). This  statement r e v e a l s  influential  t h a t t h e f o u r forms o f d i s c o u r s e were s t i l l  i n c o m p o s i t i o n pedagogy as l a t e as t h e mid  H a c k e t t ' s U n d e r s t a n d i n g and B e i n g U n d e r s t o o d i s a "communicative" logical."2  1  Such  o r g a n i z a t i o n , and  1950's.  ( 1 9 5 7 ) , as i t s t i t l e  t e x t , but i t develops t h i s premise:  " b a s i c elements" of communication skills  states i n i t s logic  as e v i d e n c e , l o g i c ,  of a n a l y s i s form the main f o u n d a t i o n f o r t h i s  chapter that  a c c u r a t e l y and h o n e s t l y when we i n f l u e n c e over others." e m o t i o n and  "relate"  "we  implies,  "good c o m m u n i c a t i o n i s  w h i c h a l s o p u t s o r a l p e r s u a s i o n and a r g u m e n t u n d e r a " s p e c i a l " text  heavily  f r e q u e n t l y are not  text,  category.  thinking  use e m o t i o n a l d e v i c e s t o t r y t o i n c r e a s e  Good c o m m u n i c a t i o n ,  i t to l o g i c a l  principles  therefore, tries  The  our  to "harness"  (105); o b v i o u s l y p e r s u a s i o n can  u n t r u s t w o r t h y , and even argument i s c a r e f u l l y  c o n f i n e d i n i t s scope t o appeals  t h r o u g h r e a s o n i n g and e v i d e n c e ( 4 7 9 - 8 0 ) .  i m p l i c i t message i n t h i s  faintly  The  be  text  e c h o e s Adam S m i t h ' s p r e m i s e t h a t n a r r a t i v e a n d d i d a c t i c d i s c o u r s e s h o u l d  59 be a s s p a r i n g o f t h e e m o t i o n s not,  as p o s s i b l e , b u t t h i s t e x t o v e r l o o k s , as S m i t h  the e x i s t e n c e of a d i s c o u r s e of o p i n i o n .  Being Understood "good r e a s o n s "  i s , a g a i n , more on  The  (see f o o t n o t e 1 ) , f o r there are twelve r e f e r e n c e s to f a c t s  t h e " s p e c i a l " argument One  which  from  reference to opinion,  relate  (1959).  call and  that being i n  I t b e g i n s by l i s t i n g  examination: P h i l i p L.  seven purposes  to c o n v i n c i n g or persuading a reader.22  the f o u r forms  and  section.  more t e x t o f t h e 1 9 5 0 ' s d e s e r v e s a b r i e f  Effective English of  emphasis of U n d e r s t a n d i n g  " f a c t s " t h a n on w h a t Wayne B o o t h w o u l d  t h e i r p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e i n d e x , b u t o n l y one  does  ( h i s seven purposes  n o n e t h e l e s s , he d r a w s s h a r p d i s t i n c t i o n s  for writing,  Gerber  a r e a i d s f o r f o c u s i n g on a b e t w e e n e x p o s i t o r y and  three  s t a y s away topic);  argumentative  purposes.  A l t h o u g h e x p o s i t i o n serves to work towards  and m u t u a l  d e c i s i o n , " t h r o u g h use of i n f o r m a l methods o f development  f o o t n o t e 2 2 ) , a r g u m e n t "by  Gerber's  "enlightenment,  solution, (see  i t s v e r y n a t u r e , excludes a l l v i e w p o i n t s but t h a t h e l d  by t h e a r g u e r " ( 9 7 ) : I t i n v o l v e s the d i r e c t c l a s h of d i v e r g e n t v i e w p o i n t s . I t i n v o l v e s c o n t e n t i o n b e t w e e n two o p p o s i n g f a c t i o n s , t h e s t r o n g advocacy of f o r - a n d - a g a i n s t p o s i t i o n s . Thus, argument b e g i n s when d i s c u s s i o n e n d s ( 9 7 ) . What G e r b e r  has  i n mind i s argument as d e b a t e ,  as c o u r t r o o m  p o p u l a r v i e w of argument as indeed a " s p e c i a l i z e d " C l e a r l y , many o f t h e "new" s l o w l y m a k i n g t h e i r way  communication  skill. purpose  into composition's t e r r i t o r y  differentiating  e x p o s i t i o n f r o m a r g u m e n t and  t h e n by p u r p o s e  and  argument h a r k e n s  and  still  argument i s as d i s s o c i a t e d  B a k e r ' s 1895  were  i n the 1950's, p e r s i s t e d i n  structure. views.  f r o m c o m p o s i t i o n a s i t was  A number o f 1 9 6 0 ' s t e x t s s t i l l  t e x t s , which  p e r s u a s i o n , i f n o t by  t o a l a r g e e x t e n t by  b a c k t o G e o r g e P.  p y r o t e c h n i c s : the  type or  Gerber's  form,  treatment  of  In fact, i n his text, i n the 1920's.  share these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .  Thomas C a i n ' s  60 Common S e n s e A b o u t W r i t i n g ( 1 9 6 7 ) u n i f i e s  d i s c o u r s e under a c l a s s i c a l  scheme o f i n v e n t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g t h e t o p o i ) , d i s p o s i t i o n , but  c e n t e r s on e x p o s i t o r y w r i t i n g .  regarding  unmentioned. ^  A r t h u r H o o l e ' s The  2  Canadian t e x t , a l s o focuses a review and  of s e n t e n c i n g ,  the business  students will  be  can  e x p o s i t i o n , " c l e a r and  j u g g l e s e t s of  into existing  diction, (1953),  or three e x p o s i t o r y  prose.  The  foundation—that  texts like  these  a  the  this  through  precis, text i s ,  e x e r c i s e i n e m p i r i c i s m , whereby i f  r e s t s on  procedures,  e m p i r i c i s m of the  of the search  s t a t e s f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f c h a n g i n g them.  e m p i r i c i s m of c o m p o s i t i o n  goes  "forms."  "common s e n s e " r u l e s and  unbiased  L o g i c i a n s a l s o r e s t e d on an e t h i c a l probing  two  see w r i t i n g as an  a b l e t o p r o d u c e c l e a r and  typically  effective writing,"  b a s i c theme w r i t i n g ,  e l s e , a m a n u a l on  correctly  defensible portion  persuasion  L i k e A Handbook o f C o m p o s i t i o n  These t e x t s i m p l i c i t l y  revision,  Fundamentals of C l e a r W r i t i n g (1967),  punctuation,  letter.  more t h a n a n y t h i n g  on  e x p r e s s i o n , and  A r g u m e n t becomes " t h e  t h e s u b j e c t " o f a p i e c e o f w r i t i n g , and  rhetorical  they New  for truth,  But  the  the narrow plank  of  "scientism."  A good example of such e m p i r i c i s m u n d e r l i e s Modern Communication  Effectiveness  (1963),  a t e x t w h i c h o s t e n s i b l y l o o k s o n l y a t e x p o s i t i o n , but  imbues i t w i t h an a r g u m e n t a t i v e express then and  our  all  serious ideas  foundation.  the s y l l o g i s m (31-62).  of our  so t h a t "our  H e r e we  minds w i l l  communication"  "We  i n language," says  b a s e s t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f d i s c o u r s e on  reasoning  (64-5).  see  deduction,  have a n i c e r e g a r d Rather  probabilities,  take i n t o  "everyday"  f o r p r e c i s i o n of thought i n the  Hulberts  l o g i c as a f r a m e w o r k on w h i c h f a c t u a l ) p i e c e s of w r i t i n g ,  c o n s i d e r a t i o n the e x i s t e n c e tries  and  induction, propositions,  l i k e R i c h a r d W h a t e l y and  f o r which informal argumentation  we  Brennan (31),  f o r m a l argument d e t a c h e d f r o m  b u i l d a l l " s u c c e s s f u l " ( t h a t i s , o b j e c t i v e and p r o p o s e s does not  n e e d f o r m a l l o g i c when  a u t h o r L a w r e n c e D.  i n E f f e c t i v e E n g l i s h (1929) Brennan sees f o r m a l  t h e l o g i c he  a  to  account.  of  but  to  Completing t h i s is  Kane and  Peters'  authors define Exposition  ( d e f i n i t i o n ) and  m e n t i o n e d as attitudes," a p p e a l as (24).  a t c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s f r o m W o r l d War  A P r a c t i c a l Rhetoric  informative  d e s c r i p t i o n and  and  r i g o r o u s l y as  informal  possible  and  enjoys the  coercive, My  wheedling, unfactual,  point  and  theoretical rationale differs I t i s true  that  h a v e s e e n how  in  the  old  with  structures  practicality  i n the  no  of  g e n e r a t e d by  for through  other, is  untrustworthy. treat  relatively  little  little  t h e i r l a c k of  c l a s s r o o m , and  evolved  such a  r e c e n t l y as  i n the  the honing of  but  the  also  1960's not  forgotten  tend to  those s k i l l s  teaching necessary  p e r s u a s i o n by  the  Neverthe-  only  persist  dissociate  main reasons: i n the  i n t e r e s t s of  a r g u m e n t , and  during  a writer's intentions.  f r o m e a c h o t h e r f o r two  exposition,  how  The  t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e other than a  t e x t s w r i t t e n as  writing primarily involves status  and  evidence"  emotion, or  argument, p a r t i c u l a r l y ,  "modes" t e r m s f o r d i s c o u r s e ,  p u r p o s e s and  The  implicitly  1968,  emotional  from a s i m i l a r l a c k i n l a t e n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y  f a c u l t y psychology, to s t r u c t u r e s l e s s , we  and  e x p o s i t i o n and  time from s t r u c t u r e s  using  therefore  l e e c h e d of  or  i s developed  experience."  p e r s u a s i o n i s t o d e m o n s t r a t e how  t r e a t m e n t s h a v e c h a n g e d b e t w e e n 1917  this  and  values  structures  i n e x a m i n i n g ways i n w h i c h t h e s e c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s  e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , and  texts.  formal  our  briefly  i t f o r l o g i c or  p u r p o s e s and  "enlarging  argument/persuasion, i s e i t h e r r i g i d l y  our  to r e s t r i c t  structure, exposition,  r o l e of  incorporate  Persuasion i s  "tries  the  communication."  thus can  never s u b s t i t u t e s  One  1960's  explanation  . .to a l t e r  persuasion,  succeeded i n s e p a r a t i n g  f o r p r a c t i c a l reasons. l o g i c and  e x p a n d s " and  convictions.  a r g u m e n t , subsumed by  to the mid  t o employ words f o r  n a r r a t i o n as w e l l ( 2 2 - 3 ) .  " a t t e m p t s to change the  I  Prose (1966), i n which  w r i t i n g developed through  a n a l y s i s : i t "probes and  A g a i n , a t e x t has  discourse  of E x p o s i t o r y  r h e t o r i c a s " t h e s t u d y o f how  includes  "informative"  look  i n t e r e s t s of  students  that  to produce f a c t . l a t e 1960's  62 reflects by  the attempts  s i n c e t h e 1 8 9 0 ' s t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e among t h e m .  t h e l a t e 1960's i s e q u a t e d w i t h such  rationality:  dwindled  to a short chapter  argument i s i n a l i m b o  f r o m t h e i n f o r m a l one  and  g a t h e r i n g and  effectively  presenting  f u n d a m e n t a l q u e s t i o n s now t o how  t h e 1960's t r i e d principles composition  we  teach composition  are afterwards  formal  Instead,  Persuasion i s lowest  above a l l i t s purpose, and  at best  expected  an  to concentrate  today.  questions  F i r s t , have t e x t book w r i t e r s s i n c e persuasion—to  discover  t h e y h a v e i n common w h i c h c o u l d f o r m a t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e t e a c h i n g beyond t h a t of w r i t i n g as a p r a c t i c a l s k i l l ?  separate  of D e s c a r t e s , Bacon, Locke, I d o n ' t t h i n k we  for  Second, c o u l d Smith,  and  c a n s i m p l y assume t h a t  forms or s t r u c t u r e s of d i s c o u r s e today,  p u b l i s h e d i n c o r p o r a t e s them.  on  facts.  t o u n i f y e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , and  Campbell p r o v i d e such a r a t i o n a l e ? teaches  " d e v i c e s , " and  Argument  i t s structure  a r i s e from t h i s examination,  the i n f o r m a l , i n d u c t i v e argumentation  one  opinion.  i n a p p r o p r i a t e f o r serious prose w r i t i n g ,  i n t e r e s t i n g e x e r c i s e f o r s t u d e n t s , who  relating  pages on  given for exposition.  somewhere b e t w e e n f a c t a n d  i t s opinionated emotionalism  deemed a t w o r s t  Two  o r a few  purpose sometimes c o i n c i d i n g w i t h e x p o s i t i o n ' s , but  usually quite different  of a l l ,  objectivity,  i n o t h e r words, w i t h a l l good, e f f e c t i v e communication.  a t t h e same t i m e h a s logic—its  p r i n c i p l e s as c l a r i t y ,  Exposition  Such an i d e e f i x e does n o t  o r t h a t no  die without  text  no now  a struggle.  63 ^ R i c h a r d Weaver, i n Language i s S e r m o n i c ( 1 9 7 0 ) , a s s e r t e d t h a t language b o t h i m p o s e s o r d e r a n d i m p a r t s v a l u e s t h r o u g h i t s power t o name o r d e f i n e . He a t t e m p t e d t o show t h a t t h e r h e t o r i c i a n ' s m o r a l c o m m i t m e n t t o , a n d e t h i c a l u s e o f , d e f i n i t i o n s o r " u l t i m a t e terms" o r d e r s h i s w o r l d and those o f h i s s t u d e n t s — s u c h hierarchies serving to "interpret the world of r e a l i t y . " K e n n e t h B u r k e , a u t h o r o f s u c h w o r k s a s A Grammar o f M o t i v e s ( 1 9 4 5 ) , A R h e t o r i c o f M o t i v e s (1950), and Language as Symbolic A c t i o n (1966), b e l i e v e s t h a t language i s n e c e s s a r i l y s y m b o l i c ; t h a t language i s c o n s t r u c t e d o f terms t h a t shape w h o l l y o u r range o f o b s e r v a t i o n ; and t h a t any a c t o f naming ( I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ) a l s o c o n s t i t u t e s a d i v i s i o n and t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n t o a d i f f e r e n t p l a c e i n a h i e r a r c h y o f v a l u e s . R h e t o r i c becomes f o r B u r k e " a s y m b o l i c means o f i n d u c i n g c o o p e r a t i o n i n b e i n g s t h a t b y n a t u r e respond t o symbols. . .[and] a n a c t t h a t c a n prove o p p o s i t e s . " Burke's D r a m a t i s t i c P e n t a d — a c t , scene, agent, agency, p u r p o s e — i s a v e h i c l e f o r a n a l y z i n g m o t i v e s o r r e a c t i o n s t o t h e s y m b o l i c power o f l a n g u a g e . Wayne B o o t h , i n M o d e r n Dogma a n d t h e R h e t o r i c o f A s s e n t ( 1 9 7 4 ) , t r i e s t o d i s m a n t l e t h e "modern dogma" o f b e l i e f i n h a r d f a c t s v e r s u s s o f t f a i t h ; o f s c i e n t i f i c k n o w l e d g e v e r s u s no k n o w l e d g e ; o f t h o u g h t v e r s u s f e e l i n g s . He b e l i e v e s i n a p h i l o s o p h y i n w h i c h " f a c t s " become a n y t h i n g we t h i n k a r e "good r e a s o n s , " o r a n y t h i n g we i n t e n d a s t r u t h . R h e t o r i c becomes t h e v e h i c l e i n w h i c h we e x p l o r e m u t u a l l y o u r v a l u e s a n d t r u t h s . None o f t h e s e a u t h o r s , t h o u g h a l l h a d b e e n l o n g e s t a b l i s h e d a s r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r i s t s before t h e 1960's, g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d any of t h e pre-1960's textbook w r i t e r s whose w o r k s I h a v e e x a m i n e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r . I s h o u l d a l s o a d d , i n c i d e n t a l l y , that these composition texts a r e quite l i t e r a l l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e f i r s t h a l f o f t h i s c e n t u r y , f o r I f o u n d them m o l d e r i n g o n t h e s h e l v e s o f t h e main l i b r a r y o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia: a graveyard f o r once-popular a n d now l o n g - f o r g o t t e n t e x t s . R o b e r t J . C o n n o r s , "The R i s e a n d F a l l o f t h e Modes o f D i s c o u r s e , " CCC 32 ( D e c e m b e r 1 9 8 1 ) , p . 4 4 8 . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s w i l l be c i t e d p a r e n t h e t i c a l l y i n t h e t e x t by page number. 2  ^ G e r h a r d R. L o m e r a n d M a r g a r e t Ashmun, T h e S t u d y a n d P r a c t i s e o f W r i t i n g E n g l i s h (Cambridge, Mass.: The R i v e r s i d e P r e s s , 1917). T h i s t e x t covers g r a m m a t i c a l c o n v e n t i o n s , " s t e p s i n theme w r i t i n g , " t h e n f o r m s o f d i s c o u r s e : d e s c r i p t i o n , exposition, d e f i n i t i o n , argumentation, biography, n a r r a t i o n , short s t o r i e s , drama, and l e t t e r s . ^ E l i a s J . MacEwan's T h e E s s e n t i a l s o f A r g u m e n t a t i o n ( 1 8 9 8 ) a n d T h e o d o r e W. Hunt's The P r i n c i p l e s o f W r i t t e n D i s c o u r s e (1884) e x e m p l i f y t h i s paradox: t h e need f o r a r a t i o n a l e t o u n i f y d i s c o u r s e , a r a t i o n a l e communicated p o o r l y t h r o u g h t e a c h i n g w r i t i n g as a s e r i e s o f l a r g e l y separate s k i l l s . ( S e e Ch. 2, f o o t n o t e s 11 a n d 13 f o r f u l l c i t a t i o n s . ) A l b e r t R. K i t z h a b e r , " R h e t o r i c i n A m e r i c a n C o l l e g e s , 1 8 5 0 - 1 9 0 0 , " u n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r a t i o n ( U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington, 1953) p. 208. 5  *>I am i n d e b t e d t o R o b e r t J . C o n n o r s ' , L i s a E d e ' s , a n d A n d r e a L u n s f o r d ' s a r t i c l e "The R e v i v a l o f R h e t o r i c i n A m e r i c a : A B r i e f H i s t o r i c a l I n t r o d u c t i o n " i n Essays on C l a s s i c a l R h e t o r i c and Modern D i s c o u r s e (Carbondale: Southern Illinois U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1983) f o r i n f o r m a t i o n about C h a r l e s Sears B a l d w i n .  Co.,  ^ C h a r l e s S e a r s B a l d w i n , C o l l e g e C o m p o s i t i o n (New Y o r k : L o n g m a n s , G r e e n & 1 9 1 7 ) , p. 9 3 - 4 . B a l d w i n d i v i d e s h i s t e x t i n t o two p a r t s , d e a l i n g f i r s t  64 w i t h t h e " C o m p o s i t i o n o f I d e a s " i n i n f o r m a t i v e , d i s c u r s i v e , and p e r s u a s i v e d i s c o u r s e , and t h e n w i t h t h e " C o m p o s i t i o n o f I m a g e s " i n d e s c r i p t i v e , n a r r a t i v e , and d r a m a t i c d i s c o u r s e . B a l d w i n n o t o n l y moves away f r o m t h e f o u r m o d e s , b u t i n f a c t i n t h i s t e x t " f o r m s o f d i s c o u r s e " a s s u c h do n o t r e a l l y e x i s t . The d e g r e e o f I n f o r m a t i v e , d i s c u r s i v e , and p e r s u a s i v e e l e m e n t s p r e s e n t i n a d i s c o u r s e determines i t s type. % e n r y S. C a n b y and J o h n B. O p d y k e , The E l e m e n t s o f C o m p o s i t i o n , r e v i s e d , (New Y o r k : The M a c m i l l a n Co., 1 9 2 5 ) , p . 3 7 9 . T h i s t e x t b e g i n s w i t h word usage, s p e l l i n g , e t c . , then deals w i t h sentencing, paragraphing, the t r i a d of u n i t y - c o h e r e n c e - e m p h a s i s , and f i n a l l y t h e "ends" o f d i s c o u r s e : e x p o s i t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , and argument. ^Howard B. G r o s e , C o l l e g e C o m p o s i t i o n (New Y o r k : S c o t t , F o r e s m a n and Co., 1 9 2 6 ) , p. 1 0 5 . T h i s author includes i n v e n t i o n i n h i s treatment of d i s c o u r s e , b e g i n n i n g h i s t e x t w i t h an e x p l a n a t i o n o f f i n d i n g a s u b j e c t and g a t h e r i n g , s e l e c t i n g , and a r r a n g i n g m a t e r i a l . The s e c o n d h a l f f o c u s e s o n " t y p e s " o f c o m p o s i t i o n : e x p o s i t i o n , argument, d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n . The t e x t f i n i s h e s w i t h a s e c t i o n on d i c t i o n and s e n t e n c i n g . J . R . and V.B. H u l b e r t , E f f e c t i v e E n g l i s h ( C h i c a g o : U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o P r e s s , 1 9 2 9 ) , p. 217. T h e i r types of d i s c o u r s e are d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , and l e t t e r w r i t i n g . 