• » j  ,  “ .U j  l
t.T:
4 European Journal of Humanities 
2017 and Social Sciences
g  ' !r iiSi'-W
.L'  ;:• *<
<8&gffWEST>
soo«ce >jra
ISSN 2414-2344 Austria, Vienna
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
European Journal 
of Humanities and 
Social Sciences
N2 4 2017
• EASTWEST > «East W est» Association for Advanced Studies and Higher Education GmbH
Vienna
2017
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
Scientific journal 
N2 4 2017
ISSN 2414-2344
Editor-in-chicf Maier Erika, Germany, Doctor of Phllology Lewicka Jolanta, Poland, Doctor of Psychology 
International editoriai board Massaro Alessandro, Italy, Doctor of Philosophy 
Marianna A. Balasanian, Georgia, Doctor of Philology 
Abdulkasimov Ali, Uzbekistan, Doctor of Geography Meymanov Bakyt Kattoevich, Kyrgyzstan, Doctor of Economics 
AbdulkasimovAJi, Uzbekistan, Doctor of Geography Sercbryakova Yulia Vadimovna, Russia, Ph.D. of Cultural Science 
Adicva Aynura Abduzhalalovna, Kyrgyzstan, Doctor o f Economics Shugurov Mark, Russia, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences 
Arabacv Cholponkul Isaevich, Kyrgyzstan, Doctor of Law Suleymanova Rima, Russia, Doctor of History 
Barlybacva Saule Hatiyatovna, Kazakhstan, Doctor of History Fazekas Alajos, Hungary, Doctor of Law
Busch Petra, Austria, Doctor of Economics 
Chcrniavska Olcna, Ukraine, Doctor of Economics Proofreading Kristin ‘lheissen 
Garagonich Vasily Vasilyevich, Ukraine, Doctor of History Cover design Andreas Vogel 
Jansarayeva Rima, Kazakhstan, Doctor of Law Additional design Stcphan Friedman 
Karabalacva Gutmira, Kyrgyzstan, Doctor of Education Editoriai office European Science Revlew 
Kvinikadze Giorgi, Georgia, Doctor ofGcograp'hical Sciences "East West" Association for Advanced Studies 
Kiscleva Anna Alexandrovna, Russia, Ph.D. of Politicai Sciences and Higher Education GmbH, Am Gestadc 1 
Khoutyz Zaur, Russia, Doctor of Economics 1010 Vienna. Austria 
Khoutyz Irina, Russia, Doctor of Philology 
Kocherbaeva Aynura Anatolcvna, Kyrgyzstan, Doctor of Economics Email: info@ew-a.org 
Konstantinova Slavka, Bulgaria, Doctor of History Homepage: www.ew.jorg
E uropean  Jo u rn a l o f  H u m an ities  and  Social Sciences is an international, German/English/Russian languagc, pcer-reviewcd journal. !t is 
published bim onthly with circulation oflOOO copies.
The decisive criterion for accepting a manuscript for publication is scientific quality. All rcsearch articles published in this journal bave 
undergone a rigorous peer review. Based on initial screening by thè editors, cacFi papcr is anonymized and reviewed by at least two anonymous 
referees. Recomm ending thè articles for publishing, thè reviewers confirm that in their opinion thè submitted article contains im portant or 
new  scientific results.
In s tru c tio n s  fo r au tho rs
Full instructions for manuscript preparation and submission can be found through thè “East West” Association G m bH  hom e page at: h ttp :// 
www.few-a.org.
M ateria l d isc la im cr
The opinions expressed in thè conference proceedings do not necessarily reflect those o f thè «East W est» Association for Advanced Studies 
and Higher Education G m bH , thè editor, thè editoriai board, o r thè organization to which thè authors are affiliated.
East West Association G m bH  is no t responsive for thè stylistic content o f thè article. The responsibility for thè stylistic content lies on an 
author o f an article.
Inc ludcd  to  th e  open  acccss rcposito ries:
G o o g le  cLIBRARy.RU ($ )' ©  *?0ASE § § 3  « W r  ^WorfdCar
©  « E as t W est»  A ssociation  fo r A dvanced S tud ies and H igher E ducation  GmbH
All rights reserved; no part o fth is  publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval System, or transmitted in any form or by any means, 
clectronic, mcchanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwisc, w ithout prior writtcn pcrmission o f the Publisher.
Typeset in Berling by Ziegler Buchdruckerei, Linz, Austria.
Printed by «E ast W est» Association for Advanced Studies and Higher Education GmbH, Vienna, Austria on acid-free paper.
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
THE THREE FACES OF GREEK AND ARISTOTELIAN RHETORIC
Section 2. Cultural studies
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20534/EJHSS-17-4-15-24
'GokeA. Akinboye, 
(Ph.D)j Department ofClassics, 
University ojlbadan, Ibadan 
E-mail: oyegoke4real(a)yahoo.com, oa.akinboye@mail.ui.edu.ng
Bosede Adefiola Adebowak, 
(Ph.D), Department ofClassics, 
University of Ibadan, Ibadan 
E-mail: olusegunbosede(a)gmail.com, bosereS2(a)yahoo.com
THE THREE FACES OF GREEK AND ARISTOTELIAN RHETORIC
A b strac t: The need for thè persuasion is often informed by a dire or grave situation which one 
needs to wriggle ou t from. Persuasion may also be necessitated by a persons disposition to a subject, 
developm ent, or topic in view. The art o f persuasion through speech is w hat scholars, ancient and 
m odern, cali rhetoric o r oratory. The Greek traditional theorists, who invented rhetoric, divided thè 
art into three types: thè judicial (dicanic or forensic), thè deliberative (sym bouleutic) and thè de- 
m onstrative (epideictic). Broadly, Greek rhetoric also has a tripartite part: invention, arrangement 
and style. Similarly,.by Aristotelian theory, rhetoric is thè art o f persuasion which functions by three 
means: by appeal to peoples reason (logos); by thè appeal to their emotions (pathos) andby  thè appeal 
o f thè speaker’s personality or character (ethos). W hat exactly did thè Greeks and, indeed, Aristotle 
mean by these term s and their functions? This paper, while highlighting thè generai conception of thè 
Greek rhetoric and its three-way nature, surveys thè Aristotelian tripartite division and functional- 
ity o f rhetoric through a simple m ethod o f content ànalysis o f selected ancient and modern texts. It 
submits that a rhetor (rhetorician/orator) is not firm in his trade if he does not artfully possess and 
execute thè Aristotelian three modes o f persuasion in contexts o f necessity o r grave situations.