1 0  ^ R a y m o n d W. P e n c e , C o l l e g e C o m p o s i t i o n (New Y o r k : The M a c m i l l a n Co., 1 9 2 9 ) , p. 2 6 . He t r e a t s two k i n d s o f w r i t i n g , e x p o s i t o r y a n d i m a g i n a t i v e , because t o him a l l w r i t i n g has as i t s main o b j e c t e i t h e r i n s t r u c t i o n o r " t h e s t i r r i n g of the emotions" (79). l Dana Composition also treats sentencing, narrative. 2  0. J e n s e n , M o r e l l R. S c h m i t z , and H e n r y F. Thoma, M o d e r n and R h e t o r i c (New Y o r k : H o u g h t o n M i f f l i n Co., 1 9 3 5 ) , p. 3. This t o p i c s e l e c t i o n and p l a n n i n g , p a r a g r a p h i n g , u n i t y a n d c o h e r e n c e , and t h e n t h e " t h r e e f o r m s " o f w r i t i n g : f a c t u a l , o p i n i o n a t e d , S t y l e a n d d i c t i o n come l a s t .  text  13James F. F u l l i n g t o n , R o b e r t S. N e w d i c k , and J . H a r o l d W i l s o n , P u r p o s i v e P r o s e : S e l e c t i o n s i n E x p o s i t i o n (D.C. H e a t h a n d Company, 1 9 3 5 ) , p. 3. The a u t h o r s ' a i m i s t o p r e s e n t " m o d e l s o f s p e c i f i c v a r i e t i e s o f p r o b l e m s i n c o m p o s i t i o n , " f o c u s i n g on e x p o s i t i o n as t h e most " p u r p o s i v e " p r o s e f o r m , a f o r m d e v e l o p e d m a i n l y by d e f i n i t i o n and a n a l y s i s . l ^ M . D o r o t h y M a w d s l e y and M a r j o r i e H. L e e m i n g , M o d e r n C o m p o s i t i o n f o r H i g h S c h o o l a n d C o l l e g i a t e s ( V i c t o r i a , B.C.: C h a r l e s F. B a n f i e l d , 1 9 3 5 ) , p p . i x , 425. l ^ C h a r l e s Harlow 1 9 3 6 ) , pp. 401-2.  Raymond, A B o o k o f E n g l i s h  ( B o s t o n : G i n n and  Company,  l ^ C l e a n t h B r o o k s and R o b e r t P e n n W a r r e n , F u n d a m e n t a l s o f G o o d W r i t i n g (New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t , B r a c e a n d Company, 1 9 4 9 ) , p . 3 1 . This i s essentially a modes t e x t , w i t h t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r t h e modes b e i n g t h a t t h e y r e f l e c t s t a n d a r d i n t e n t i o n s f o r normal communication. P a r a g r a p h i n g , s e n t e n c i n g , d i c t i o n , rhythm, metaphor are i n c l u d e d ; the authors emphasize r e p e a t e d l y the i n s e p a r a b i l i t y of f o r m and c o n t e n t i n t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n s on s t y l e .  65 ^ D o n a l d D a v i s i o n , A m e r i c a n C o m p o s i t i o n a n d R h e t o r i c , t h i r d e d . (New Y o r k : C h a r l e s S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1 9 5 3 ) , p. 4 5 . He s t r u c t u r e s h i s t e x t o n t h e f o u r forms o f d i s c o u r s e , and i n t e r e s t i n g l y , a l s o d i f f e r e n t i a t e s between c o m p o s i t i o n ( s t r u c t u r e and o r g a n i z a t i o n ) and r h e t o r i c ( p e r s u a s i o n and e f f e c t i v e n e s s ) , u n i n t e n t i o n a l l y s h o w i n g how w i d e t h e r i f t was t h e n b e t w e e n r h e t o r i c a n d composition. ^ D o u g l a s M . Brown, A Handbook o f C o m p o s i t i o n ( T o r o n t o : C l a r k e , I r w i n a n d Company L t d . , 1 9 5 3 ) , p . 4 3 . Brown's forms o f d i s c o u r s e a r e n a r r a t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , e x p o s i t i o n , t h e r e p o r t , and t h e p r e c i s . ^ I . J . K a p s t e i n , E x p o s i t o r y P r o s e : A n A n a l y t i c a l A p p r o a c h (New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t , B r a c e a n d Company, 1 9 5 5 ) . T h i s i s r e a l l y a t e x t a b o u t how a w r i t e r ' s p u r p o s e c a n s u p p l y t h e d r i v i n g f o r c e f o r a n e x p o s i t o r y s t y l e , a n d how one c a n understand e x p o s i t i o n ' s s t r u c t u r e s through a n a l y z i n g models of i t . R i c h a r d M. W e a v e r , C o m p o s i t i o n : A C o u r s e i n W r i t i n g a n d R h e t o r i c (New York: H e n r y H o l t a n d Company, 1 9 5 7 ) , p . i x . W e a v e r b e g i n s w i t h " p r o b l e m s o f c o m p o s i t i o n " s u c h as f i n d i n g and l i m i t i n g a s u b j e c t , and o r d e r i n g and c l a r i f y i n g m a t e r i a l , also incorporating the c l a s s i c a l topoi i n h i s text. His four " t r a d i t i o n a l " k i n d s o f d i s c o u r s e a r e e x p o s i t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , and a r g u m e n t a t i o n , e a c h o f w h i c h he d i s c u s s e s i n d e t a i l . The r e s t o f h i s t e x t f o c u s e s on s e n t e n c i n g , p a r a g r a p h i n g , d i c t i o n , r e s e a r c h , and u s a g e . I was, p e r h a p s i l l o g i c a l l y , d i s a p p o i n t e d a t f i r s t t h a t one o f t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y r h e t o r i c i a n s had a n t i - c l i m a c t i c a l l y b u i l t h i s t e x t a r o u n d t h e f o u r forms of d i s c o u r s e . T h a t seemed t o me t o be t a k i n g a n e a s y p a t h , c o n t r a r y t o t h e s p i r i t o f r h e t o r i c a l and p h i l o s o p h i c a l g r o u n d - b r e a k i n g . Y e t Weaver does t r y t o r a t i o n a l i z e h i s use o f t h e f o u r f o r m s , and a l s o s t r u c t u r e s h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n o f e x p o s i t i o n a n d a r g u m e n t o n t h e same e t h i c a l / p h i l o s o p h i c a l f o u n d a t i o n a s t h a t d i s c u s s e d throughout Language i s Sermonic. D e f i n i t i o n , t h e a c t o f n a m i n g and o r d e r i n g , comes f i r s t o n W e a v e r ' s l i s t f o r w a y s t o d e v e l o p e x p o s i t i o n ; and a r g u m e n t a t i o n , he s a y s , m u s t i n c o r p o r a t e o n e ' s " h o n e s t l y c o n c e i v e d " v i e w s . 2 0  2 1 - H a c k e t t , e t a l . , U n d e r s t a n d a n d B e i n g U n d e r s t o o d (New Y o r k : L o n g m a n s , G r e e n and Co., 1 9 5 7 ) . T h i s t e x t b r i e f l y mentions the f o u r forms of n a r r a t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , e x p o s i t i o n , a n d a r g u m e n t a t i o n , a n d shows how one a d a p t s e a c h f o r m t o o n e ' s p u r p o s e . Y e t t h i s t e x t ' s m a i n a i m i s t o show how l o g i c h e l p s d e v e l o p primarily expository discourse. P h i l i p L . G e r b e r , E f f e c t i v e E n g l i s h (New Y o r k : Random H o u s e , 1 9 5 9 ) , pp. 19-20. H i s g e n e r a l p u r p o s e s f o r w r i t i n g a r e t o i n f o r m , e x p l a i n , e n t e r t a i n , i m p r e s s , c o n v i n c e , p e r s u a d e , and a c t u a t e . For Gerber, discourse i s developed g e n e r a l l y t h r o u g h i n f o r m a l means s u c h a s d e f i n i t i o n , e x a m p l e , c a u s e a n d e f f e c t , c o m p a r i s o n a n d c o n t r a s t , a n d a n a l o g y , a n d a l s o t h r o u g h " s p e c i a l i z e d " means s u c h as a r g u m e n t a t i o n , o r a l s p e e c h , and r e s e a r c h . The t e x t a l s o d i s c u s s e s t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e , v o c a b u l a r y , r e a d i n g , a n d grammar. 2 2  -*Here i s a n a n n o t a t e d l i s t , i n c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r d e r , o f t h e 1 9 6 0 ' s t e x t s examined: L a w r e n c e D. B r e n n a n , M o d e r n C o m m u n i c a t i o n E f f e c t i v e n e s s ( E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I n c . , 1 9 6 3 ) . T h i s t e x t c e n t e r s on e x p o s i t o r y w r i t i n g and makes u s e o f a f o r m a l l o g i c a l f r a m e w o r k f o r d e v e l o p i n g i t . J o s e p h i n e J . C u r t o , W r i t i n g W i t h U n d e r s t a n d i n g ( C o l u m b u s , O h i o : C h a r l e s E. M e r r i l l Books, I n c . , 1966). She d i s t i n g u i s h e s b e t w e e n a r g u m e n t a n d p e r s u a s i o n i n 2  I  66 t h i s way: "An a r g u m e n t i s t h e p r o c e s s b y w h i c h we r e a c h c o n c l u s i o n s ; p e r s u a s i o n i s g e t t i n g o t h e r s t o a c c e p t t h e s e c o n c l u s i o n s . The l o g i c a l a r g u m e n t i s j u s t one of t h e methods o f p e r s u a s i o n " ( 1 7 1 ) . But Curto f a i l s t o bridge the s t r u c t u r a l gap s h e l e a v e s b e t w e e n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a n d i n f o r m a l p e r s u a s i o n . Thomas S. K a n e a n d L e o n a r d J . P e t e r s , A P r a c t i c a l R h e t o r i c o f E x p o s i t o r y P r o s e (New Y o r k : O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 6 6 ) . A f t e r o u t l i n i n g t h e k i n d s o f d i s c o u r s e ( e x p o s i t i o n , d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , and p e r s u a s i o n ) and d e t a i l i n g e x p o s i t o r y p r o c e s s e s , s t y l e s , a n d p u r p o s e s , t h e a u t h o r s d e a l w i t h i n v e n t i o n , how to w r i t e " t h e e s s a y , " and t h e n s e n t e n c i n g , p a r a g r a p h i n g , p u n c t u a t i o n , and diction. The emphasis i n t h i s t e x t i s d e f i n i t e l y on s t y l e . Thomas H. C a i n , Common S e n s e A b o u t W r i t i n g ( E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I n c . , 1 9 6 7 ) . The o u t s t a n d i n g f e a t u r e a b o u t t h i s t e x t i s i t s u s e of a c l a s s i c a l r h e t o r i c a l framework f o r d e v e l o p i n g e x p o s i t o r y w r i t i n g . A r t h u r H. H o o l e , T h e F u n d a m e n t a l s o f C l e a r W r i t i n g ( T o r o n t o : T h e M a c m i l l a n Company o f C a n a d a , L t d . , 1 9 6 7 ) . T h i s i s b a s i c a l l y a usage and t e c h n i c a l w r i t i n g manual, f o c u s i n g on t h e p r e c i s , t h e b u s i n e s s l e t t e r , and e x p o s i t o r y themes. R o b e r t G u n n i n g , T h e T e c h n i q u e o f C l e a r W r i t i n g , r e v i s e d e d . (New Y o r k : M c G r a w - H i l l B o o k Company, 1 9 6 8 ) . N a r r o w i n g e x p o s i t i o n t o o n l y o n e o f i t s components, c l a r i t y , Gunning's a i m i s t o i n c r e a s e r e a d a b i l i t y i n w r i t i n g through a d h e r e n c e t o t e n p r i n c i p l e s — a m o n g them c l e a r d i c t i o n and s e n t e n c i n g , v a r i e t y , and " t y i n g i n t o y o u r r e a d e r ' s e x p e r i e n c e . " He f o c u s e s o n b u s i n e s s , l e g a l , t e c h n i c a l , and j o u r n a l i s t i c w r i t i n g .  67 IV. Rediscovering Informal  We h a v e s e e n how, f r o m generally  t i o n classroom; texts after factual, and  t h e 1920's t o t h e 1960's, c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s  f i x a t e d on a v i e w  s h o u l d be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d  that exposition,  took i t s p l a c e .  t h e 1920's r e f l e c t s  and a l l - e n c o m p a s s i n g  opinionable. issue—the  clearly  Theory had d e s e r t e d t h e composi-  The dominance o f e x p o s i t i o n i n  i t s s t a t u s as t h e most  practical,  form o f w r i t i n g , w h i l e t h e l o w s t a t u s o f argument  composition's  l a c k o f i n t e r e s t b e f o r e t h e 1960's i n t h e  A t t h e same t i m e , t h e two b a s i c t o o l s o f e s t a b l i s h i n g a n o p i n i o n o r  i n d u c t i o n and s y n t h e s i s o f i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i o n — r e m a i n e d  b u r i e d under t h e r o t e r u l e s and models f o r w r i t i n g w h i c h were a l l t h a t theory's r e c e d i n g t i d e had l e f t  s e v e r a l attempts  rhetorical  Since  then,  h a v e b e e n made t o r e d r e s s w r o n g s a n d t o p r o v i d e c o m p o s i t i o n  the t h e o r e t i c a l foundations l a c k i n g n o t my i n t e n t t o d e t a i l  throughout  much o f i t s s h o r t h i s t o r y .  t h e m y r i a d ways i n w h i c h  begun t o b r i n g c o m p o s i t i o n and r h e t o r i c a l  pedagogies.  B y t h e same t o k e n ,  I n rhetoric  j o u r n a l s , and a t c o n f e r e n c e s ,  link,  realm  i fnot actually  c o m p o s i t i o n i n s t r u c t o r s h a v e become  texts,  their  teaching  i n works on r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r y , i n  r h e t o r i c and c o m p o s i t i o n a r e a t l a s t  multi-disciplinary  I t i s  theory together, f o r during the past  i n c r e a s i n g l y aware o f t h e need t o t u r n t o t h e o r y t o s u p p o r t methods ( s e e f o o t n o t e 1 ) .  with  t h i s r h e t o r i c a l r e n a i s s a n c e has  decade and a h a l f , most r h e t o r i c i a n s have acknowledged t h i s  that broad,  largely  f o r the teaching of composition.  However, 1969 c a n be c o n s i d e r e d t h e y e a r t h e t i d e t u r n e d . ^  proposed  remained  argument, and p e r s u a s i o n c o u l d and  f o r teaching purposes.  practicality  persuasion indicates  Argumentation  i n which w r i t i n g  reoccupying  i s d e f i n e d as a process of  m u t u a l d i s c o v e r y , a way o f e x p l o r i n g human n a t u r e , a n d a means o f b r i n g i n g a b o u t changes i n s o c i e t y . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , such a view  o f w r i t i n g h a s y e t t o make i t s way i n t o t h e  g e n e r a l t e a c h i n g o f c o m p o s i t i o n i n many N o r t h A m e r i c a n c o l l e g e s a n d u n i v e r s i t i e s .  68 In  much d a i l y p r a c t i c e , p e d a g o g i e s b a s e d on d i s c o u r s e as h a v i n g  s t r u c t u r e s , as r u l e s w i t h o u t classes i n particular.  a rationale,  I h a v e shown t h a t up  t e x t s t e n d e d t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e and persuasion on  this  primarily  i n fact,  composition  texts'  One  of  treatments  and  today,  breadth  the 1960's most  attempts  d e p e n d e n t on a r g u m e n t a t i v e  foundations.  many p o p u l a r  o f t h e gap  This chapter,  contemporary r h e t o r i c i a n s '  between  f o r m s , and  then, w i l l  conclude  by  suggesting  i n f o r m a l argumentative  how  theory  Chapter Five w i l l  adhere to the  and  a composition  principles  and  last  current current theories  examine s e v e r a l  Discourse having  not  l o o k a t some  p r a c t i c e to u n i f y discourse. i n s t r u c t o r might apply will  I  will  these u n i f y i n g i n d i c a t e how  such  as w e l l  level.  theorists  o n l y an  s i n c e the 1960's have begun t o l o o k a t a r g u m e n t a t i o n  "everyday" l o g i c but  r e g a i n the m a t e r i a l s necessary  a l s o e t h i c a l purposes beyond t h a t  f o r i t to b u i l d not  only persuasive  C h i e f among t h e g r o w i n g n u m b e r s o f r h e t o r i c i a n s a n d have r e c e n t l y c o n t r i b u t e d t o l i n k i n g argumentative  d i s c o u r s e are  the f o l l o w i n g :  A l t o n Becker,  James K i n n e a v y , and  but  as  of  I n o t h e r words, argument i s b e g i n n i n g  t h e o r i s t s who  to  expository  composition principles  to  Stephen T o u l m i n , Chaim P e r e l m a n , R i c h a r d Young, Frank D'Angelo.  each sees argument's p l a c e i n the w o r l d working  to  "current-traditional"  t o t e a c h i n g w r i t i n g , and  s y m b o l i c a l l y d e s t r o y i n g an opponent.  discourse.  largely  show t h e e x t e n t  a n a p p r o a c h w o r k s t o w a r d u n i f y i n g d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s on a p e d a g o g i c a l as a t h e o r e t i c a l  carry  two  t o d e v i s e u n i f y i n g f r a m e w o r k s , ones  texts s t i l l  t e x t s which t r y to l i n k  composition  texts s t i l l  a p p r o a c h t o d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s , t h o u g h a t t h e same t i m e I w i l l recent  composition  deal with i n these  o f d i s c o u r s e a i m s and  on u n i f y i n g d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s .  w h i c h a number o f p o p u l a r  until  the i s s u e s I w i l l  i s the extent  dominate freshman  f o r m u l a r i z e e x p o s i t i o n , argument,  f o r teaching purposes;  "tradition."  chapters,  still  separate  I will  o f d i s c o u r s e , and  t o w a r d s u n i f y i n g a r g u m e n t w i t h e x p o s i t i o n and  briefly how  discuss  e a c h c a n be  persuasion.  how seen  as  69 A pioneer of i n q u i r y i n t o A r g u m e n t ( 1 9 5 8 ) e x a m i n e s how  "everyday"  "problems  logic,  about  Stephen Toulmin  logic.  . .apply i n p r a c t i c e ,  w h a t c o n n e c t i o n t h e y h a v e w i t h t h e c a n o n s a n d m e t h o d s we life,  we  a c t u a l l y assess the soundness,  arguments."  s t r e n g t h , and  L o g i c , i n s t e a d of a system  2  make a r e s o u n d .  "justificatory,"  Toulmin  c o n c l u s i v e n e s s of  o f s p e c i a l i z e d r u l e s and  finally,  t h i s s t r u c t u r e , Toulmin  t h a t argument r e s t s on a  t h e c l a i m a t t i m e s m u s t be q u a l i f i e d .  i s also rejecting  the s c h o l a s t i c  "minor  t o d e a l w i t h i s s u e s and  the scope situations  C l e a r l y , Toulmin's  c l a i m and  or the  validity  In presenting  I n s t e a d , the  than  the  courtroom.  data correspond t o the "bare  the process of i n s t i l l i n g  warrant-qualifier  and  that t h i s  account  bones"  Therefore, a data-claim-  encompass e x p o s i t o r y ,  occasions with r e l a t i v e  ease.  also  f o r further necessary steps  c o n v i c t i o n i n an a u d i e n c e .  s t r u c t u r e can p o t e n t i a l l y  o r p e r s u a s i v e a i m s and strongly  qualifier  greatly  t h a t a r e a t o n c e more  r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an e x p o s i t o r y p i e c e (as A r i s t o t l e , S m i t h , and C a m p b e l l i n d i c a t e d ) , w h i l e h i s w a r r a n t and  major  o f a r g u m e n t by  b u t a t t h e same t i m e more c o m p l e x and m u l t i - f a c e t e d ,  o c c a s i o n s of argument found i n debate  any  that  premise;  conclusion" or c a t e g o r i c a l / s y l l o g i s t i c pattern (96).  increasing i t s ability  in  basic  i n other words,  up by i n f o r m a t i o n t o show t h e i r  d a t a - w a r r a n t - c l a i m - q u a l i f i e r s t r u c t u r e broadens  stylized  know when  a r g u m e n t makes a c l a i m o f some s o r t a n d n e e d s d a t a t o s u p p o r t  ( t h e w a r r a n t ) , and  "everyday,"  we  says t h a t argument i s p r e d o m i n a n t l y  a c l a i m he s u p p o r t s by s h o w i n g  c l a i m . O f t e n , t h a t d a t a m u s t be b a c k e d  p r e m i s e ; j3£  methods,  a n d why  s t r u c t u r e composed o f d a t a , c l a i m s , w a r r a n t s , and q u a l i f i e r s : "everyday"  and  u s e when, i n e v e r y d a y  becomes i n e f f e c t a h e u r i s t i c a b l e t o h e l p u s d i s c o v e r how t h e c l a i m s we  i n The U s e s o f  argumentative,  I n f a c t , Toulmin  s t r u c t u r e i s r o o t e d i n an i n d u c t i v e p r o c e s s w h e r e i n  implies the  data  i t s p r e s e n t a t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y decide the r e s t of the d i s c o u r s e ' s s t r u c t u r e  (99-100).  L i k e Smith's  and C a m p b e l l ' s  process of expansion from n a r r a t i v e to d i d a c t i c  o v e r l a p p i n g "ends,"  Toulmin's  s t r u c t u r e a c c o u n t s f o r any  writing, p i e c e of  70 w r i t i n g which  relies  on d a t a t o support a g e n e r a l i z a t i o n :  aims and o c c a s i o n s f o r p r o s e The and  writing.  i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r composition o f such a theory a r e , I t h i n k , c l e a r :  the l o g i c a l  prose.  i n o t h e r w o r d s , most  r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n them a n d a t h e s i s s t a t e m e n t  data  u n d e r l i e almost a l l  T h i s c e n t r a l p r i n c i p l e forms one o f t h e c o r n e r s t o n e s o f i n f o r m a l  argumentation.  Thus, Toulmin  has l a i d  b a r e a n immense a n d l a r g e l y  uncharted  realm f o r t e a c h i n g c o m p o s i t i o n , t h a t o f v i e w i n g d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s on t h e b a s i s of u s e o f d a t a and t h e i r  synthesis into a claim or thesis.  I t i s unfortunate  t h a t much w o r k w i t h T o u l m i n ' s  s t r u c t u r e i n r e l a t i o n t o c o m p o s i t i o n has sof a r  been l i m i t e d  alone o r t o such  t o argumentation  f i e l d s as sentence  combining (see  footnote 2 ) . By  c o n t r a s t , both Perelman  (1969) and Young, Becker,  a n d O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a ' s t r e a t i s e T h e New R h e t o r i c  and P i k e ' s R h e t o r i c : D i s c o v e r y and Change (1970) n o t  o n l y broaden t h e r o l e and scope o f argumentation, relate  but also  i t i n some d e g r e e t o o t h e r a i m s a n d o c c a s i o n s f o r d i s c o u r s e .  Rhetoric establishes  itself  r e i n t r o d u c i n g two c o n c e p t s  within the context of c l a s s i c a l basic to classical  Second, t h e study of argumentative secure t h e "adherence" Ramus a n d D e s c a r t e s  of an audience.^  t o the realm of t h e i r  charges.  the plausible,  immediately  First,  argument  the probable."  p r o o f s s h o u l d f o c u s on t o what e x t e n t  they  Proofs, propositions, relegated since " c o n f o r m i t y w i t h f a c t s , " have r e c e i v e d  systematic attention outside formal logic,  operate, Perelman  T h e New  rhetoric,  rhetorical theory.  by i t s v e r y n a t u r e m u s t d e a l w i t h " t h e c r e d i b l e ,  no  as does T o u l m i n ,  o r i n a r e a s w h e r e humans c o n s t a n t l y  I n e f f e c t , h i s book aims t o u n t a n g l e t h i s paradox.  new r h e t o r i c a l l o w i n g m e t h o d s o f p r o o f o n c e a g a i n t o a c c o u n t  f o r the opinionable  (or t h e adherence of an audience  or writer) w i l l  resolve this s p l i t  t o the o p i n i o n of a speaker  between hard l o g i c and "those areas which  elude  help  calculation"  (2-4). Argumentation,  A  " t h e study o f d i s c u r s i v e t e c h n i q u e s a l l o w i n g us t o induce o r  71 to  i n c r e a s e the mind's adherence t o the t h e s e s p r e s e n t e d f o r i t s a s s e n t " ( 4 ) ,  b e c o m e s P e r e l m a n ' s v e h i c l e by w h i c h deliberation,  and  inquiry.  J u s t as C a m p b e l l  f o r g e s t h e arms t h a t e l o q u e n c e t e c h n i q u e s as the t o o l s own  a c t i o n s and  t e a c h e t h us  "that w i l l  influencing  r h e t o r i c r e - e n t e r s everyday  believed that "logic therefore  t o w i e l d , " Perelman  acknowledge the use  those of o t h e r s " ( 3 ) .  place i n Perelman's r h e t o r i c a l  Argument, t h e n , takes  t r e a t i s e demonstrates  s a y s a b o u t d a t a and  how  e x p o s i t i o n and  t e c h n i q u e s work  on  l o o k i n p a r t i c u l a r a t what  t h e i r a d a p t a t i o n t o argument and in relation  argumentative  t o how  they can  apply  persuasion.  O p e n i n g h i s s e c t i o n on d a t a and  t h e i r a d a p t a t i o n t o argument i s the  q u e s t i o n — a r e arguments s e p a r a t e from data? g i v e n a r g u m e n t , one  chooses  endows t h o s e e l e m e n t s  i s o l a t e c e r t a i n elements  w i t h "presence,  on o u r  Perelman's answer i s t h a t , i n a  w h a t becomes d a t a a n d w h a t becomes a r g u m e n t .  w r i t e r ' s d e c i s i o n t o s e l e c t and  (acting) directly  supreme  i s traditionally  argumentative  I will  techniques, s i n c e these are of primary concern to  our  exist.  the mind t o s e c u r e i t s adherence t o a t h e s i s . Perelman  discursive  t h e o r y ; he a s s u m e s t h a t w i t h o u t t h e o p i n i o n a b l e ,  domain, t h e n argument cannot  Perelman's e n t i r e  sees  of reason i n d i r e c t i n g  w i t h o u t t h a t degree of p r o b a b i l i t y or u n c e r t a i n t y which rhetoric's  discussion,  sensibility"  r a t h e r than others  an e s s e n t i a l f a c t o r i n (116).  A  Those elements  argumentation constituting  data  become so b e c a u s e " t h e r e seems t o be a n a g r e e m e n t . . . c o n s i d e r e d t o be u n i v o c a l and  undisputed" t h a t these elements  t h a t agreement. perhaps, overall  Another  important concept  d i f f u s i o n i n t o what Perelman  The  presence  about data i s t h e i r  calls notions.  " f a c t s / v a l u e s " p a t t e r n on w h i c h  a r e a b s t r a c t i o n s such as honor, h a v e no  a r e d a t a ( 1 2 1 ) , and  New  influenced  expansion  or,  Here e x e m p l i f i e d i s the  Rhetoric i s structured.  j u s t i c e , m o r a l i t y which  Notions  are p l a s t i c because  f i x e d m e a n i n g , b u t a r e a t t a c h e d t o more c o n c r e t e c o n t e x t s  c o n v e n t i o n s , j u s t as p r e s u m p t i o n s  has  are attached to t r u t h s or f a c t s  and i n a given  they  argument. his  Perelman's  d e f i n i t i o n of notions, of course, relates very strongly to  conception of argumentative processes: . . . i t i s p r e c i s e l y because t h e n o t i o n s used i n argumentation a r e n o t u n i v o c a l a n d h a v e no f i x e d m e a n i n g t h a t w i l l n o t c h a n g e that t h e c o n c l u s i o n s of an argumentation a r e not b i n d i n g . (132)  In  o t h e r words, argument c a n never e s t a b l i s h  plasticity—the deal.  " f a c t s " because  c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g n a t u r e o f t h e s t u f f w i t h w h i c h argument must  P r e s e n c e and p l a s t i c i t y u n d e r l i e i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i o n , which i n t u r n  u n d e r l i e s e x p o s i t i o n and p e r s u a s i o n . w r i t i n g , g i v e n a s i m i l a r purpose  An e x p o s i t o r y o r a p e r s u a s i v e p i e c e of  and o c c a s i o n , w i l l  use e s s e n t i a l l y  e l e m e n t s , and b o t h a u t h o r s t h e n assume t h e i r a u d i e n c e s a g r e e are  of t h i s concept of  data.  t h e same  that these  elements  However, t h e e x p o s i t o r y w r i t e r presumes t h a t t h e b u l k o f t h e s e d a t a  constitute facts or truths f o r her audience, w h i l e the persuasive w r i t e r  expands  data i n t o notions, which correspond to values, i n order to b r i n g f o r t h a  truth.  B o t h Smith and Campbell  sensed  persuasion differentiated  t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n when t h e y saw e x p o s i t i o n a n d  by t h e degree  of pathos i n v o l v e d .  The b a s i c  elements  t h a t make up d a t a , a n d t h e f a c t t h a t t h e same d a t a c a n become p r e s u m p t i o n s o r notions, constitutes the argumentative nature of discourse i n general, according to  Perelman. The  techniques of argumentation which Perelman  e x p l a i n s a r e t o o many a n d  complex t o d e a l w i t h h e r e , but they s e r v e t o e l a b o r a t e on t h i s nature, or to "establish the structure" writer the  and a u d i e n c e .  particular  of a particular  argumentative  "reality"  enmeshing a  Among t h o s e t e c h n i q u e s h e d i s c u s s e s a r e a r g u m e n t  case ( o r use o f examples and i l l u s t r a t i o n s ) ;  a n d m e t a p h o r ; a n d a r g u m e n t by " d i s s o c i a t i o n o f c o n c e p t s . " c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e s o - c a l l e d methods o f development e x p o s i t i o n and argument.  F o r example,  covers d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n ,  example,  through  a r g u m e n t by a n a l o g y Clearly, a l lthree  given i n texts f o r both  argument through t h e p a r t i c u l a r illustration,  and e n u m e r a t i o n .  by a n a l o g y makes u s e o f c o m p a r i s o n , c o n t r a s t , a n d c a u s e a n d e f f e c t  case Argument  (through  73 similitude).  Finally,  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , and establishing  partition,  final  well.^  t h e o r y o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n shows u s a c o n s t a n t l y s h i f t i n g ,  that of the s i n g l e - c e l l e d  breaking a p a r t , merging, his  definition,  a l t h o u g h d i s s o c i a t i o n c a n be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r  t h e o t h e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among d a t a a s  Perelman's world l i k e  a r g u m e n t by d i s s o c i a t i o n i n v o l v e s  never  c r e a t u r e s we  a r g u m e n t s , t a k e s us f u l l s t a r t i n g p o i n t s , and  see under a m i c r o s c o p e :  r e m a i n i n g t h e same.  c h a p t e r on t h e i n t e r a c t i o n , circle  This f l u i d i t y ,  s t r e n g t h , a m p l i t u d e , and  to h i s f i r s t  b a s i c premise:  t e c h n i q u e s of argument a speaker  occasions of e x p o s i t i o n ,  concrete sense, u n i f i e s B o t h The New premise.  Yet  t h e i r v i e w s on t h e r o l e and On  of use  (8),  and  rejecting (7),  argumentative  strategies  t h e one  and  of R o g e r i a n argument, wherein technique, i l l u s t r a t e s  argumentative  reject  underlies  i n that  o f argument c o n s t i t u t e a  of r h e t o r i c . t h e r o l e and  does n o t h i n g On  how  go  major less  t h e o t h e r hand,  scope  of  argument.  the authors are then a b l e to broaden attempts  "skillful  the  to gain cooperation.  of  scope Their  t h e a r g u e r " i d e n t i f i e s " w i t h h i s "opponent") as a r g u m e n t c a n become a more  flexible,  of a c h i e v i n g c l o s e n e s s between d i f f e r i n g themselves  to general o u t l i n e s  s t r a t e g i e s — o u t l i n e s w h i c h do n o t i l l u s t r a t e  t h r o u g h t o g a i n an a u d i e n c e ' s  the idea that drawing  this  the c l a s s i c a l r h e t o r i c a l aim of " c o n t r o l "  H o w e v e r , Y o u n g , B e c k e r , and P i k e l i m i t  may  T h i s premise  p e r s u a s i o n , and  hand, Perelman  limit  t o i n c l u d e any  n o n - h o s t i l e , h u m a n i t a r i a n way  one  depend  r e j e c t i n g what t h e y c l a i m i s t h e t r a d i t i o n a l v i e w o f r h e t o r i c as  human b e i n g o v e r a n o t h e r  a major  scope  argument w i t h t h e e n t i r e w o r k i n g s  verbal coercion" one  that the k i n d s ,  R h e t o r i c and R h e t o r i c : D i s c o v e r y a n d C h a n g e w o r k t o u p h o l d  Y o u n g , B e c k e r , and P i k e b o t h b r o a d e n First,  order of  them.  d i f f e r e n c e between t h e s e works.^ than equate  a r g u m e n t , and  cells  reiterated in  or w r i t e r uses  u l t i m a t e l y on t h e n a t u r e o f t h e a u d i e n c e b e i n g a d d r e s s e d . t h e a i m s and  fluid  "adherence."  even i n f o r m a l l o g i c a l  clearly  In effect,  the the  minds. of processes authors  r e l a t i o n s h i p s among d a t a  74  constitutes a cooperative  strategy.  T h e i r one c o n c e s s i o n  t o argumentative p r o c e s s e s i s a d i s c u s s i o n o f  " r e c o n s t r u c t i n g a r e a d e r ' s image of h i m s e l f " r e a d e r ' s image i n v o l v e s c o n v i n c i n g  (230-35).  and  They focus  only on d e d u c t i v e ,  s t r a t e g y t o use t o f u l f i l l  s p e c i f i c a l l y c a t e g o r i c a l , argument  i n c l u d e d i s c u s s i o n of the s y l l o g i s m and enthymeme because they p r o v i d e a  w r i t e r with "patterns persuasively" i s simply  f o r organizing  (231-32).  the statements i n your message c l e a r l y and  F o r Young, Becker, and P i k e ,  one means (and, they add, a f a i r l y  i n a p i e c e of w r i t i n g . fit  reconstructing a  him through " i r r e f u t a b l e e v i d e n c e , " the  a u t h o r s f e e l t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l argument i s the best this intention.  Since  I t should  l i m i t i n g one) o f o r g a n i z i n g  material  be noted t h a t the authors make one attempt t o  t h i s k i n d o f argument i n t o the other  describe—that  such t r a d i t i o n a l argument  i n t e n t i o n s of a w r i t e r that  they  i s , through the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l h e u r i s t i c s they propose both f o r  r e c o n s t r u c t i n g and expanding a r e a d e r ' s image.  Reconstruction  involves  e s t a b l i s h i n g a major and minor premise and b a c k i n g them w i t h a u t h o r i t i e s ; expansion r e p l a c e s  t h i s s e c t i o n w i t h " t h e s i s and e x p l a n a t i o n , "  i n t r o d u c t i o n , background, and c o n c l u s i o n to the authors a l e s s c o n t e n t i o u s , less formalized  Expanding a r e a d e r ' s image i s  less p o t e n t i a l l y threatening  i n t e n t i o n with a  organizational h e u r i s t i c ; i t i s , i n e f f e c t , expository  In Rhetoric:  Discovery  i n t o argument and p e r s u a s i o n structure.  sections.  r e t a i n i n g the  and Change, Young, Becker, and P i k e  writing.  phase e x p o s i t i o n  but o n l y on t h e b a s i s of s t r a t e g i e s , not l o g i c a l  The a u t h o r s do not d e t a i l i n f o r m a l argumentative p r o c e s s e s  themselves, but d i s c u s s organization.  t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between t r a d i t i o n a l v e r s u s Rogerian  Y e t Young, Becker, and P i k e a r e a l l i e d w i t h Perelman, and w i t h  Campbell, i n i m p l y i n g  t h a t b a s i c data remain the same d u r i n g  from e x p o s i t i o n t o p e r s u a s i o n . Young, Becker, and P i k e ,  Governing a l l w r i t i n g c h o i c e s ,  i s s o c i a l cooperation,  both sublime and o r d i n a r y .  a writer's  shift  according to  or communicating shared  values,  Smith had i n s i s t e d on the importance i n d i s c o u r s e of  75 the  speaker or w r i t e r ' s honest conception  simple,  e q u a l l y honest terms.  image" c o r r e s p o n d s r o u g h l y contention  that reason,  framework f o r  o f t r u t h and  Young, B e c k e r , and  to t h i s view, while  e m o t i o n , t r u t h , and  they  p o s i t i o n whereby i t can  and  Change and  writing  become n o t  a l s o share  The  composition  New  reader's  Campbell's ethical  R h e t o r i c h e r a l d the  o f f o r e n s i c s and  o n l y a t h e o r e t i c a l but  s t r u c t u r e f o r m o s t a i m s and  teaching  "expansion of a  goodness c o n s t i t u t e an  emergence of argument from the narrow c o n f i n e s  for  Pike's  communication.  Both Rhetoric; Discovery  underlying  of i t s communication i n  occasions  i s an i n f u s i o n o f a n  debate i n t o  eventually a  of d i s c o u r s e .  slow  practical  What t h i s  e t h i c a l framework f o r  a  means  classroom  t h r o u g h a s i n g l e b a s i c s e t o f common p r i n c i p l e s , a s o p p o s e d t o many  discrete  precepts.  Also proposing Discourse;  The  a u n i f y i n g framework i s James K i n n e a v y ' s A T h e o r y  Aims of D i s c o u r s e  (1971).  The  of  framework here c o n s i s t s of  the  e s s e n t i a l l y A r i s t o t e l i a n communications t r i a n g l e of t e x t , audience,  and  a writer's manipulation  organization,  and  of  s t y l e of a d i s c o u r s e .  the  t r i a n g l e determines the aims, l o g i c ,  K i n n e a v y d i v i d e s t h e a i m s i n t o w h a t he  dominant uses of language, these expressive.  I will  d i s c o u r s e , and what e x t e n t  the  they  logic  briefly  of p e r s u a s i v e  differentiates  referential,  the  share argumentative  Kinneavy f i r s t this  explore  being  l o g i c and  persuasive,  sees  reality;  as  literary,  o r g a n i z a t i o n of  and  referential  d i s c o u r s e , i n an a t t e m p t t o d e t e r m i n e  to  processes.  reference  discourse  from the other  manner: . . . ' r e f e r e n c e ' c a n be b e s t u n d e r s t o o d as c o m p r i s i n g s c i e n t i f i c , i n f o r m a t i v e , and e x p l o r a t o r y d i s c o u r s e . . . . 'reference' discourse, t h e r e f o r e , comprises these three t y p e s o f d i c o u r s e a n d e x c l u d e s p e r s u a s i v e , l i t e r a r y , and expressive discourse. I t i s c l e a r that a l l three of these l a t t e r i n c l u d e much r e f e r e n c e t o r e a l i t y , b u t t h e r e f e r e n c e to s u b j e c t m a t t e r i s secondary i n each c a s e , whereas i n r e ference discourse i t i s primary.^  three  in  76 In discussing the logic of reference  d i s c o u r s e , K i n n e a v y a l s o makes a  d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e s t r u c t u r e s o f t h e v a r i o u s  aims, a s s e r t i n g that there a r e  "different  "has i t s v a r i o u s  l o g i c s " f o r each.  Reference discourse  p r o c e d u r e s , and they a r e q u i t e d i s t i n c t  from the s o - c a l l e d ' r h e t o r i c a l  which c o n s t i t u t e the l o g i c of persuasion"  (107).  scientific  treatment of the nature  discourse  encompasses a f o r m a l  b o t h i n d u c t i o n and d e d u c t i o n  t h e more t e n u o u s n o t i o n s  t h i r d kind of reference  proofs'  The l o g i c K i n n e a v y p r o p o s e s f o r  as w e l l as o f f a c t u a l i t y  propositions). For that kind of reference cites  logical  discourse  and r u l e s o f  (and the use of t r u e - f a l s e  he c a l l s  " i n f o r m a t i v e , " he  o f comprehensiveness and " s u r p r i s e v a l u e . "  discourse,  t h e " e x p l o r a t o r y , " has  A  "illogical"  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , as K i n n e a v y p u t s i t ; i n f a c t t h e sample a n a l y s i s he g i v e s exploratory  f o r an  e s s a y i n c l u d e s s u c h i n f o r m a l p r o c e s s e s a s " h a p p y medium" l o g i c o r  s y n t h e s i s o f t h e s i s and a n t i t h e s i s ,  and i n d u c t i o n s  "of a rather informal or  common s e n s e v a r i e t y " p r o v i d i n g s u p p o r t f o r g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s ( 1 4 7 - 4 8 ) . Kinneavy i s l e s s comfortable  with exploratory discourse—and  Clearly,  yet, the informal  a r g u m e n t a t i v e p r o c e s s e s i t u s e s , c e n t e r i n g on i n d u c t i o n and s y n t h e s i s , a r e those students  most f r e q u e n t l y u s e i n c l a s s r o o m  Adam S m i t h ' s d i d a c t i c d i s c o u r s e , opinionable,  could  writing.  effectively  b u t K i n n e a v y does n o t e x p l o r e  this  Exploratory bridge  discourse.  induction f o rscientific; informative; everything  These a r e , b r i e f l y ,  possibility.  for  f o rthe three  o r g a n i z a t i o n by d e d u c t i o n  by f a c t u a l / s u p r i s e v a l u e  and f o r e x p l o r a t o r y , a s o r t o f d i a l e c t i c a l p a t t e r n  from debate t o exposing and r e s o l v i n g " c r i s e s . "  I t i s simply  exploratory discourse  unrealistic  i n the light  (encompassing everything  types  and  and c o m p r e h e n s i v e n e s s f o r  a p a t h by r e v e r t i n g t o a n a n a l y s i s o f P l a t o n i c d i a l o g u e discourse.  like  t h e s c i e n t i f i c and  Kinneavy a l s o proposes d i f f e r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n a l patterns of r e f e r e n c e  discourse,  encompassing  Y e t he takes  t o o easy  f o r exploratory  of current  aims and  occasions  from i n v e s t i g a t i v e j o u r n a l i s m  to l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m ) structure;  A l s o , i n order  forced to limit  t o teach  exploratory discourse  n o t emphasize i t s p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g It  f o r m s i t s m o s t common  logical  d i a l e c t i c may b e a t o o l o f a n a l y s i s , b u t n o t o f i n v e n t i o n a n d  organization.  and  t o contend that d i a l e c t i c  t h i s k i n d o f s t r u c t u r e , one w o u l d be essentially  t o debate, as Kinneavy  does,  potential.  i s a p i t y t h a t K i n n e a v y d o e s n ' t t r y t o s e t up a n o r i g i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  model f o r e x p l o r a t o r y d i s c o u r s e , o r t i e i t t o any o t h e r  patterns  has  t o two t y p e s  instead attached  t r a d i t i o n a l processes  d i s c o u r s e whose a i m s a n d o c c a s i o n s discourse.  a r e more l i m i t e d  Y e t he a t t e m p t s t o r e l a t e  some a s p e c t s  discourse concerned w i t h subject matter,  l o g i c on t h e c l a s s i c a l  than those  of reference  of reference  discourse,  Kinneavy bases t h i s  of persuasive s e c t i o n on  r h e t o r i c a l l o g i c as o u t l i n e d i n A r i s t o t l e ' s  R h e t o r i c ^ and focuses  on ethos,  seemingly r a t i o n a l . "  B u t "what h a p p e n s t o i n f o r m a t i o n when i t i s i n c o r p o r a t e d  into a persuasive  distrust  pathos, and logos, t h e l a t t e r  document?" Kinneavy asks ( 2 5 3 ) — a  Perelman's regarding  data.  He  of exploratory  i n some way t o t h e l o g i c  d i s c o u r s e , or that concerned w i t h audience. persuasive  and p a t t e r n s  o r processes.  question  also called "the  similar to  Kinneavy's answer acknowledges a " s c i e n t l s m i c "  of the opinionable:  " F a c t s " i n p e r s u a s i o n a r e put t o work t o prove a s c i e n t i f i c thesis. T h e f a c t s w h i c h c o u l d do a d i s s e r v i c e t o t h e c a u s e m u s t b e e i t h e r c o n c e a l e d o r m i n i m i z e d . . . .When f a c t s have been m i n i m i z e d o r concealed o r m a g n i f i e d o u t o f proport i o n , t h e r e s u l t i s a l a c k of comprehensiveness, t h e second component o f i d e a l i n f o r m a t i o n ( 2 5 3 - 5 4 ) . On p e r s u a s i o n and  cross-examination  techniques limiting and  and e x p l o r a t o r y d i s c o u r s e , Kinneavy c i t e s a s "ample e v i d e n c e o f t h e u s e f u l n e s s  i n persuasion"  (255).  can blend:  insistence that persuasion's  examination  of exploratory  Y e t h e r e we h a v e o n l y t w o r a t h e r l i m i t e d a n d  s i t u a t i o n s i n w h i c h two a l l - e n c o m p a s s i n g  persuasive,  forensic  aims o f d i s c o u r s e ,  propaganda, and t h e courtroom. s t a t u s be e l e v a t e d ,  Despite  i t seems t h a t  referential  Kinneavy's  discourse  78 emphasizing subject matter s t i l l  has l i t t l e  use f o r the realm  of opinion i n this  work; a r g u m e n t a t i v e p r o c e s s e s ,  informal or otherwise,  framework f o r d i s c o u r s e here.  I n e f f e c t , A Theory of Discourse:  Discourse  point of view.  approach t o u n i f y i n g discourse incorporates  "conceptual  classification, enumeration.^ underlying  structurally.  Not only a r e these  patterns  repetition,  "symbolic  manifestations of  t o D'Angelo they  ( C a m p b e l l ' s and B a i n ' s c o n t i g u i t y ,  and a s s o c i a t i o n ) .  What D ' A n g e l o i s a t t e m p t i n g  o f t h o u g h t w i t h a common t h e o r e t i c a l  c o n s t i t u t e a s o r t of "everyday" l o g i c a l  types—logical,  static  By d i v i d i n g a r r a n g e m e n t o f d i s c o u r s e  p r o g r e s s i v e , and r e p e t i t i v e — a m d  make u p e a c h , D ' A n g e l o c l e a r l y  patterns  "They a r e t o be c o n s i d e r e d  . .and n o t m e r e l y c o n v e n t i o n a l ,  D'Angelo emphasizes ( 5 7 - 8 ) .  rationale.  s t r u c t u r e , f l e x i b l e enough t o encompass  aims and o c c a s i o n s .  organizational processes.  t o do h e r e  p a t t e r n s , b u t a l s o endow  t i e here w i t h i n f o r m a l argumentation i s t h a t D'Angelo's  a l l discourse  t i e i n with  r h e t o r i c and t r a d i t i o n a l l o g i c as w e l l as w i t h t h e  n o t o n l y u n i f y d i s c o u r s e on t h e b a s i s o f t h e s e  virtually  a different  To D ' A n g e l o , a l m o s t a l l d i s c o u r s e  (20), but according  of c l a s s i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n theory  seemingly d i s p a r a t e schools  or  (1975) takes  comparison, c o n t r a s t , a n a l o g y , cause and e f f e c t , p a r t i t i o n , and  the c a t e g o r i e s of c l a s s i c a l  The  persuasive  p a t t e r n s " such as d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n ,  thought processes"  similitude,  and  7  F r a n k D'Angelo's A C o n c e p t u a l Theory o f R h e t o r i c  is  The Aims o f  encourages t h e s e p a r a t i o n of e x p o s i t o r y , argumentative,  s t r u c t u r e s from a teaching  "laws"  do n o t a c t a s a u n i f y i n g  listing  dynamic  patterns," into  the patterns  three that can  i m p l i e s t h a t no o n e p a t t e r n a d h e r e s t o a n y o n e a i m  occasion. Of  t h e r h e t o r i c i a n s I have examined h e r e ,  establishing a theoretical  D ' A n g e l o comes c l o s e s t t o  framework f o r b u i l d i n g d i s c o u r s e  from a l l -  encompassing, i n f o r m a l l y l o g i c a l  r e l a t i o n s h i p s . S h o r t l y , when I l o o k a t some  recent  a l s o examine D'Angelo's P r o c e s s  composition  texts, I will  and Thought i n  Composition  )second ed., 1980)  w i t h an eye toward e v a l u a t i n g how  he a p p l i e s h i s  c o n c e p t u a l t h e o r y t o pedagogy. Other  composition  t h e o r i s t s , as w e l l as i n s t r u c t o r s , have r e c e n t l y begun  e x p l o r i n g argument's r e l a t i o n s h i p both t o o t h e r aims and o c c a s i o n s f o r d i s c o u r s e and  to f o r m a l v e r s u s "everyday"  r h e t o r i c and  composition  " i n f o r m a l " argumentation, composition  classes.  logic.^  The  authors I surveyed  j o u r n a l s r e c o g n i z e a d i f f e r e n c e between " f o r m a l " and but are d i v i d e d about which k i n d s h o u l d be taught i n  J . Woods and Douglas Walton, r e v i e w i n g two  w r i t i n g t e x t s i n R h e t o r i c S o c i e t y Q u a r t e r l y (1976), l o g i c or argumentation,  "On  Freshman  a more s y s t e m a t i c i n f o r m a l  l o g i c w i t h some emphasis on t r a d i t i o n a l l o g i c , w h i l e D a v i d S. C h r i s t i n e M. Neuwirth's " I n t e g r a t i n g F o r m a l L o g i c and suggests, as the t i t l e  the New  i m p l i e s , t h a t f o r m a l l o g i c a l as w e l l as  Kaufer  and  R h e t o r i c " (1983) "rhetorically  a c c e p t a b l e methods" should be combined i n the w r i t i n g c l a s s . Another reviewer, David Lumsden, complains  and  as a l o o s e a s s o c i a t i o n  Gerald Levin, i n his a r t i c l e  and L o g i c a l T h i n k i n g " (1977), advocates  logic  are not a g a i n s t i n f o r m a l  but d e p l o r e i t s p o p u l a r treatment  of mere "common sense h o m i l i e s . " Composition  i n various  text  t h a t Robert J . F o g e l i n ' s U n d e r s t a n d i n g  Arguments n e g l e c t s the t a s k of h e l p i n g s t u d e n t s work out "the broad an argument i n i t s emphasis on "speech  s t r u c t u r e " of  a c t s and p r a g m a t i c s . " S t i l l o t h e r s , l i k e  Andrea L u n s f o r d i n " A r i s t o t e l i a n v s . R o g e r i a n Argument: A Reassessment" (1979) and Jeanne Fahnestock  and Marie Secor  i n "Teaching Argument:  (1983) would l i k e to see c l a s s i c a l argumentative f o r t e a c h i n g argument i n w r i t i n g c o u r s e s :  A Theory of Types"  s t r u c t u r e s form the f o u n d a t i o n  Lunsford l i n k s Rogerian  to  A r i s t o t e l i a n methods, and Fahnestock  and Secor propose a  "rhetorical/generative  method" of t e a c h i n g argument wherein  s t u d e n t s combine c a t e g o r i c a l and  arguments i n t o more complex e v a l u a t i o n s and p r o p o s a l s . These l a s t  causal  three authors,  as w e l l as L e v i n i n p a r t i c u l a r , c l e a r a pathway f o r e x p o s i t i o n , argument, and p e r s u a s i o n being taught as aims and o c c a s i o n s f o r w r i t i n g which stem from a  80  common s y s t e m My  of i n f o r m a l l o g i c a l  f i n a l chapter w i l l  relationships.*  i l l u s t r a t e that furnishing composition teaching with  theoretical foundations i s s t i l l a p p r o a c h e s o f a number o f p o p u l a r  a project i n I t s prototype state, texts.  s m a l l group of t e x t b o o k w r i t e r s sees p e r s u a s i o n as too o b v i o u s toward  u  the  However, i t i s e q u a l l y c l e a r t h a t a  the l i n k between e x p o s i t i o n , argument,  t o p a s s o v e r , a n d we  an i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i v e  j u d g i n g by  shall  s e e how  s t r u c t u r e f o r t h e s e aims and  and  t h e s e w r i t e r s move occasions.  81 ^ S i n c e 1 9 6 9 , m a j o r r h e t o r i c i a n s h a v e d e v o t e d a n i n c r e a s i n g amount o f a t t e n t i o n t o t h e r e l a t i o n between r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r y and c o m p o s i t i o n . T h e s e t h e o r i s t s i n c l u d e R i c h a r d Young ( t h e r e l a t i o n between i n v e n t i o n as a h e u r i s t i c and c o m p o s i t i o n ) ; James K i n n e a v y ( a s t r u c t u r a l r a t i o n a l e f o r t h e forms o f w r i t i n g ) ; Frank D'Angelo ( t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n t o p o i as m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of thought p r o c e s s e s i n w r i t i n g ) ; W. R o s s W i n t e r o w d ( w h o s e w o r k h a s s y n t h e s i z e d v a r i o u s t h e o r i e s a n d p e d a g o g i e s ) ; a n d t o a n e x t e n t , C h a i m P e r e l m a n (who p a y s some a t t e n t i o n to o r g a n i z a t i o n of argumentative s t r a t e g i e s i n d i s c o u r s e ) . This i s o n l y t o name a f e w c o n t e m p o r a r y r h e t o r i c i a n s w h o s e w o r k h a s e i t h e r become p a r t i c u l a r l y i n f l u e n t i a l a f t e r 1 9 6 9 , o r w h o s e m a j o r w o r k was p u b l i s h e d a f t e r t h a t date. Some t e x t b o o k a u t h o r s who h a v e b u i l t t h e i r w o r k on a t h e o r e t i c a l b a c k g r o u n d and whose t e x t s have a c h i e v e d a c e r t a i n p o p u l a r i t y i n c l u d e J a n i c e L a u e r ( K i n n e a v y ' s and Young's t h e o r i e s a p p l i e d ) ; F r a n k D'Angelo ( h i s c o n c e p t u a l t h e o r y a p p l i e d ) ; Maxine H a i r s t o n (D'Angelo's and Young's t h e o r i e s ) ; R i c h a r d Y o u n g , A l t o n B e c k e r , a n d K e n n e t h P i k e ; S t e p h e n T o u l m i n (who c o - a u t h o r e d a t e x t o n i n t r o d u c t o r y r e a s o n i n g ) ; and J a c q u e l i n e B e r k e (whose t e x t u s e s t h e t o p o i as a heuristic for writing). Of c o u r s e , b e f o r e 1 9 6 9 , r h e t o r i c i a n s s u c h a s Wayne B o o t h , K e n n e t h P i k e , R i c h a r d Ohmann, D o u g l a s E h n i n g e r , a n d E d w a r d P . J . C o r b e t t w e r e e x p l o r i n g t h e l i n k b e t w e e n r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r y a n d c o m p o s i t i o n . H o w e v e r , I s e e 1969 a s t h e b e g i n n i n g o f a much more w i d e s p r e a d a w a r e n e s s o f r h e t o r i c ' s r o l e i n c o m p o s i t i o n t e a c h i n g t h a n had e x i s t e d b e f o r e . ^ S t e p h e n E d e l s t o n T o u l m i n , The U s e s o f A r g u m e n t ( C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 5 8 ) , p . 1. A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s t o t h i s w o r k w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . T o u l m i n ' s i n f l u e n c e i n c o m p o s i t i o n seems e x e m p l i f i e d by s u c h a r t i c l e s a s J a m e s F. S t r a t m a n ' s " T e a c h i n g W r i t t e n A r g u m e n t : The S i g n i f i c a n c e o f T o u l m i n ' s L a y o u t f o r S e n t e n c e C o m b i n i n g " i n C o l l e g e E n g l i s h 44 (November 1 9 8 2 ) , 7 1 8 - 7 3 3 . S t r a t m a n e x p l o r e s how T o u l m i n ' s l a y o u t m i g h t be u s e f u l l y a d a p t e d t o t h e t e a c h i n g of a r g u m e n t a t i v e s e n t e n c e c o m b i n i n g e x e r c i s e s . However, a t t h e 6 4 t h A n n u a l S p e e c h C o m m u n i c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n m e e t i n g , T o u l m i n a n d two o t h e r s p e a k e r s r e p o r t e d on " A l t e r n a t i v e P h i l o s o p h i c a l G r o u n d i n g s f o r L o o k i n g a t A r g u m e n t a t i o n a s a Way o f Knowing," e m p h a s i z i n g a need t o d e t e r m i n e t h e l i m i t s o f t r a d i t i o n a l r h e t o r i c a l and l o g i c a l m o d e l s . ( T h i s s e m i n a r i s r e p o r t e d i n The R h e t o r i c S o c i e t y Q u a r t e r l y , V I I I (Summer 1 9 7 8 ) , 1 1 4 - 1 5 . ) ^ C h a i m P e r e l m a n a n d L . O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a , The New R h e t o r i c : A T r e a t i s e o n A r g u m e n t a t i o n , J o h n W i l k i n s o n a n d P u r c e l l W e a v e r , t r a n s . ( N o t r e Dame, I n d i a n a : U n i v e r s i t y o f N o t r e Dame P r e s s , 1 9 6 9 ) , p . 1. A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s t o t h i s w o r k w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . ^Perelman's d i s s o c i a t i o n s e v e r s t i e s between s i n g l e n o t i o n s or conceptions comprised of u n i t i e s of elements, the elements themselves being p r o p e r l y l i n k e d t o e a c h o t h e r ( 4 1 1 - 1 2 ) . What i s s o p o w e r f u l a b o u t d i s s o c i a t i o n i s t h a t i t r e c o n s t r u c t s r e a l i t y , r e m o d e l s i t , a n d i n d o i n g s o i n t r o d u c e s new concepts or n o t i o n s , which are themselves perhaps d i s s o c i a t e d l a t e r . The fundamental u n i t s f o r d i s s o c i a t i o n are " p h i l o s o p h i c a l p a i r s , " p r i m o r d i a l p o s i t i v e / n e g a t i v e v a l u e s , though Perelman d i s c u s s e s o t h e r d i s s o c i a t i v e t e c h n i q u e s s u c h as u s i n g " d i s q u a l i f y i n g " p r e f i x e s , making s u b s t i t u t i o n s , and even s i m p l y e s t a b l i s h i n g d e f i n i t i o n s of n o t i o n s . ^ R i c h a r d E. Young, A l t o n L. B e c k e r , and K e n n e t h L. P i k e , R h e t o r i c : D i s c o v e r y a n d Change (New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t B r a c e J o v a n o v i c h , I n c . , 1 9 7 0 ) , p. 1 7 1 . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s t o t h i s w o r k w i l l b e c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t .  82 Perelman's and Young, B e c k e r , and P i k e ' s works d i f f e r p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h a t the l a t t e r authors take a decidedly e t h i c a l stance i n t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n of r h e t o r i c , w h e r e a s P e r e l m a n i s more u t i l i t a r i a n : h e l o o k s a t r h e t o r i c n o t f r o m t h e v i e w p o i n t o f w h a t i t s h o u l d do i n s o c i e t y , b u t w h a t i t a c t u a l l y d o e s . 6james L . K i n n e a v y , A T h e o r y o f D i s c o u r s e : The Aims o f D i s c o u r s e (Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I n c . , 1971), p. 77. A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s t o t h i s w o r k w i l l be c i t e d b y p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . Kinneavy deplores t h e use of the term " e x p o s i t i o n " f o r i n f o r m a t i v e o r s c i e n t i f i c d i s c o u r s e , because, a s he p u t s i t , " i t f o s t e r s t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t o n l y l i t e r a r y w r i t i n g i s c r e a t i v e . . . i t c o n f u s e s a mode o f d i s c o u r s e w i t h a n a i m of d i s c o u r s e . " ( 7 9 ) . ^Kinneavy's work has been w i d e l y i n f l u e n t i a l , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e a r e a o f new c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s s u c h a s F o u r W o r l d s o f W r i t i n g . The most l i k e l y r e a s o n f o r t h i s i s t h a t Kinneavy p r o v i d e s a t h e o r e t i c a l base f o r t h e " f o u r forms" o f w r i t i n g p e r s e ; no l o n g e r m u s t i n s t r u c t o r s t e a c h t h e m b y r o t e , b u t c a n d e l v e i n t o t h e s t r u c t u r e s , t h e l o g i c , b e h i n d e a c h a s p r e s e n t e d by K i n n e a v y . Four World of W r i t i n g adopts h i s u s e o f terms such as " i n f o r m a t i v e " w r i t i n g r a t h e r than "expository" w r i t i n g , f o r c e r t a i n l y Kinneavy's breaking-up of e x p o s i t i o n i n t o f i n e r c a t e g o r i e s d o e s b r o a d e n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f a n a i m t h a t p r e v i o u s l y h a d done l i t t l e but "provide information." I n h i s a r t i c l e "A T h e o r y o f D i s c o u r s e : A R e t r o s p e c t i v e " i n CCC, 3 3 (May 1 9 8 2 ) , 1 9 6 - 2 0 1 , J o h n D. O ' B a n i o n d e s c r i b e s Kinneavy's c a t e g o r i e s as " s t a t i c " and h i s approach as " t o oc l o s e l y t i e d t o l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m t o b e h e l p f u l i n c o m p o s i t i o n . " My own e v a l u a t i o n o f K i n n e a v y ' s f a i l u r e t o u n i f y d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s (beyond t h e e x t r e m e l y h e l p f u l but broad " t r i a n g l e " ) i s r e f l e c t e d i n O'Banion's comment—"Kinneavy's r e f u s a l t o deal with process i n order to treat s t a t i c t e x t s . . . r e s u l t s i n an u n f o r t u n a t e s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e k i n d s o f d i s c o u r s e . . . .he e n d s up w i t h s e l f - i m p o s e d limitations." ^Frank J . D'Angelo, A C o n c e p t u a l Theory o f R h e t o r i c (Cambridge, Mass.: W i n t h r o p , 1 9 7 5 ) , p . 3 4 . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s t o t h i s w o r k w i l l b e c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . D ' A n g e l o a d d s t h a t when t h e s e t h o u g h t p a t t e r n s a r e embedded i n s e n t e n c e s , "We c a l l them a s p e c t s o f s t y l e . When t h e y a r e embedded i n p a r a g r a p h s a n d e x t e n d e d u n i t s o f d i s c o u r s e , we c a l l them a s p e c t s o f s t r u c t u r e . " I n o t h e r words, t h e y encompass a l l l e v e l s and a s p e c t s o f w r i t i n g . ^The f o l l o w i n g a r t i c l e s e x p l o r e a s p e c t s o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n a n d l o g i c a n d pedagogy r e l a t i n g t o them. I have l i s t e d them h e r e s t a r t i n g w i t h t h e most recent: D a v i d S. K a u f e r a n d C h r i s t i n e M. N e u w i r t h , " I n t e g r a t i n g F o r m a l L o g i c a n d t h e New R h e t o r i c : A F o u r - S t a g e H e u r i s t i c " i n C E , 45 ( A p r i l 1 9 8 3 ) , 3 8 0 - 3 8 9 . Jeanne F a h n e s t o c k and M a r i e S e c o r , "Teaching Argument: A Theory o f Types" i n CCC, 34 ( F e b r u a r y 1 9 8 3 ) , 2 0 - 3 0 . D a v i d L u m s d e n , "Book R e v i e w s : U n d e r s t a n d i n g A r g u m e n t s : A n I n t r o d u c t i o n t o I n f o r m a l L o g i c by R o b e r t J . F o g e l i n , and A n I n t r o d u c t i o n t o R e a s o n i n g by S t e p h e n T o u l m i n , R i c h a r d R i e k e , and A l l a n J a n i k " i n R h e t o r i c S o c i e t y Q u a r t e r l y , I X ( F a l l 1979), 211-214. A n d r e a A. L u n s f o r d , " A r i s t o t e l i a n v s . R o g e r i a n A r g u m e n t : A R e a s s e s s m e n t " i n CCC, 30 (May 1 9 7 9 ) 1 4 6 - 1 5 1 . G e r a l d L e v i n , "On F r e s h m a n C o m p o s i t i o n a n d L o g i c a l T h i n k i n g " i n CCC, 28 (December 1977) 359-364.  83  J . Woods and D o u g l a s W a l t o n , "Book R e v i e w s : W i t h Good R e a s o n by M o r r i s E n g e l , and L o g i c and C o n t e m p o r a r y R h e t o r i c by Howard Kahane" i n R h e t o r i c S o c i e t y Q u a r t e r l y , V I (Summer 1 9 7 6 ) , 5 0 - 5 2 . * 0 t h e r t e x t s w h i c h t r e a t i n v a r y i n g d e g r e e s a r g u m e n t , e x p o s i t i o n , and p e r s u a s i o n as h a v i n g common s t r u c t u r a l f e a t u r e s b a s e d on i n f o r m a l l o g i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s among d a t a i n c l u d e t h e f o l l o w i n g : B e r k e ' s T w e n t y Q u e s t i o n s f o r the W r i t e r (the l o g i c used here i s t h a t of the t o p o i ) ; H a i r s t o n ' s A Contemporary R h e t o r i c ( w h i c h p o s e s methods of d e v e l o p m e n t o r " c o n c e p t u a l p a t t e r n s " as a u n i f y i n g f o u n d a t i o n f o r d i s c o u r s e ) ; and S k w i r e ' s W r i t i n g W i t h a T h e s i s ( w h i c h takes the A r i s t o t e l i a n view that d i s c o u r s e i s e s s e n t i a l l y a two-part s t r u c t u r e w h i c h c a n be e l a b o r a t e d o n ) . See Ch. 5, f o o t n o t e 2 f o r f u l l c i t a t i o n s . u  84 V.  Informal Argumentation  Although the l a s t have grown toward  decade has  the fragmented dominates  " t h e new  a marked i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y  writing  f r a g m e n t a t i o n more o b v i o u s  i n s t r u c t i o n today."^  and  which are  that f i v e mention  t h e same c r i t e r i a a s t h e i r  Perhaps  n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y new  i n t o t h e b a s i c e x p o s i t o r y e s s a y and  e x a m p l e , and  informally  the s i x t e x t s  from "the b a s i c essay." effectively  The splits  t h e e s s a y o f o p i n i o n by d e v o t i n g t o such as  definition, the  fallacies.  t h e t e x t ' s e a r l i e r a s s e r t i o n t h a t a r g u m e n t c a n be S i m i l a r l y , The  i t s s e c t i o n on " D e v e l o p i n g A n E s s a y "  w r i t i n g whose p r i m a r y p u r p o s e  argument;  2  d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n as w e l l as d i s c u s s i o n o f e t h o s and  part of "the whole c o m p o s i t i o n . " devotes  I  p e r s u a s i v e s t r u c t u r e s t h e most  c h a p t e r on l o g i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s  Such a treatment c o n t r a d i c t s  or  not s u r p r i s i n g l y ,  P r e n t i c e - H a l l Handbook f o r W r i t e r s ( s e v e n t h e d i t i o n , 1978)  an i s o l a t e d  t e x t s I surveyed,  trend i n these texts i s t h e i r  s e p a r a t i o n of argument o r o p i n i o n a b l e w r i t i n g  the l a t t e r  turn-of-the-  t r y t o p r o v i d e e i t h e r an a r g u m e n t a t i v e  u n i v e r s a l l y - k n o w n " b i b l e s " of the c o m p o s i t i o n c l a s s r o o m .  writing  highly  exposition,  some c o m m o n a l i t i e s b e t w e e n e x p o s i t i o n and  framework f o r t e a c h i n g w r i t i n g .  n o t i c e a b l e and  "clearly  in differentiating  d i f f e r e n t i a t e e x p o s i t o r y , a r g u m e n t a t i v e , and  One  and  d i f f e r e n t i a t e d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s on t h e b a s i s , m a i n l y ,  that only three c l e a r l y  logical  between  Nowhere i s t h i s  I n f a c t , out of the f o u r t e e n post-1970  that s i x c l e a r l y  purpose;  exists  t h a n i n many o f t o d a y ' s m o s t w i d e l y u s e d a n d  composition t e x t s , which p e r s i s t  century antecedents.  of  still  writing  r h e t o r i c " o f s y n t h e s i s and u n i f i c a t i o n ,  a r g u m e n t , and p e r s u a s i o n , u s i n g a l m o s t  found  t h e o r y and  " c u r r e n t - t r a d i t i o n a l r h e t o r i c " w h i c h , he s a y s , s t i l l  t h i n k i n g about  t o u t e d freshman  Composition  b e e n a t i m e when r h e t o r i c a l  a reconciliation,  w h a t J a m e s A. B e r l i n c a l l s  and T e a c h i n g  Little,  Brown Handbook (1980)  to exposition, which  i s t o "expose i n f o r m a t i o n "  a  i n this  text i s  (2-3), while a separate  85 chapter  d i s c u s s e s argument, l o g i c ,  and  fallacies.  c o n t r a d i c t t h e t e x t ' s a s s e r t i o n t h a t " I n a way, The  H e a t h Handbook o f C o m p o s i t i o n  "expository/academic  writing"  w h i c h t h e c a r e f u l s t u d e n t may "The  Research  d e f i n i n g i t as  Paper." "any  This  two  This treatment  a l lwriting  (tenth edition,  o n l y , but  seems t o  i s arguing."  1981)  dedicates i t s e l f  i t includes a chapter  on  f i n d p l a c e d between "Diction/Word  "Reasoning," Selection"  statements  connected  i n s u c h a way  a more f o r m a l l o g i c a l  t h a t one  emphasizing  p r a c t i c a l purposes,  remains unconnected to e x p o s i t i o n (287-310).  treatment  perpetuates  the s p l i t  between f a c t and  a n a r g u m e n t . . . f a c t w o u l d c a r r y more w e i g h t  which,  for a l l  Likewise,  S t r a t e g y of S t y l e  o p i n i o n by  t h a n mere o p i n i o n "  O p i n i o n , a l o n g w i t h e v e r y t h i n g e l s e , becomes a s t y l i s t i c  models.  F o r an  e x p o s i t o r y purpose, the w r i t e r i s advised  the t o p i c  sentence  first;  f o r p e r s u a s i o n , s h e may  implicit  argument i n the l a t t e r  i n t e n t i o n but  three texts,  w r i t i n g at the l e x i c a l  or s y n t a c t i c  J u s t as I n t h e 1 9 4 0 ' s a n d the t r a n s m i s s i o n of f a c t u a l many c o m p o s i t i o n  50's  level,  clearly  "four widely accepted differentiated  New  on"  on  introduce The  only  to a piece  of  as s e p a r a t e s t r u c t u r e s .  when " e x p o s i t i o n o n l y " t e x t s w e r e i n v o g u e ,  I n The  M a c m i l l a n Handbook of E n g l i s h  e d i t i o n , 1982), e x p o s i t i o n , argumentation, g i v e n as  "pasted  to  t h a t not  i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e s t h e same i m p l i c i t  t e x t s today.  (260).  to i t inductively.  then, i s t h i s :  t h e v e h i c l e f o r t h e i n t e n t i o n c a n be  weak  persuasion centers  paragraph  l e a d up  The  adding,  o r n a m e n t i n The  ( 1 9 7 8 ) , when d i s c u s s i o n o f e x p o s i t i o n a n d  by  i s drawn f r o m  C a n a d i a n W r i t e r ' s Handbook (1980) m e n t i o n s argument o n l y under " D i c t i o n :  "In  and  t e x t i s o l a t e s argument t o an even g r e a t e r degree  the other," thereby  g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s " and  to  n a r r a t i o n , and  emphasis i n (seventh  d e s c r i p t i o n are  purposes or aims of the essay,"  the f i r s t  from each o t h e r i n p r e p a r a t i o n f o r the emphasis  exposition: W r i t e r s who s e e k t o i n f o r m o r e x p l a i n w i l l p r e s e n t f a c t s a n d i d e a s t o t h e i r r e a d e r s . . . . W r i t e r s who s e e k t o c o n v i n c e w i l l e n l i s t the a i d of techniques used i n argumentation ( 8 - 9 ) .  on  first two  86 A g a i n , t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f "The T a s k o f W r i t i n g " i s e x p l i c i t l y writing  expository,  that of the task of  " f a c t u a l " p i e c e s , w h i l e p e r s u a s i o n (used i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y w i t h  a r g u m e n t ) comes u n d e r " P r o b l e m s  of Composing."  d e s c r i b e s e x p o s i t i o n as "a p e r s o n a l e f f o r t p o s i t i o n t a k e n i s sound" t a s k demanding " t h a t  ( 5 ) , then l a t e r  the w r i t e r  according to the dictates  here, argument/persuasion  this  text  also  t o convince your readers that the  combines argument and p e r s u a s i o n as a  take a p o s i t i o n ,  o f r e a s o n and l o g i c "  f o r a n o t h e r example o f s p l i t t i n g  Interestingly,  state a thesis  (200-1).  t o be a r g u e d .  T h i s statement  . .  i s a cue  f a c t and o p i n i o n , e x p o s i t i o n and argument: f o r  i s equated w i t h f o r m a l l o g i c and c l a s s i c a l  e v e n a s e x p o s i t i o n f o c u s e s o n more I n f o r m a l l o g i c .  Texts l i k e  organization  this,  and t h e f i v e  o t h e r s I have d e s c r i b e d so f a r , a r e a s k i n g t h e s t u d e n t as w e l l as t h e i n s t r u c t o r t o t a k e a " b a s i c e x p o s i t o r y " f r a m e w o r k a n d somehow f i t or onto i t a t need, a t a s k f o r which  t h e s t u d e n t , and t h e i n e x p e r i e n c e d  instructor i n particular, are ill-prepared T e x t s t h a t a t t e m p t more c l e a r l y opinionable writing  a n a r g u m e n t a t i v e one i n t o  t o carry out s u c c e s s f u l l y .  t o o u t l i n e c o m m o n a l i t i e s between f a c t u a l and  include J a c q u e l i n e Berke*s  Twenty Q u e s t i o n s f o r t h e W r i t e r  (1981) and Maxine H a i r s t o n ' s A Contemporary R h e t o r i c ( t h i r d Berke  sees argument as t h e l a s t o f a s e r i e s  inventional heuristic Berke  says  f o r the writer:  edition,  1982).  o f twenty q u e s t i o n s f o r m i n g an  "What c a s e c a n b e made f o r o r a g a i n s t X ? "  this:  I n t r y i n g t o b u i l d a c a s e , we move b e y o n d p l a i n e x p o s i t i o n i n t o t h e more a c t i v e a n d a g g r e s s i v e r e a l m o f a r gumentation. . .wherein the arguer t r i e s not only t o exp l a i n b u t t o d e f e n d o r r e f u t e what l o g i c i a n s c a l l a p r o p o s i t i o n . . . .(306) C l e a r l y , Berke  s e e s a n d makes e v i d e n t a n i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n w r i t i n g  w i t h and w i t h o u t an o v e r t a r g u m e n t a t i v e  both  "edge," e c h o i n g i n p a r t t h e C a m p b e l l i a n  i d e a t h a t t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g m u s t be e n g a g e d b e f o r e t h e w i l l .  Berke  also  notes  t h a t a r g u m e n t makes f r e e u s e o f t h e i n f o r m a l l o g i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f e x p o s i t o r y writing:  definition,  d e s c r i p t i o n , comparison,  and so on ( 3 0 7 ) .  However, she  87 t r e a t s k i n d s o f arguments as e s s e n t i a l l y to all  special writing  prove p r o p o s i t i o n s , c r e a t i n g again a s p l i t  techniques which  serve  between argument as p a r t o f almost  w r i t i n g aims and o c c a s i o n s , and argument as a s e p a r a t e s k i l l  of writing.  H a i r s t o n , on t h e o t h e r hand, embraces argument as t h e most i m p o r t a n t p a r t of  the rhetorical  square  o f argument, purpose,  a u d i e n c e , and p e r s o n a .  For  H a i r s t o n , argument p r o v i d e s "a s u b s t a n t i a l and w e l l - c o n s t r u c t e d base on w h i c h t o build"  (87).  Argument, e x p o s i t i o n , and p e r s u a s i o n i n t h i s  scheme a r e u n i t e d  ("arguments i n c l u d e e x p o s i t o r y as w e l l as p e r s u a s i v e p r o s e " ( 2 6 6 ) Hairston, borrowing exposition: cation.  from D'Angelo, c a l l s  definition,  "thought  t h r o u g h what  p a t t e r n s " o f argument and  i n d u c t i o n , d e d u c t i o n , cause  and e f f e c t ,  and c l a s s i f i -  A s a r e s u l t , u n l i k e t h e c o m p o s i t i o n handbooks, H a i r s t o n does n o t draw a  l i n e b e t w e e n e x p o s i t o r y "methods o f d e v e l o p m e n t "  and g e n e r a l k i n d s o f argument.  The  o n l y r e a l b r e a k i n t h i s u n i f i c a t i o n o f e x p o s i t i o n and argument t h r o u g h what  are  essentially  discusses one  t h e t o p o l o c c u r s i n c h a p t e r s t e n and e l e v e n , w h e r e i n H a i r s t o n  " l o g i c a l argument": i n c l u d i n g  s y l l o g i s m s and f a l l a c i e s .  i s q u i t e c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h t h e i d e a t h a t w r i t e r s can argue  I t i s a s i f no  a thesis  without  k n o w i n g t h e s t r u c t u r e o f a s y l l o g i s m — a n e v e n t w h i c h o c c u r s much m o r e o f t e n  than  not i n p r a c t i c e . It  i s clear  t h a t even i n t e x t s emphasizing  informal logic,  e x i s t b e t w e e n t h a t a n d a more f o r m a l a n a l y s i s o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n . examined Frank D'Angelo's A C o n c e p t u a l Theory unifies  a c o n f l i c t can Earlier I  o f D i s c o u r s e i n terms  discourse i n theory through i n f o r m a l l o g i c .  o f how h e  I n h i s t e x t P r o c e s s and  Thought i n C o m p o s i t i o n  (second e d i t i o n ,  t h e o r y i n t o pedagogy.  B a s i c a l l y , h e b u i l d s h i s p e d a g o g y o n t h e common g r o u n d w o r k  of  1980), D'Angelo a t t e m p t s  to translate h i s  t h e " p a t t e r n s o f t h o u g h t " o r t h e s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c s t r u c t u r e s on  w h i c h he m a i n t a i n s a l l w r i t i n g equated little  i s based.^  Y e t , " P e r s u a s i o n as an Aim" i s s t i l l  h e r e w i t h t h e s y l l o g i s m a n d t h e enthymeme, w i t h a f o r m a l s t r u c t u r e i n common w i t h t h e o t h e r s .  Argumentation  (subsumed by p e r s u a s i o n )  having  88 also receives a traditional definition: t r u t h or f a l s i t y  of a p r o p o s i t i o n .  l o g i c a l m a n n e r by how  later maintains  the f a c t s that w i l l  the  connected,  While D'Angelo c e r t a i n l y of i n f o r m a l l o g i c  argument w i l l  use  "the  (296).  framework f o r d i s c o u r s e , but as a  shows  (chapter deductive  t o " a n a l y z e t h e p r o p o s i t i o n c a r e f u l l y and  be m o s t e f f e c t i v e w i t h t h e r e a d e r "  argument not as a s t r u c t u r a l skill:  d o e s make u s e  to support  i s thinking i n a  (241).  that a w e l l planned  sequence," e n a b l i n g the w r i t e r out  . . .Reasoning  i n d u c t i o n or deduction"  argument o r r e a s o n i n g can and  e i g h t ) , he  "the g i v i n g of reasons  to pick  A g a i n , we  see  differentiated  i n D ' A n g e l o ' s c a s e , a s a t o o l o f a n a l y s i s more t h a n p r o d u c t i o n .  W r i t i n g With a Thesis similar  (third edition,  t o D'Angelo's t e x t .  The  argumentation necessary  prove  itself.  s y l l o g i s m , and  a few  chapter.  (237)  and  i s i n some ways  Skwire  does say,  p r o c e s s he  logical  l i k e B e r k e and H a i r s t o n a s w e l l ,  fallacies.  t h e w h o l e book has  One  "This throughout  equates  s e p a r a t e c h a p t e r on i n d u c t i o n , d e d u c t i o n ,  he  why  with feels i t  the  q u e s t i o n to ask about t h i s  been about a r g u m e n t a t i o n ,  on  while  encourages students  i t using informal l o g i c — a  Nonetheless,  to include t h i s  then, i s — i f  isolated  been about a r g u m e n t a t i o n "  t o f o r m a t h e s i s and  Skwire  ( a g a i n , d e r i v a t i v e s of the t o p o i ) ,  constitutes a final,  w h o l e book has  by D a v i d  author d i v i d e s the t e x t i n t o c h a p t e r s based  d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n s of development argumentation  1982)  i s such a  text, chapter  necessary? Finally,  also falling  i n t o my  b e t w e e n e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , and Writing or  (1983).  category of t e x t s which  mention  commonalities  p e r s u a s i o n , i s J o h n F. P a r k e r ' s T h e  Process  of  P a r k e r s t a t e s t h a t e x p o s i t i o n c a n be d i v i d e d i n t o " i n f o r m a t i v e "  " p e r s u a s i v e " because " a n y t h i n g you  I n a d d i t i o n , P a r k e r encourages the use d e v e l o p m e n t as w e l l as  "specific  audience  (Chapters  S i x , Seven).  students  "a p u r e l y a r g u m e n t a t i v e  say o r w r i t e has  an a r g u m e n t a t i v e  edge."  of the i n f o r m a l l o g i c a l methods of  e v i d e n c e , a c c u r a t e e x a m p l e s " f o r c o n v i n c i n g an However, P a r k e r d e f i n e s and e s s a y " and  differentiates  "pure e x p o s i t i o n " a t almost  for  t h e same  89  t i m e he for  emphasizes t h e i r commonalities;  a reader of t h i s  t e x t m i g h t be  t h i n k i n g t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n them a r e more i m p o r t a n t  similarities.  excused  than  their  Such d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n f o r the sake of a v o i d i n g " c o n f u s i o n "  only i n the long run to t e l l  students  t h a t " o p i n i o n " and  serves  " f a c t " are separate  and  d e a l w i t h s e p a r a t e m e t h o d s and m a t e r i a l s , when ( a s P e r e l m a n i m p l i e s ) t h e y s p r i n g from  t h e common g r o u n d o f w h a t we We  can r e a l i s t i c a l l y  p e r c e i v e a s d a t a and how  conclude,  must i n c o r p o r a t e s e p a r a t e s t r u c t u r e s a n d that composition instructors  granted, but a view else,  relate  t h e n , t h a t a g o o d many o f t o d a y ' s  c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s h i n t b r o a d l y t h a t d i f f e r e n t aims and  view  we  them. popular  occasions f o r discourse  separate r u l e s of o r g a n i z a t i o n .  It is a  s i n c e the n i n e t e e n t h century have taken f o r  t h a t t h e o r i s t s a r e now  the s e p a r a t i o n of the argumentative  realizing  i s harmful.  For i f nothing  "edge" from d i s c o u r s e w h i c h  purports  g i v e i n f o r m a t i o n i m p l i e s t o students t h a t the e x p r e s s i o n of o p i n i o n i s not inferior  to e x p o s i t i o n , but  for a l l that a highly specialized  r e q u i r i n g e x t r a o r d i n a r y types of r e a s o n i n g . s h o u l d be I  giving  students, implictly  the mechanical  has  one  "success."  To  w o r l d o f o p i n i o n and issues.  reduce  and  r u l e s and  argumentation  everyday  One  g i v e n him  serve, only to s t i f l e  t h a t one  techniques  t o a c h i e v e some  to yet another any  probabilities:  interest  Johnny  which  beyond  nebulous  set of d i s c r e t e  i n other words, i n the world  h a v e s e e n t h a t many c o m p o s i t i o n t e x t s s t i l l  than something  so  skills  on J o h n n y ' s p a r t i n t h e  w i t h the communication of " f a c t s "  i s b e t t e r , more u s e f u l ,  tricks  instructors  s u f f i c i e n t m o t i v a t i o n t o do  e a r l y t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y c o n c e p t i o n t h a t something  ically  of the reasons  W h i l e m o d e r n c o m p o s i t i o n t h e o r i s t s a r e now  r e c o n c i l e argumentation c l a s s r o o m , we  has  of mastering  s e r v e d , and w i l l  ethical  one  the message  only  otherwise.  s t a t e d a t the beginning of Chapter  c a n ' t w r i t e i s b e c a u s e no  future  or  That i s not  s e r i e s of  to  s e a r c h i n g f o r ways t o  i n the reflect  which  of  writing the nineteenth-  is verifiable  i s open t o doubt or  empir-  change.  90 To  perpetuate t h i s  o n c e and I  conception  f o r a l l as  i s to e s t a b l i s h the  a laboratory  posed t h i s q u e s t i o n  writing?  at the  end  of Chapter Three:  the  Cartesian  opinion,  and  we  Yet  t h e New  L o g i c i a n s ' methods of  g o o d : t h e New  Logicians  t h a t new  that the  synthesis  truths.  The  equally on  the  grasp of the  writers  pieces.  new:  Hairston's  The  logical  Aristotelian "patterns  texts which c l e a r l y teaching  discourse.^  nineteenth  i n s u c h a way  to syntheses of  "common s e n s e " ways o f v i e w i n g nothing  t h i s new  of  and  a valid  that only  field  proposed  be,  logic,  are  ready instead  themselves, major  to b r i n g  w r i t t e n word. century's  of  behind  facts  t r u t h s are  l i g h t c o n s t i t u t e two  s p o k e n and  i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i o n as  of i n f o r m a t i o n  of  the  And  growing  b e e n "new"  i t is emphasis  logic into  a  itself.  to i n q u i r e i n t o a subject  among t h e  the  could  f a c t s h e l p e d t o c a s e - h a r d e n w h a t had  I have d e s c r i b e d  occasions  r a i s o n d'etre  t h e m , and  perceptions  Campbell i n that  i m p o r t a n t to keep i n mind t h a t importance of  and  between f a c t  idea that  tested against  e x p e r i e n c e s and  t r u t h s w i t h i n the  split  the b e l i e f  the  inventionless rhetoric with  ready-made t r u t h a l l of  pieces  i n v e s t i g a t i o n , and  w o r k s o f S m i t h and  informal,  a i m s and  o f p r o b a b i l i t y as  were r e b e l l i n g a g a i n s t  o f new  the  d i f f e r e n c e between the  e x p e r i e n c e s m u s t be  a t t e m p t s t o e q u i p an of  o r i g i n a t i n g the  must keep i n mind t h e  made and  discovery  as  c o n t r i b u t i n g to the d o w n f a l l  study.  the  t h e o r i s t s , among them P e r e l m a n , h a v e condemned  r u l e s of reasoning as  could  Bacon, Locke, Smith,  a t h e o r e t i c a l r a t i o n a l e f o r teaching  C e r t a i n l y a number o f  classroom  exercise.  i n d u c t i v e a r g u m e n t a t i o n stemming f r o m D e s c a r t e s , Campbell provide  act of w r i t i n g i n the  t h e m , by  a w r i t i n g procedure that d i r e c t s that they b u i l d from  creating logical relationships  r e l a t i o n s h i p s c o m p r i s e what c o u l d and  making sense of experiences,  t o p o i , "methods o f  thought."  t r y to provide  I will  Then, to c o n c l u d e t h i s  be and  called they  development," D'Angelo's  give  a s o r t of  simple  three  examples of  are  and  composition  i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i v e framework f o r chapter,  I will  s u g g e s t how  an  91 instructor,  armed w i t h  t h e r a t i o n a l e that a l l w r i t i n g i s an a c t o f b u i l d i n g  towards a t r u t h , might use i n f o r m a l argumentation i n t h e classroom. F i r s t , W i l l i a m J . B r a n d t ' s The R h e t o r i c comprehensive explanation  o f Argumentation (1970) p r o v i d e s  o f how e x p o s i t i o n , a r g u m e n t , a n d p e r s u a s i o n  a  can share  common g r o u n d : T r a d i t i o n a l l y . . .direct discourse (exposition) d i d notaim a t m e r e l y g i v i n g i n f o r m a t i o n ; i t s o b j e c t was t o p e r s u a d e t h e r e a d e r t o some s o r t o f e x p l i c i t j u d g m e n t . A j u d g m e n t i n v o l v e s n o t o n e t e r m b u t t w o , a n d t h e y must b e c o n n e c t e d t o e a c h o t h e r i n a way t h a t i s u l t i m a t e l y l o g i c a l ( 2 2 ) . For  Brandt, argumentation provides  non-imaginative discourse. e s t a b l i s h i n g an i n f o r m a l  a s t r u c t u r a l framework f o r  H i s most v a l u a b l e  c o n t r i b u t i o n , though,  argumentative structure f o r discourse  toward  lies,  ironically,  i n h i s s l i g h t l y u n f l a t t e r i n g a n a l y s i s o f r e p o r t o r i a l ( e x p o s i t o r y ) w r i t i n g : "a bastard  form o f w r i t i n g because i t borrows s t r u c t u r e s and t e c h n i q u e s  from other  kinds  o f w r i t i n g " (259).  (This  statement a l s o r e f e r s o b l i q u e l y t o  S m i t h ' s c r e a t i o n o f d i d a c t i c and n a r r a t i v e w r i t i n g . ) Brandt says, or  t h e w r i t e r must n e v e r t h e l e s s  In reportorial writing,  take a persuasive,  ethical,  analogical,  e x p e r i e n t i a l s t a n c e a n d s e t up " p s e u d o " l o g i c a l c o n n e c t i o n s ( I w o u l d s a y  "common s e n s e " c o n n e c t i o n s ) t o c o m m u n i c a t e t h i s only but  haphazardly  take the place  of the formal  These c o n n e c t i o n s n o t  l o g i c a l ones p r e s e n t i n t r a d i t i o n a l  a r e a l s o more a c c e s s i b l e t o a g e n e r a l  more l i k e l y  stance.  argument,  audience ( o r , as Perelman might say,  t o r e s u l t i n t h e a u d i e n c e ' s adherence t o t h e argument i n q u e s t i o n ) .  " R e p o r t o r i a l w r i t i n g , " says Brandt, " i s a c t u a l l y a k i n d o f pseudo-argumentation" (23).  T h e r e b y , he e s t a b l i s h e s n o t o n l y  "opinionable"  the r e l a t i o n of " f a c t u a l " to  w r i t i n g , but also the informal  logical  Less t h e o r e t i c a l i n i t s approach t o discourse (1981), which c l a s s i f i e s  discourse  a u t h o r s f e e l a r e most r e l e v a n t (persuasive),  into the four  to students'  structures both  share.  i sFour Worlds of W r i t i n g  "contexts"  L a u e r and h e r c o -  needs: p r i v a t e ( e x p r e s s i v e ) ,  and t h e c o l l e g e and w o r k i n g w o r l d s  (expository).  public  "The c h a p t e r s  92 move a s t u d e n t f r o m t h e e x p r e s s i v e the  outward, both i n subject  persuasive proofs  aim incorporates  paper t o the e x p o s i t o r y ,  m a t t e r and a u d i e n c e "  (xvi).  from the inward t o  In this  a r g u m e n t a t i o n , and a l t h o u g h t h e r e  and i n f o r m a l reasoning,  text, the  i s discussion of  o r o r g a n i z a t i o n , and o f s t y l e i n a r g u m e n t a t i o n ,  ( 1 2 7 - 1 4 3 ) , a t no t i m e i s a r g u m e n t f o r m a l i z e d  or isolated.  Four Worlds of W r i t i n g  a l s o l i n k s e x p o s i t i o n t o argument b o t h t h r o u g h i n d u c t i o n o r d e d u c t i o n "which t h e persuasive  aim also uses"  (196) and t h r o u g h t h e d e s c r i p t i v e , c l a s s i f i c a t o r y , o r  e v a l u a t i v e modes f o r d e v e l o p i n g persuasion  (282).  w e l l , by a g e n e r a l and  Change.  Students t r yout d i f f e r e n t l o g i c a l  clearly  them t o a l l f o u r  contexts  Discovery again  of w r i t i n g .  s t r i v e s t o b a s e a t l e a s t some a i m s a n d o c c a s i o n s logical  connections,  f o rdiscourse  which, p a r t i c u l a r l y  on  when  students a r r i v e i n d u c t i v e l y a t discoveries of t r u t h s . i n Writing  and L o g i c  (1982), Gerald  "Exposition presents  and e x p l a i n s  uses these as evidence f o r c o n c l u s i o n s , " between t h e two.  For Levin,  specific  Levin  establishes  of expository  informal  and argumentative  f a c t s and i d e a s , whereas argument  (9) Levin  s t a t e s as h i s view o f the l i n k  t e c h n i q u e s f o r e x p o s i t i o n and argumentation  o r i g i n a t e i n p a r a g r a p h s t r u c t u r e s and i n c l u d e analysis,  i n Rhetoric:  r e l a t i o n s h i p s over and over  l o g i c o r methods o f development as t h e f o u n d a t i o n writing.  t e x t a r e l i n k e d , as  t h e o r e t i c a l l y as Brandt's t e x t , Four Worlds of  a s t r u c t u r e making use o f i n f o r m a l repeated, help  i n this  h e u r i s t i c based on t h e tagmemic m a t r i x  Though n o t as i n n o v a t i v e  Finally,  t h e e v a l u a t i v e mode i s a l s o l i n k e d t o  A l l aims and t y p e s o f d i s c o u r s e  throughout the t e x t , l i n k i n g  Writing  an idea;  definition,  classification,  cause and e f f e c t , comparison and c o n t r a s t , a n a l o g y , and e x a m p l e — a  f a m i l i a r assortment (11-12). organizational techniques,  He l a t e r  allowing  reintroduces  these s t r u c t u r e s as  students t o see s p e c i f i c  r e l a t i o n s h i p s among i d e a s , a n d a l s o c o m b i n e s them w i t h of e x p o s i t o r y  and a r g u m e n t a t i v e e s s a y s .  i n d u c t i v e and d e d u c t i v e  essays, Levin  logical  outlines of the structure  A l t h o u g h he d e v o t e s two c h a p t e r s t o  centers  the bulk  o f h i s a t t e n t i o n on  93 informal logic,  and  later,  e v e n more e x p l i c i t l y how  on a d e t a i l e d  than Four Worlds  l o o k a t argument and a u d i e n c e .  Thus,  o f W r i t i n g , W r i t i n g a n d L o g i c shows w r i t e r s  e x p o s i t i o n a n d a r g u m e n t a t i o n c a n be b u i l t  o n a common, l a r g e l y  informal  l o g i c a l foundation. I n C h a p t e r One,  I showed how  w h i c h S m i t h and C a m p b e l l to the s c i e n c e s .  saw  t h e new  l o g i c p r o v i d e d a method o f  inquiry  c o u l d a p p l y t o the a r t of communication  as w e l l  Both r h e t o r i c i a n s approached  u s i n g p r i n c i p l e s f r o m t h e new  logic  communication  such as c l a r i t y ,  differently,  as  Smith  s i m p l i c i t y , and a c c u r a t e  o b s e r v a t i o n o f o b j e c t s , a n d C a m p b e l l a p p l y i n g t o r h e t o r i c L o c k e ' s a n d Hume's c o n c e p t s o f l o g i c a l m e n t a l c o n n e c t i v e s between o b j e c t s as w e l l as Bacon's of r e a s o n , e m o t i o n , and  ethics.  common l o g i c a l a n d e t h i c a l informal argumentation. (1)  The  s y n t h e s i s of both these approaches  s t r u c t u r e f o r p r o s e , a s t r u c t u r e I have been  A l l prose seeks e i t h e r e x p l i c i t l y thesis).  or i m p l i c i t l y  Campbell  (2)  t o what e x t e n t t h e o p i n i o n a b l e d o m i n a t e s A l l p r o s e c a n be v i e w e d a s a " p a c k a g e "  illustrates  the v a l i d i t y  p r e s e n t t o an a u d i e n c e . communication  A r i s t o t l e was  b r e a k s down u l t i m a t e l y  "facts"  into  t o show t h e v a l i d i t y  everyday  to  proof" structure.  t i m e t o t a k e on s u c h a  " e v i d e n c e " a t need.  which  t o s t a t e t h a t any g i v e n  t o a t w o - p a r t " t h e s i s and  a b l e a t any  shown  communication.  of p i e c e s of i n f o r m a t i o n  the f i r s t  of  except  s o r t , w h i l e P e r e l m a n has  or t r u t h of the c e n t r a l i d e a the w r i t e r wishes  S m i t h ' s n a r r a t i v e w r i t i n g was converting  a  calling  stressed that a l l discourse  m a t h e m a t i c a l p r o o f must i n c l u d e c o n v i c t i o n o f t h i s and  yields  I t s p r i n c i p l e s are these:  a central idea (or claim,  how  unity  And P e r e l m a n ' s  structure,  concept  of  "adherence"  imbues a l l d i s c o u r s e , even p o e t i c s , w i t h t h e q u a l i t y o f e x p r e s s i n g  some t r u t h ;  any p r o s e i n v o l v i n g a n y d e g r e e o f p r o b a b i l i t y b y t h i s  a c l a i m and e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t i t ,  an a s s e r t i o n e c h o i n g T o u l m i n ' s  token presents argument  as  well. (3)  The  logical  r e l a t i o n s h i p s among t h e s e p i e c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n f u l f i l l  main f u n c t i o n s i n a p i e c e of prose: from t h e i r  synthesis a writer  can  two  94 d i s c o v e r o r i n v e n t a c e n t r a l i d e a , and readily one  of  s h a r e t h e w r i t e r ' s d i s c o v e r y and the f i r s t  process  joining  philosophers "simple"  principles writing  governing  s u c h as  recently,  their  be  convinced  t h i n k i n g (and  of  "simple"  d e s c r i p t i o n c o u l d be C a m p b e l l and  i n d i c a t e d that these  Bain  more  Locke  as  logical  them.  o b j e c t s , t h e n showed how  the  synthesized  of the w r i t i n g p r o c e s s  Clearly,  i n t o more c o m p l e x  discussed  principles  which manifests  of d i s c o u r s e , p a r t i c u l a r l y  For  freshman composition  this  reason,  t h a n i s any  adequate s k i l l s ,  a l s o emphasizes s k i l l s ,  itself  in  prose,  by  the  a l l o w i n g w r i t e r s to  i d e a s n e e d e d t o show t h a t  informal argumentation i s r i c h e r  pedagogy b a s e d o n l y on  soil  the m a s t e r y of a good  "success."  Informal  argumentation  goes beyond m e r e l y t h e m a s t e r y of them, f o r i t s  o f c h a n g i n g h i s l i f e and  argumentation reintroduces For  teaching  literature the  intended  opinions  of o t h e r s .  I n other words,  to composition  particularly  how  t o be  the  r a t i o n a l e behind  a b o u t i s s u e s and  these  and  i n t o p r a c t i c e both  informal argumentation.  i n s t r u c t o r may  transform  informal  a combined c o m p o s i t i o n  a comprehensive pedagogy, but  a composition  force  teaching.  I propose the f o l l o w i n g o u t l i n e which puts  guidelines suggesting reasonable  lives  e t h i c a l content  t h e o r e t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s and  o u t l i n e i s not  the  f r e s h m a n E n g l i s h , and  course,  the  for  r a t i o n a l e i s t o r e v i t a l i z e J o h n n y ' s a w a r e n e s s o f w r i t t e n c o m m u n i c a t i o n as a capable  well  i n d u c t i v e "thread" weaving a l l  a l s o the  or the achievement of but  And  basic pattern.  only a c e n t r a l o p i n i o n but  opinion i s true.  of  i n discourse.  i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i o n as a t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t r e c o g i z e s  opinionable nature s y n t h e s i z e not  i n t o one  process the  a  "complex" syntheses of  p r i n c i p l e s are ubiquitous  synthetic connections:  was  d i s c o u r s e ) as  t h e o r i s t s s u c h as D'Angelo have e q u a t e d the A r i s t o t e l i a n t o p o i as  discourse  style,  extension  specifically  a s s o c i a t i v e p r i n c i p l e s w i t h an u n d e r l y i n g  aspects  may  of i t s v a l i d i t y .  by  of i n f o r m a t i o n i n t o  with analyses  didactic.  a s s o c i a t i o n and  t o see  pieces  Smith began h i s L e c t u r e s  as  from t h e i r p r e s e n t a t i o n a reader  help  simply  a set  students  opinions  into  of  discover prose.  This  95 A.  The  opinlonable  D u r i n g the  nature  first  of  two  prose  weeks o f c l a s s , I use  a simple  K i n n e a v y ' s t r i a n g l e t o e x p l a i n t h e most i m p o r t a n t context I n my  (or " r e a l world");  w r i t e r ; audience;  components of a p i e c e of  and  w i t h i n the  d i s c u s s i o n of the message I e x p l a i n t h a t i t not  c o n v e n t i o n s and concrete  various  form, or the  support a p a r t i c u l a r emphasize from the purely  skills  of w r i t i n g , but  v e r s i o n of James  only  o p i n i o n , " b o t h p u r p o s e and of  includes  ideas  opinion being  the course that students  will  and  key  they read  and  write w i l l  be  the  not  be  t o show t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r  f a c t s used  terms.  I  dealing  with  " i n f o r m a t i o n a l " w r i t i n g , that i n f a c t the o v e r a l l purpose of  everything  message.  a l s o "the w r i t e r ' s purpose i n a  common s e n s e a r r a n g e m e n t o f a l l t h e  outset  triangle,  prose:  to  virtually  opinion i s  valid. After call  t h i s o v e r v i e w , we  "implicit"  and  "explicit"  s t a t e t h e p u r p o s e as an "read  between the  (a) Does t h e opinionable—an  b e l i e f s and  opinions  ( c ) Does the  (explicit),  f o l l o w i n g s o r t s of  (implicit)?  does not  present  o r do we Our  to  class  i s this  of something t h a t i s open t o an  have  questions:  c o n t a i n a s t a t e d c e n t r a l p u r p o s e , and  explicit  purpose  argument?  o p i n i o n , t h e n what  implied  does the w r i t e r h o l d ?  e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e w r i t e r u s e s c o n v i n c e us  o p i n i o n , whether s t a t e d or What I'm  words, does the w r i t e r a c t u a l l y  t h e n b a c k i t up  a t t e m p t t o c o n v i n c e us  (b) I f the p i e c e  i n other  to f i n d a c e n t r a l opinion  around the  piece  e x a m i n i n g p r o s e s e l e c t i o n s i n terms of what I  opinion:  o p i n i o n and  lines"  discussion revolves  begin  implied, i s a  truth?  emphasizing here i s r e c o g n i t i o n of  the  opinlonable  t h e m e t a m o r p h o s i s o f o p i n i o n i n t o t r u t h , as w e l l as occasions  of w r i t i n g t h a t  opinions.  Soon, s t u d e n t s  tend  nature  of prose  and  r e c o g n i t i o n of  the aims  and  to contain e i t h e r e x p l i c i t  are able  that the c e n t r a l  to analyze  or i m p l i c i t  a v a r i e t y of pieces  central  i n terms  of  96 degrees o f o p i n i o n and types  o f c e n t r a l i d e a s and purposes.  C e r t a i n l y we do n o t  m i s s o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o d i s c u s s t h e i r own r e a c t i o n s t o i s s u e s a n d o p i n i o n s expressed bias.  i n the readings, as w e l l as t h e i r  I discuss the importance  i s s u e s as being evidence  s t a r t i n g points f o rforming  skills  Beginning  i n roughly  structure:  sense"  this  basic writing  from b a s i c t o complex, i n c l u d i n g  punctuation;  sentence  combining;  i d e a s i n "common  ways.  analyses of e x p l i c i t  reading v a r i o u s pieces of prose  and i m p l i c i t  opinions, students  s e n t e n c i n g augments t h e message and c e n t r a l  and, i n a d d i t i o n t o  also begin to look at  t h e i r r e a c t i o n s t o a p i e c e a n d a t ways purpose.  t h e f o u r t h week we h a v e b e g u n e x p a n d i n g t h e n o t i o n o f "common  r e l a t i o n s between i d e a s by e x p l o r i n g i n d e t a i l i n c l u d e s work on d i c t i o n and w o r d i n e s s ) ;  illustrations comparison,  t o support  a reasonable  c o n t r a s t , analogy  I n about t h e seventh  t h e use o f examples and  ( i n c l u d i n g an overview  as w e l l as a continued  The s k i l l s  o f t h e w r i t e r ' s message.  through  i n v o l v e d i n good  emphasis on t r a n s i t i o n s ,  week, s t u d e n t s u n d e r s t a n d  created  o f s i m i l e and metaphor),  receive attention  that a writer  v a r i o u s terms and p a t t e r n s o f s e n t e n c i n g and p a r a g r a p h i n g towards acceptance  sense"  the principles of d e f i n i t i o n  o p i n i o n ; and t h e r e l a t i o n s  d e s c r i p t i o n , n a r r a t i o n , and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . paragraphing,  skills  order:  how s e n t e n c i n g a n d e v e n p u n c t u a t i o n a f f e c t  now.  argumentation  o f t r a n s i t i o n s a s means o f r e l a t i n g  t h e same t i m e we a r e s t i l l  (which  o p i n i o n s and g a t h e r i n g  and embedding i n f o r m a t i o n i n s e n t e n c e s ;  (c) t h e importance  By  reasonable  i n the context of informal  common c o n v e n t i o n s  (b) adding  our  of their personal reactions to  i n t h e s e c o n d week o f t h e c o u r s e , we c o v e r  (a) sentence  At  and t h e v a l i d i t y  f o r t h e i r own w r i t i n g .  B. D e v e l o p i n g  and  r e a c t i o n s t o t h e w r i t e r ' s degree of  chooses  t o help guide  a reader  97 Our  continued  grammatical and  and  p a t t e r n s , and  f o c u s now  on w a y s w r i t e r s u s e  the e f f e c t s of these  acceptance of the w r i t e r ' s t r u t h .  writing at  readings  skills,  home and guide  students  assignments,  I a l s o emphasize over  to each other  One little  skills  of backing  and  over  best guide  o f ways t o r e l a t e  In discussing  the  audience,  meaningful  important  a  central  ideas which  are  (if a  them w r i t e a l e t t e r  I n t h i s p i e c e , d i r e c t e d t o an  "common s e n s e " m e t h o d s .  step f o r inexperienced w r i t e r s ;  these  f o r students  t h e y m u s t b a c k a n o p i n i o n a b l e t h e s i s w i t h i d e a s and  r e l a t e d using the  ideas  reader.  f r i g h t e n i n g ) i s , by a b o u t t h e t e n t h w e e k , h a v i n g f a v o r i t e newspaper.  of  i n short pieces w r i t t e n both  that thesis with supporting  i n ways t h a t w i l l  and  understanding  the importance of having  a s s i g n m e n t I h a v e f o u n d b o t h u s e f u l and  the e d i t o r of t h e i r  their  terms  d i s c u s s i o n s of the uses  a storehouse  towards a c c e p t i n g t h e i r o p i n i o n s .  p u r p o s e o r t h e s i s , and related  these  i n c l a s s , g r a d u a l l y b u i l d i n g up  readers  p a t t e r n s on  A l l d u r i n g our  are p r a c t i s i n g  different  facts  to  outside  logically  T h i s a s s i g n m e n t a l s o c o n s t i t u t e s an they  realize  that their  own  opinions  c a n make a m a r k , h o w e v e r s m a l l , i n s o c i e t y . C.  I n v e n t i o n and The  arrangement f o r i n f o r m a l argumentative  a s s i g n m e n t s up  4 0 0 - 5 0 0 w o r d s , and  the  t o t h e n i n t h week o f t h e c o u r s e t o p i c areas  are given.  prose are  before  the l e t t e r  which gives students  t o t h e e d i t o r i s due,  ideas about g e n e r a l  has  little  (a) G a t h e r a l l i n f o r m a t i o n you  looks roughly  like  think r e l a t e s to your  guide"  f o c u s i n g t o p i c s , and  A means o f d i s c o v e r i n g o p i n i o n s and  i s s u e s , the guide  impact.  I introduce a "problem-solving  some s y s t e m a t i c h e l p i n c r e a t i n g and  a r r i v i n g at a t h e s i s statement.  than  T h e s e c o n s t r a i n t s g e n e r a l l y mean  a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n of i n v e n t i o n too e a r l y i n the course But  s m a l l , no more  supporting  this: topic.  (b) R e l a t e these p i e c e s of i n f o r m a t i o n u s i n g "common s e n s e " p a t t e r n s . F o r e x a m p l e , y o u may c l a s s i f y p i e c e s u n d e r b r o a d h e a d i n g s ; d e f i n e i m p o r t a n t t e r m s a n d c o n c e p t s ; c o m p a r e and c o n t r a s t p i e c e s t o h e l p y o u d r a w a n i m p o r t a n t c o n c l u s i o n a b o u t them; i l l u s t r a t e f a c t s o r i d e a s through d e s c r i p t i o n o r n a r r a t i o n ; or draw a n a l o g i e s between y o u r f a c t s and i d e a s a n d some o t h e r s i t u a t i o n .  at  98 ( c ) D e c i d e w h i c h o f t h e s e r e l a t e d i d e a s seems t o s t a n d o u t a s m o s t r e l e v a n t o r e f f e c t i v e , and e x p r e s s i t a s a t h e s i s s t a t e m e n t . The m o s t e f f e c t i v e t h e s e s a r e o f t e n formed as a " c a u s e - a n d - e f f e c t " complex sentence: " I f the government p a s s e s such-and-such a b i l l , t h e n ... ( d ) To s u p p o r t y o u r t h e s i s , u s e t h e p i e c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n y o u h a v e a l r e a d y g a t h e r e d and r e l a t e d i n "common s e n s e " p a t t e r n s . Compose a n o u t l i n e i n w h i c h t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t i d e a s become t o p i c s f o r p a r a g r a p h s , w i t h l e s s i m p o r t a n t i d e a s m a k i n g up t h e b o d i e s o f t h e s e paragraphs. ( e ) The c o n c l u s i o n o f y o u r p i e c e s h o u l d n o t j u s t r e s t a t e t h e t h e s i s , b u t a l s o a n s w e r t h e r e a d e r ' s u n s p o k e n , " F i n e , b u t w h a t d o e s t h a t mean f o r us? I  go  through  t h i s guide  u s i n g some c u r r e n t i s s u e ( t h e g o v e r n m e n t ' s  b u d g e t , t u i t i o n f e e s , v i d e o g a m e s ) , and  students  practise gathering information  and  f o c u s i n g i t i n t o a t h e s i s according to the guide.  try  using t h i s guide  letters;  to help organize t h e i r  thoughts  I recommend t h a t before  o u t l i n e s of supporting ideas s h o r t l y before  the l e t t e r  D.  literature  In  they w r i t e  I r e q u i r e them, h o w e v e r , t o h a n d i n f o r p e e r e v a l u a t i o n t h e i r  Informal argumentation,  composition,  and  the combined freshman c o m p o s i t i o n  u n k n o w n f o r s t u d e n t s who personal interests problem-solving  between the p r i n c i p l e s literature.  An  their  first  course,  the requirements  i s presented  of w r i t i n g  fully  I n s t e a d o f d e a l i n g w i t h p i e c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n whose s o u r c e s  lets  a work such  first  or event  they have read  into individual  traits  and  The bridge about  students  i n Appendix are t h e i r limit  a s S h a k e s p e a r e ' s H a m l e t o r T i m o t h y F i n d l e y ' s n o v e l The  task, after  and  t h e r e f o r e perhaps  experiences, others' experiences, or g e n e r a l readings, students to  theses  i t i s not  I think, a workable  p l a y s i n s y s t e m a t i c (and  y e t c r e a t i v e ways; t h i s g u i d e  their  about g e n e r a l i s s u e s  o n l y s l i g h t l y m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n of t h i s guide  e x p l o r e n o v e l s , s h o r t s t o r i e s , and comforting)  and  students  due.  a s s i g n m e n t on a l i t e r a r y w o r k .  I have o u t l i n e d above forms, of composition  is  literature  otherwise w r i t e adequately  to f a i l  guide  and  latest  own themselves Wars.  t h e w o r k , i s t o b r e a k down a c h a r a c t e r , ( p i e c e s of i n f o r m a t i o n ) ; t h i s method  A.  Their  scene,  closely  99 corresponds  t o t h e S t a g e One d e l i n e a t e d  i n Appendix  sense" r e l a t i o n s between these i n d i v i d u a l  traits  f o c u s on and s y n t h e s i z e a d i s c o v e r y , framed  A.  Students form  "common  ( S t a g e T w o ) , w h i c h h e l p s them  i n a t h e s i s sentence  (Stage Three).  I a s k s t u d e n t s t o c o n s i d e r t h e i r c o n c l u s i o n a s a n a n s w e r t o t h e q u e s t i o n "How does t h i s d i s c o v e r y o f y o u r s a f f e c t e i t h e r t h e c h a r a c t e r i n q u e s t i o n , o r y o u r v i e w o f some a s p e c t o f t h e w o r k ? "  Appendix  B shows how two s t u d e n t s p r o g r e s s e d  through the guide from g e n e r a l t o p i c s t o focused theses. The  t h e o r e t i c a l background  of t h i s guide l i e s not only i n the informal  argumentative p r i n c i p l e o f s y n t h e s i s , b u t a l s o i n Young, Becker, and P i k e ' s tagmemic h e u r i s t i c , D'Angelo's p a t t e r n s o f t h o u g h t , and A r i s t o t l e ' s i n v e n t i o n as a h e u r i s t i c  concept of  d e s i g n e d t o h e l p u s g a t h e r a n d a r r a n g e i n f o r m a t i o n whose  sources a r e gleaned from o b s e r v a t i o n .  I t i s n o t my i n t e n t i o n t o d i s c u s s t h e  guide i n d e t a i l h e r e , but I emphasize i t s a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s f o r h e l p i n g w r i t e about and of  problems  students  l i t e r a t u r e b e c a u s e i t f o r m s a l i n k b e t w e e n t h e a g e - o l d human v a l u e s on w h i c h  literature  i s f u e l e d , a n d s t u d e n t s ' own g r o w i n g  awareness  issues. To  sum u p , t h i s  following  t e a c h i n g o u t l i n e embodies and puts i n t o p r a c t i c e t h e  informal argumentative  principles:  (a) t h a t t h e s y n t h e s i s o f f a c t s and i d e a s t o support o p i n i o n s p l a y s a role  i n the writing  process;  (b) that t h e main purpose show t h e v a l i d i t y  major  o f much w r i t i n g a n d v i r t u a l l y  or truth of a central  a l l prose i sto  opinion;  ( c ) t h a t t o w r i t e and t o r e a d what o t h e r s have w r i t t e n i s t o t a k e p a r t i n a c o n t i n u a l p r o c e s s o f d i s c o v e r i n g and exchanging This outline, validates  i t s emphasis on w r i t i n g  o p i n i o n s about  human v a l u e s .  as t h e v e h i c l e by w h i c h a w r i t e r  some t r u t h , a n d i t s d e t a i l i n g o f t h e i n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t a t i v e  under-  100 s t r u c t u r e of t h i s v e h i c l e , is  a f o r c e which  s h a p e s and  importantly, they w i l l For to  i s designed  d i r e c t s o p i n i o n s as w e l l as  realize  that writing  these inexperienced w r i t e r s ,  "facts."  can shape and  direct  reuniting  skills  a step i s e s s e n t i a l i f student w r i t e r s are ever of v a l u e s which  that writing  Most their opinions. begin  t h e r e f o r e , g r e a t e r meaning.  t e a c h i n g f r e s h m a n E n g l i s h , a d a p t a t i o n of an i n f o r m a l  framework c o n s t i t u t e s a s t e p toward  guardians  clearly  t h e c o n f u s i n g w o r l d o f human v a l u e s w i l l  t a k e on a more s u b s t a n t i a l f o r m a n d , For  t o h e l p s t u d e n t s see  are t h e i r b i r t h r i g h t  w i t h e t h i c a l purpose.  to view and  argumentative  themselves  legacy.  as  the  Such  101 ames A. T h e o r i e s , " CE, concern " s o l e l y verifiable—in  B e r l i n , " C o n t e m p o r a r y C o m p o s i t i o n : The M a j o r P e d a g o g i c a l 44 ( 1 9 8 2 ) . B e r l i n a l s o condemns c o l l e g e r h e t o r i c f o r i t s w i t h t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f t r u t h t h a t i s c e r t a i n and e m p i r i c a l l y o t h e r words, not p r o b a b l i s t i c . "  H e r e i s a l i s t o f t h e s e p o p u l a r t e x t s , a g a i n , s t a r t i n g w i t h t h e most recent. T h e m o s t w e l l known a r e n o t a n n o t a t e d : J o h n F. P a r k e r , The P r o c e s s o f W r i t i n g ( D o n M i l l s , O n t a r i o : A d d i s o n - W e s l e y P u b l i s h e r s , 1983). T h i s i s an i n t e r e s t i n g t e x t t h a t combines w r i t i n g a s s i g n m e n t s w i t h l a b o r a t o r y w o r k a n d " w o r k s h o p s " o n e v e r y t h i n g f r o m grammar t o s t y l i s t i c s . The p u r p o s e s o f d i s c o u r s e P a r k e r d e a l s w i t h m a i n l y a r e t h e i n f o r m a t i v e a n d t h e persuasive. D a v i d S k w i r e , W r i t i n g W i t h a T h e s i s : A R h e t o r i c and R e a d e r , t h i r d e d i t i o n (New Y o r k : CBS C o l l e g e P u b l i s h i n g , 1 9 8 2 ) . A s m e n t i o n e d i n my t e x t , t h i s b o o k f o l l o w s t h e " p a t t e r n s o f development" f o r m a t and e s s e n t i a l l y c o n c e n t r a t e s on t h e a r g u m e n t a t i v e edge o f i n f o r m a t i v e w r i t i n g . A n o t h e r name f o r t h i s b o o k w o u l d be Robert J . Connors' t e r m — a " t h e s i s " t e x t . Maxine H a i r s t o n , A Contemporary R h e t o r i c , t h i r d e d i t i o n (Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n Co., 1 9 8 2 ) . A comprehensive and d e t a i l e d t e x t , A Contemporary R h e t o r i c c o m b i n e s a number o f r h e t o r i c a l t h e o r i e s , i n c l u d i n g D ' A n g e l o ' s a n d , t o a n e x t e n t , K i n n e a v y ' s a s w e l l a s some o f t h e c l a s s i c a l t r a d i t i o n . Her r h e t o r i c a l "square" i s a d e p a r t u r e f r o m t h e u s u a l t r i a n g l e , however, and c o n s t i t u t e s an i m p o r t a n t move i n i n t e g r a t i n g a r g u m e n t i n t o t h e r e s t o f d i s c o u r s e . R o b e r t F. W i l l s o n , J r . , J o h n M. K i e r z e k , a n d W. W a l k e r G i b s o n , The M a c m i l l a n Handbook o f E n g l i s h , s e v e n t h e d i t i o n (New Y o r k : M a c m i l l a n P u b l i s h i n g Co., I n c . , 1 9 8 2 ) . L a n g d o n E l s b r e e , N e l l G. A l t i z e r , a n d P a u l V. K e l l y , The H e a t h H a n d b o o k o f Composition, tenth e d i t i o n ( L e x i n g t o n , M a s s . : D.C. H e a t h a n d C o . , 1 9 8 1 ) . J a c q u e l i n e B e r k e , Twenty Q u e s t i o n s f o r the W r i t e r : A R h e t o r i c w i t h Readings, t h i r d e d i t i o n (New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t B r a c e J o v a n o v i c h , I n c . , 1 9 8 1 ) . B e r k e ' s t w e n t y q u e s t i o n s c o n s t i t u t e a h e u r i s t i c , h e l p i n g s t u d e n t s t h r o u g h what a r e e s s e n t i a l l y " m e t h o d s o f d e v e l o p m e n t " f r o m b a s i c n a r r a t i o n a n d d e s c r i p t i o n up to what she sees as t h e i r s y n t h e s i s o r c u l m i n a t i o n : argument. Her t r e a t m e n t of argument, though, as I've mentioned, does not emphasize t h i s s y n t h e s i s . W i l l i a m E. M e s s e n g e r a n d J a n de B r u y n , The C a n a d i a n W r i t e r ' s H a n d b o o k (Scarborough, O n t a r i o : P r e n t i c e - H a l l of Canada, L t d . , 1980). H. Ramsey F o w l e r , The L i t t l e , B r o w n H a n d b o o k ( T o r o n t o : L i t t l e , B r o w n , and Company C a n a d a L t d . , 1 9 8 0 ) . W i n s t o n W e a t h e r s a n d O t i s W i n c h e s t e r , The New S t r a t e g y o f S t y l e (New Y o r k : M c G r a w - H i l l B o o k Company, 1 9 7 8 ) . G l e n n L e g g e t t , C. D a n i e l Mead, a n d W i l l i a m C h a r v a t , The P r e n t i c e - H a l l Handbook f o r W r i t e r s , s e v e n t h e d i t i o n (Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1978). 2  ^ F r a n k J . D ' A n g e l o , P r o c e s s and T h o u g h t i n C o m p o s i t i o n , s e c o n d e d i t i o n . ( C a m b r i d g e , Mass.: W i n t h r o p P u b l i s h e r s , I n c . , 1 9 8 0 ) . A l l f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s t o t h i s w o r k w i l l be c i t e d by p a g e number i n t h e t e x t . D'Angelo d i v i d e s h i s t e x t i n t o " p a t t e r n s o f t h o u g h t " and shows how t h e s e a r e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e " f o u r b a s i c aims" of d i s c o u r s e : i n f o r m a t i v e , p e r s u a s i v e , l i t e r a r y , e x p r e s s i v e . He n o t e s how f r e q u e n t l y i n f o r m a t i v e a n d p e r s u a s i v e a i m s u s e t h e same t h o u g h t p a t t e r n s , s u c h as a n a l y s i s , d e s c r i p t i o n , e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n , d e f i n i t i o n , c o m p a r i s o n , n a r r a t i o n , p r o c e s s , and c a u s e and e f f e c t . I n h i s f i r s t e d i t i o n , D'Angelo o m i t t e d argument e n t i r e l y , perhaps because o f i t s " f o r m a l " n a t u r e . I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t he d o e s n o t a t t e m p t t o i n t e g r a t e a r g u m e n t w i t h h i s t h e o r i e s .  102 A 1 1 f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e s e t h r e e t e x t s w i l l be c i t e d b y p a g e number the text: W i l l i a m J . B r a n d t , The R h e t o r i c o f A r g u m e n t a t i o n ( T h e B o b b s - M e r r i l l Co. Inc., 1970). B r a n d t a n d t h e o t h e r a u t h o r s d e s c r i b e t h i s t e x t a s a "grammar" o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n , a " d i s c i p l i n e d , s y s t e m a t i c " way o f d e s c r i b i n g w h a t g o e s o n i n a persuasive text. R a t h e r t h a n t r y i n g t o s u p e r i m p o s e e x i s t i n g l o g i c on argument, B r a n d t a t t e m p t s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e s t r u c t u r e s b o t h o f p e r s u a s i v e and what he c a l l s r e p o r t o r i a l w r i t i n g : here, argumentation l i n k s both s t r u c t u r a l l y . J a n i c e M. L a u e r e t a l . , F o u r W o r l d s o f W r i t i n g (New Y o r k : H a r p e r & Row P u b l i s h e r s , 1981). S e e comments i n my t e x t . G e r a l d L e v i n , W r i t i n g a n d L o g i c (New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t B r a c e J o v a n o v i c h , I n c . , 1982). S e e comments i n my t e x t . 4  in  Appendix A THE TEXT PROBLEM SOLVING GUIDE  I n f o r m a t i o n needed t o f o c u s on t h e s i s i . e . process of gathering and s y n t h e s i z i n g  focus  Narrower  S t a g e One; L I S T t h o s e ELEMENTS o f a c h a r a c t e r , event, scene t h a t appear relevant t o your general f o c u s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , i s o l a t e and " f r e e z e " character t r a i t s , p l o t elements e t c .  focus  (Rough I n t r o d u c t i o n , P a r a g r a p h s )  (ideas f o r a conclusion)  S t a g e Two; TRACE CHANGES a n d o r DIFFERENCES between t h e s e e l e m e n t s ; " u n f r e e z e " and r e l a t e them t o e a c h other u s i n g time sequence, c o n t r a s t , comparison, analogy, c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , definition.  Working Thesis  Thesis Stage Three; FIT these changing, d i f f e r i n g e l e m e n t s i n t o t h e BROAD BACKGROUND o f t h e e n t i r e s c e n e , c h a p t e r , o r work. Here y o u a r e l o o k i n g f o r c a u s e - a n d - e f f e c t : why y o u t h i n k c h a r a c t e r s o r events change as t h e y d o , a n d how t h e s e c h a n g e s t i e i n w i t h important issues i nthe work.  Broad  Complete D r a f t , R e v i s i o n s (tying  Support  t h e s i s i n t o s u p p o r t and conclusion) I  Good D r a f t  (broader  Conclusion i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e s i s )  S t a g e T h r e e i s t h e p o i n t w h e r e y o u c a n f o r m u l a t e a n d r e f i n e y o u r T H E S I S STATEMENT; d e c i d e w h a t i n f o r m a t i o n y o u have g a t h e r e d w i l l best s u p p o r t your t h e s i s ; and t h i n k about a broader c o n c l u d i n g "statement o f d i s c o v e r y " about c h a r a c t e r s , i s s u e s , o r t h e work a s a whole.  104 Appendix B  I.  CINDY'S NOTES FOR AN ESSAY ON HAMLET  Broad Focus: A c t I , s c . i i ( t h e banquet  hall)  S t a g e One: H a m l e t — m o u r n i n g , u n c e r t a i n , a n g r y a t t h e m a r r i a g e b y t a k i n g no a c t i o n . . . . C l a u d i u s — d e t e r m i n e d , t a k e s a c t i o n , r a t i o n a l i z e s h i s own a c t i o n s , g o e s f o r what he wants. N a r r o w e r F o c u s : Who l i v e s a t r a g i c l i f e ?  Hamlet  or Claudius?  S t a g e Two: H a m l e t d e l a y s a c t i o n . . . . C l a u d i u s a c t s i m m e d i a t e l y = H a m l e t ' s e a r l y death and C l a u d i u s ' " l a t e " d e a t h . P r o t a g o n i s t and a n t a g o n i s t . Claudius repents but s t i c k s t o h i s g o a l . Hamlet d e l a y s h i s r e v e n g e — l a c k s a c t i o n . S t a g e T h r e e : C l a u d i u s w o u l d have been dead l o n g b e f o r e i f i t w e r e n ' t f o r H a m l e t ' s weakness. . . . d i f f e r e n t t r a i t s l e a d t o t h e i r d e a t h s — C l a u d i u s a c t s immediately t o k i l l H a m l e t when h e l e a r n s o f h i s d i s c o v e r y o f O l d H a m l e t ' s m u r d e r . Hamlet wouldn't have d i e d i f C l a u d i u s were l e s s d e c i s i v e . W o r k i n g T h e s i s : The t r a g e d y r e v o l v e s a r o u n d and a c c u m u l a t e s b e c a u s e o f Hamlet t h e p r o t a g o n i s t and C l a u d i u s t h e a n t a g o n i s t . Support: C h a r a c t e r a n a l y s e s of,Hamlet and C l a u d i u s a t b e g i n n i n g and end o f p l a y . Working C o n c l u s i o n : C o n s e q u e n t l y , i f Hamlet the t r a g i c v i l l a i n . II.  i s the t r a g i c hero, then Claudius i s  JO-ANN'S NOTES FOR AN ESSAY ON HAMLET  Broad Focus: A c t I I I ,  s c . i i (Claudius at prayer)  S t a g e One: E m o t i o n s — H a m l e t — r e v e n g e , a n g e r , e x c i t e d , a c t i v e , s t i m u l a t e d , o b s e s s e d — e x c i t a b l e f o r a r e a s o n . C l a u d i u s — f e e l s g u i l t and remorse, p r a c t i c a l , d o e s n o t w a n t t o g i v e up t h e f r u i t o f h i s s i n s — p o i n t o f no r e t u r n . S t a g e Two: H a m l e t — p r o c r a s t i n a t i o n t h r o u g h o u t p l a y , r a t i o n a l i z i n g , shown t o be c r u e l here but only because o f r a t i o n a l i z i n g , emotions from h i g h t o low. C l a u d i u s — c o m e s t o r e a l i z e w h a t h e h a s d o n e i s e v i l ( w a s h w h i t e a s snow a s i n Macbeth) but a m b i t i o n ! Narrowing Focus: I n A c t I I I ,  sc. i i ,  Hamlet  and C l a u d i u s r e a c h a t u r n i n g  point.  Stage Three: (Jo-Ann " f l e s h e d t h i s o u t " i n a rough i n t r o d u c t i o n ) Hamlet thwarted i n attempts a t revenge because o f h i s i n a b i l i t y t o take a c t i o n . Claudius s u s p e c t s H a m l e t ' s k n o w l e d g e a n d when he c a n n o t w i n H a m l e t o v e r , r e s o l v e s t o h a v e h i m k i l l e d t o s a v e h i s own power a n d a m b i t i o n — u n d o n e a t t h e e n d . Working Thesis: A c t I I I , s c . i i i s a t u r n i n g point i n the play wherein both Hamlet's and C l a u d i u s ' d e c i s i o n s t o c a r r y o u t t h e i r p l a n s and a c h i e v e t h e i r g o a l s a r e s t r e n g t h e n e d a n d made i n a l t e r a b l e . Support: Character analyses w i t h i n A c t I I I , the play.  s c . I I and w i t h i n t h e f i n a l  scene o f  105  Working C o n c l u s i o n : C l a u d i u s , because o f g r e e d and a r e s o l v e t o s u s t a i n h i s p o w e r , l o s e s h i s Q u e e n r a t h e r t h a n t h e c r o w n . T h i s , h o w e v e r , becomes h i s own u n d o i n g b e c a u s e H a m l e t f i n a l l y f u l f i l l s h i s d u t y t o h i s f a t h e r a n d a t t h e same time sends h i s u n c l e t o h e l l — t h e f i n a l r e s u l t o f t h e " t u r n i n g p o i n t " i n the chapel.  106 Bibliography  Chapter  One  Bacon, F r a n c i s . A d v a n c e m e n t o f L e a r n i n g a n d Novum Organum. The C o l o n i a l P r e s s , 1900.  r e v . ed.  C a m p b e l l , G e o r g e . The P h i l o s o p h y o f R h e t o r i c . E d . L l o y d F. C a r b o n d a l e : S o u t h e r n I l l i n o i s U n i v . P r e s s , 1963.  Bitzer.  Hartley, David. O b s e r v a t i o n s on man, h i s f r a m e , h i s d u t y , a n d V o l . I . New Y o r k : G a r l a n d P u b l i s h i n g I n c . , 1 9 7 1 .  New  York:  his expectations.  H o w e l l , W i l b u r S a m u e l . E i g h t e e n t h - C e n t u r y B r i t i s h L o g i c and R h e t o r i c . P r i n c e t o n , N.J.: P r i n c e t o n U n i v . P r e s s , 1971. .  L o g i c and R h e t o r i c i n E n g l a n d ,  Russell Inc., Hume, D a v i d .  The  1550-1700.  New  York: R u s s e l l  and  1961.  P h i l o s o p h i c a l Works.  Vol. I I .  Scientia Verlag Aalen,  1964.  Locke, John. An E s s a y C o n c e r n i n g t h e U n d e r s t a n d i n g , K n o w l e d g e , O p i n i o n and Assent. Ed. Benjamin Rand. Cambridge, Mass.: H a r v a r d U n i v . P r e s s , 1931. S m i t h , Adam. L e c t u r e s o n R h e t o r i c a n d B e l l e s L e t t r e s . E d . J o h n M. L o t h i a n . C a r b o n d a l e : S o u t h e r n I l l i n o i s U n i v . P r e s s , 1971. S m i t h , N o r m a n Kemp. Ltd., 1952.  Descartes' Philosophical Writings.  Chapter  London: M a c m i l l a n &  Two  Bain, Alexander. E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n and R h e t o r i c : A M a n u a l . G r e e n , and Co., 1 8 6 6 . Rev. ed. 1887. Bates, Arlo. T a l k s on W r i t i n g E n g l i s h : F i r s t R i v e r s i d e P r e s s , 1896.  Series.  B l a i r , Hugh. L e c t u r e s on R h e t o r i c and B e l l e s L e t t r e s . C a r b o n d a l e : S o u t h e r n I l l i n o i s U n i v . P r e s s , 1965. C a r p e n t e r , G.R. Elements High School Courses.  Co.  L o n d o n : Longmans,  Cambridge, Mass.:  E d . H a r o l d F.  o f R h e t o r i c and E n g l i s h C o m p o s i t i o n : New Y o r k : The M a c m i l l a n Co., 1906.  First  The  Harding.  and  Second  Clark, J . Scott. A P r a c t i c a l Rhetoric f o r I n s t r u c t i o n i n E n g l i s h Composition a n d R e v i s i o n i n C o l l e g e s a i i d I n t e r m e d i a t e S c h o o l s . New Y o r k : H e n r y H o l t a n d Company, 1 8 8 6 . Dalgleish, Walter Scott. I n t r o d u c t o r y Text-Book of E n g l i s h Composition. ed. H a l i f a x : A & W M a c K i n l a y , 1893. . Advanced Text-Book of E n g l i s h Composition, Halifax: A & W M a c K i n l a y , 1893.  i n Prose  and  Rev,  Verse.  107 Day,  H e n r y W. Elements of the A r t of R h e t o r i c ; Adapted f o r Use A c a d e m i e s , and f o r P r i v a t e S t u d y . 4 t h ed. New Y o r k : A.S. 1866.  G e n u n g , J o h n F. 1899. Hill,  David J . Discourse.  The P r a c t i c a l E l e m e n t s  of R h e t o r i c .  i n C o l l e g e s and B a r n e s and B u r r ,  B o s t o n : G i n n and  Company,  The S c i e n c e o f R h e t o r i c : A n I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e L a w s o f New Y o r k : S h e l d o n & Company, 1 8 7 7 .  H o p e , M.B. The P r i n c e t o n T e x t Book i n R h e t o r i c . R o b i n s o n , 1859. H u n t , T h e o d o r e W. The P r i n c i p l e s A r m s t r o n g and Son, 1886.  P r i n c e t o n , N.J.: John  of W r i t t e n D i s c o u r s e .  2nd  ed.  New  Effective  T.  York:  A.C.  J o h n s o n , Nan. " T h r e e N i n e t e e n t h - C e n t u r y R h e t o r i c i a n s : The H u m a n i s t A l t e r n a t i v e t o R h e t o r i c as S k i l l s Management." I n The R h e t o r i c a l T r a d i t i o n and M o d e r n W r i t i n g . E d . James J . M u r r a y . New Y o r k : MLA, 1982. K i t z h a b e r , A.R. "Rhetoric of Washington, 1953. MacEwan, E l i a s J . 1893.  The  i n American  Colleges,  1850-1900."  E s s e n t i a l s of Argumentation.  Diss.  B o s t o n : D.C.  University  Heath  and  Co.,  M c E l r o y , J o h n G.R. The S t r u c t u r e o f E n g l i s h P r o s e : A M a n u a l o f C o m p o s i t i o n Rhetoric. 6 t h ed. T o r o n t o : R o s e P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1 8 9 0 .  and  Q u a c k e n b o s , G e o r g e P. A d v a n c e d C o u r s e o f C o m p o s i t i o n and R h e t o r i c : A S e r i e s Practical Lectures. R e v . J o h n D. Q u a c k e n b o s . New Y o r k : A m e r i c a n B o o k Company, 1 8 8 4 .  of  S y k e s , F r e d e r i c k H. Elementary E n g l i s h Composition. Company L t d . , 1 9 0 2 .  T o r o n t o : The  Copp C l a r k  Theremin, F r a n z . E l o q u e n c e A V i r t u e : An O u t l i n e of a S y s t e m a t i c R h e t o r i c . T r a n s . W i l l i a m T. S h e d d . P h i l a d e l p h i a : S m i t h , E n g l i s h a n d Co., 1859. Whately,  Richard.  Elements  of R h e t o r i c .  Chapter Baldwin, Charles Sears. 1917.  College  B o o t h , Wayne C. M o d e r n Dogma a n d o f N o t r e Dame P r e s s , 1 9 7 4 .  B o s t o n : James M u n r o e a n d Co.,  Three  Composition.  the R h e t o r i c  B r e n n a n , L a w r e n c e D. Modern Communication N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I n c . , 1963.  1851.  New  Y o r k : Longmans G r e e n  of Assent.  Effectiveness.  B r o o k s , C l e a n t h and R o b e r t P e n n W a r r e n . Fundamentals Y o r k : H a r c o u r t , B r a c e a n d Co., 1949.  and  Co.,  N o t r e Dame, I n . : U n i v .  Englewood  Cliffs,  o f Good W r i t i n g .  New  108 Brown, Douglas  M.  Burke, Kenneth.  A Handbook o f C o m p o s i t i o n .  A Grammar o f M o t i v e s .  . A R h e t o r i c of Motives.  T o r o n t o : C l a r k e , I r w i n & Co.,  1953.  Berkeley: Univ. of C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s ,  B e r k e l e y : Univ. of C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s ,  . Language as S y m b o l i c A c t i o n .  1969.  1969.  Berkeley: Univ. of C a l i f o r n i a Press,  1966. C a i n , Thomas H. Common S e n s e A b o u t W r i t i n g . H a l l , I n c . , 1967. C a n b y , H e n r y S. and J o h n B. O p d y k e . The New Y o r k : The M a c m i l l a n Co., 1925.  Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.:  Elements  of Composition.  Prentice-  Rev.  Connors, Robert J . "The R i s e and F a l l o f t h e Modes o f D i s c o u r s e . " C o m p o s i t i o n and C o m m u n i c a t i o n , 32 ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 4 4 4 - 4 5 5 .  ed.  College  C o n n o r s , R o b e r t J . , L i s a S. E d e , and A n d r e a A. L u n s f o r d . "The R e v i v a l o f Rhetoric i n America: A B r i e f H i s t o r i c a l Introduction." I n Essays i n C l a s s i c a l R h e t o r i c and M o d e r n D i s c o u r s e . C a r b o n d a l e : S o u t h e r n I l l i n o i s U n i v . P r e s s , 1983. Curto, Josephine J . W r i t i n g With Understanding. M e r r i l l B o o k s , I n c . , 1966.  Columbus, Ohio:  Davidson, Donald. A m e r i c a n C o m p o s i t i o n and R h e t o r i c . C h a r l e s S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1953.  3 r d ed.  Charles  New  E.  York:  F u l l i n g t o n , James F., R o b e r t S. N e w d i c k , a n d J . H a r o l d W i l s o n . P u r p o s i v e P r o s e : Selections i n Exposition. B o s t o n : D.C. H e a t h and Co., 1935. Gerber,  P h i l i p L.  G r o s e , H o w a r d B.  Effective English. College Composition.  Gunning, Robert. The T e c h n i q u e H i l l B o o k Co., 1968.  New New  Y o r k : Random H o u s e , York:  S c o t t , F o r e s m a n a n d Co.,  of C l e a r W r i t i n g .  H a c k e t t , e t . a l . U n d e r s t a n d i n g and a n d Co., 1957.  Rev.  Being Understood.  H o o l e , A r t h u r H. The F u n d a m e n t a l s o f C l e a r W r i t i n g . of Canada, L t d . , 1967. H u l b e r t , J.R. and V.B. P r e s s , 1929.  Hulbert.  1959.  Effective English.  ed.  New  New  York:  McGraw-  Y o r k : Longmans G r e e n  T o r o n t o : The  Macmillan  Chicago: U n i v . of  J e n s e n , D a n a 0., M o r e l l R. S c h m i t z , and H e n r y F. Thoma. R h e t o r i c . New Y o r k : H o u g h t o n M i f f l i n C o . , 1953.  1926.  Co.  Chicago  Modern Composition  and  K a n e , Thomas S. and L e o n a r d J . P e t e r s . A P r a c t i c a l R h e t o r i c o f E x p o s i t o r y Prose. New Y o r k : O x f o r d U n i v . P r e s s , 1 9 6 6 . K a p s t e i n , I . J . E x p o s i t o r y P r o s e : An A n a l y t i c a l A p p r o a c h . B r a c e and Co., 1955.  New  York:  Harcourt,  109 L o m e r , G e r h a r d R. a n d M a r g a r e t Ashmun. T h e S t u d y a n d P r a c t i s e o f W r i t i n g Cambridge,  Mass.: The R i v e r s i d e P r e s s , 1917.  M a w d s l e y , M. D o r o t h y a n d M a r j o r i e H. L e e m i n g . M o d e r n C o m p o s i t i o n f o r H i g h and C o l l e g i a t e s . V i c t o r i a , B.C.: C h a r l e s F. B a n f i e l d , 1 9 3 5 . P e n c e , Raymond W. C o l l e g e C o m p o s i t i o n . R a y m o n d , C h a r l e s H.  New Y o r k :  A Book o f E n g l i s h .  Language I s Sermonic.  Schools  t h e M a c m i l l a n Co., 1929.  B o s t o n : G i n n and Co., 1936.  W e a v e r , R i c h a r d M. C o m p o s i t i o n : A C o u r s e Henry H o l t and Co., 1957. .  English.  i n W r i t i n g and R h e t o r i c .  New Y o r k :  B a t o n Rouge: L o u i s i a n a S t a t e U n i v . P r e s s ,  1970.  Chapter D'Angelo, Frank J . A Conceptual Theory 1975.  Four  of Rhetoric.  Cambridge,  Mass:  Fahnestock, Jeanne and M a r i e Secor. "Teaching Argument: A Theory C o l l e g e C o m p o s i t i o n a n d C o m m u n i c a t i o n , 34 ( 1 9 8 3 ) , 2 0 - 3 0 . K a u f e r , D a v i d S. a n d C h r i s t i n e M. N e u w i r t h . New R h e t o r i c : A F o u r - S t a g e H e u r i s t i c . "  Winthrop,  o f Types."  " I n t e g r a t i n g F o r m a l L o g i c and t h e C o l l e g e E n g l i s h , 45 ( 1 9 8 3 ) , 380-89.  K i n n e a v y , James L. A T h e o r y o f D i s c o u r s e : The Aims o f D i s c o u r s e . C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I n c . , 1971. L e v i n , G e r a l d . "On F r e s h m a n C o m p o s i t i o n a n d L o g i c a l T h i n k i n g . " C o m p o s i t i o n and C o m m u n i c a t i o n , 28 ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 359-364.  Englewood  College  Lumsden, D a v i d . Review o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g Arguments: An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o I n f o r m a l L o g i c , by R o b e r t J . F o g e l i n , a n d A n I n t r o d u c t i o n t o R e a s o n i n g , by S t e p h e n T o u l m i n , R i c h a r d R i e k e , and A l l a n J a n i k . Rhetoric Society Quarterly, IX (1979), 211-214. L u n s f o r d , A n d r e a A. " A r i s t o t e l i a n v s . R o g e r i a n A r g u m e n t : A R e a s s e s s m e n t . " C o l l e g e C o m p o s i t i o n a n d C o m m u n i c a t i o n , 30 ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 1 4 6 - 1 5 1 . O ' B a n i o n , J o h n D. "A T h e o r y o f D i s c o u r s e : A R e t r o s p e c t i v e . " C o m p o s i t i o n a n d C o m m u n i c a t i o n , 33 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 1 9 6 - 2 0 1 .  College  P e r e l m a n , C h a i m a n d L . O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a . T h e New R h e t o r i c : A T r e a t i s e o n Argumentation. T r a n s . J o h n W i l k i n s o n a n d P u r c e l l W e a v e r . N o t r e Dame, I n d i a n a : U n i v . o f N o t r e Dame P r e s s , 1 9 6 9 . S t r a t m a n , James F . " T e a c h i n g W r i t t e n A r g u m e n t : T h e S i g n i f i c a n c e o f T o u l m i n ' s Layout f o r Sentence Combining." C o l l e g e E n g l i s h , 44 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 7 1 8 - 7 3 3 . Toulmin, Stephen E. 1958.  The Uses o f Argument.  Cambridge:  Cambridge U n i v . P r e s s ,  110 Woods, J . and D o u g l a s W a l t o n . R e v i e w o f W i t h G o o d R e a s o n , by M o r r i s E n g e l , a n d L o g i c a n d C o n t e m p o r a r y R h e t o r i c , by H o w a r d K a h a n e . R h e t o r i c S o c i e t y Q u a r t e r l y , V I ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 50-52. Y o u n g , R i c h a r d E., A l t o n L . B e c k e r , a n d K e n n e t h L . P i k e . Rhetoric: Discovery a n d C h a n g e . New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t B r a c e J o v a n o v i c h , I n c . , 1 9 7 0 .  Chapter  Five  B e r l i n , J a m e s A. " C o n t e m p o r a r y C o m p o s i t i o n : T h e C o l l e g e E n g l i s h , 44 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 7 6 5 - 7 7 7 .  Major Pedagogical Theories."  B e r k e , J a c q u e l i n e . Twenty Q u e s t i o n s f o r t h e W r i t e r : A R h e t o r i c w i t h 3rd ed. New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t B r a c e J o v a n o v i c h , I n c . , 1 9 8 1 . B r a n d t , W i l l i a m J . The R h e t o r i c o f A r g u m e n t a t i o n . M e r r i l l Co., 1970.  Readings.  I n d i a n a p o l i s : The  D ' A n g e l o , F r a n k J . P r o c e s s and T h o u g h t i n C o m p o s i t i o n . Mass.: W i n t h r o p , 1980.  2nd  ed.  Bobbs-  Cambridge,  E l s b r e e , L a n g d o n , N e l l G. A l t i z e r , a n d P a u l V. K e l l y . The H e a t h H a n d b o o k o f Composition. 1 0 t h e d . L e x i n g t o n , M a s s . : D.C. H e a t h a n d Co., 1 9 8 1 . F o w l e r , H. Ramsey. The L i t t l e , Co. C a n a d a L t d . , 1 9 8 0 . H a i r s t o n , Maxine. Co., 1982. L a u e r , J a n i c e M., Publishers,  Brown Handbook.  A Contemporary  et. a l . 1981.  Rhetoric.  Four Worlds  Toronto: L i t t l e ,  3 r d ed.  of W r i t i n g .  Brown,  Boston: Houghton  New  York: Harper  &  and  Mifflin  Row  L e g g e t t , G l e n n , C. D a n i e l Mead, and W i l l i a m C h a r v a t . The P r e n t i c e - H a l l H a n d b o o k for Writers. 7 t h e d . E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I n c . , 1978. Levin, Gerald. 1982.  W r i t i n g and L o g i c .  New  York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, I n c . ,  M e s s e n g e r , W i l l i a m E . a n d J a n de B r u y n . The C a n a d i a n W r i t e r ' s H a n d b o o k . S c a r b o r o u g h , O n t a r i o : P r e n t i c e - H a l l o f Canada, I n c . , 1980. P a r k e r , J o h n F. The P r o c e s s o f W r i t i n g . P u b l i s h e r s , 1983.  Don  Mills,  Ontario:  S k w i r e , D a v i d . W r i t i n g W i t h a T h e s i s : A R h e t o r i c and R e a d e r . Y o r k : CBS C o l l e g e P u b l i s h i n g , 1 9 8 2 . W e a t h e r s , W i n s t o n and O t i s W i n c h e s t e r . M c G r a w - H i l l Book Co., 1978.  The New  Addison-Wesley  3 r d ed.  S t r a t e g y of S t y l e .  New  New  York:  W i l l s o n , R o b e r t F. J r . , J o h n M. K i e r z e k , a n d W. W a l k e r G i b s o n . The M a c m i l l a n Handbook of E n g l i s h . 7 t h e d . New Y o r k : M a c m i l l a n P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1982.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095782/manifest

Comment

Related Items