K eyw ords: Greek rhetoric, oratory, Aristotle, ethos, pathos, logs.
In troduction B. C. The invention took place after thè expulsion of
One of thè major legacies of thè Graeco-Romans thè city s tyrants and thè Syracusans’ enthronement
and which has continued to be of profound utilitar- of democracy. Right from thè beginning of its civili- 
ian value in contemporary art is rhetoric. Accord- zation, thè Greek society thrived ón orai expression.
ing to thè classical tradition, thè origin and growth This was evident not only in its System of politics 
of rhetoric is credited to thè duo of Tisias and Co- as shall be seen below, but also in its plethora of lit- 
rax, who flourished in thè city-state of Syracuse on 1 eratures and philosophy which later became writ- 
the Greek island of Sicily in thè mid fifth century ten after thè epic poems had been invented. The
1 5
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
Seclion 2 . Cultural studies
development ofrhetoric was facilitateci by thè Greek of men of all classes, occupations, educational and 
discoveny of democracy, a politicai System which op- wealth backgrounds.
erated through thè direct speech of citizens in thè This important aspect of thè fundamental theory 
ekklesia (assembly) and thè courts. Complaints, de- of demokratia emphasised that die Greeks had great 
fenses and appeals were verbally conveyed by citi­ faith in thè speech and reasoning faculty of thè com­
zens before thè magistrates (areopagusK houle, and mon man. They had a profound belief in his criticai wis- 
heliaea) and thè public juries (dikasteria). dom and ability to deliberate and execute thè ordinar}' 
The fundamental principles of Greek demokra- business of public life. This idea, which clearly emerges 
tia had required equality,f reedom, and thè rute oflaw. from a passage of Plato s Protagoras sums up thè Greek 
This is true.at least as far as Athens was concerned. fundamentals. Socrates converses with his interlocu- 
The equality of all free adult male citizens (thè dem­ tor, Protagoras (Plato, Protagoras. 319 b-323 a):
os —  thè many —  who had thè sovereign power) •Socrates: W hen thè Athenian people gather 
in formulating and deciding public policy was a Car­ for assembly, if thè city has something to do 
dinal feature of democratic theory. By this equality, about buildings, thè advice of building-special- 
firstly, we mean all thè free adult male citizens had ists issought, if thè business isship-building, thè 
thè fundamental right to speak and vote in thè as­ shipwrights are called upon especially for their 
sembly (ecclesia), irrespective ofbirth, class, occupa- advice, and so on and so forth with everything 
tion, education, wealth, or anything else. Secondly, that can be taught and learned. And in such cases, 
equality was secured by thè composition of thè ex­ if any non-expert tries to interrupt with his own 
ecutive-Council (houle), which was thè most funda­ advice, thè assembly refuses to listen to him how- 
mental of all Greek democratic constitutions, and, ever rich or aristocratic he may be, but jeers and 
in effect, thè principal committee of thè assembly of boos thè speaker until he either shuts up or is 
thè people. Thirdly, thè principle o f equality was en- removed by thè police. This is how thè Athenian 
shrined in thè composition ofthe panels ofjudges in people behave on technical questions. But when 
thè jury courts (thè courts of thè people -  demos). thè debate is on generai questions of government, 
The members o fthe Council were annually selected anyone gets up and gives his advice: carpenters, 
by lot from thè whole adult male population of citi­ smiths, leather-workers, businessmen, ship-cap- 
zens irrespective of background or social status; thè tains, rich or poor, noble or humble; and no one 
judges for thè jury (supreme) courts were also ap- ever complains that thè speaker is untrained in 
pointed annually from thè same adult male citizens thè subject under discussion.
who made up thè assembly, though in this regard, Protagoras: The naturai gifts and accomplish- 
they volunteered to serve. This type of Greek democ- ments of men are varied, but all alike possess a 
racy held that thè collective judgment of thè whole naturai sense of decency and fair-play. While deci­
demos meeting in assembly (ecclesia) to talk, debate sions on technical questions require thè advice of 
and fìnally make decisions by majority vote, was su- trained men, politicai decisions depend on justice 
perior to thè judgment of any select hand of experts. and fair-play.
It was, of course, recognized that thè orai submission This takes us to thè root of Greek participatory 
of certàin professional or individuai expert, within demokratia: thè Greek democrat believed in thè abil­
thè particular field of his expertise, was superior in ity of thè ordinary man to make sound speech and 
ability and judgment to thè individuai non-expert; decisions whether on politicai issues, as speakers in 
but according to thè theory of democracy, what was thè assembly, judges in thè law courts, or in matters 
best for thè community was thè collective judgment aesthetic though thè place of thè expert was fully
1 6
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ THETHREE FACESOF GREEK AND ARISTQTEllAN RHETORIC
recognized (Thucydides. 2.36 ff.). Thus, in thè lan- The first band of notable Greek rhetores, as noted 
guage of Greek politics, demokratia is often synony- above, was Tisias and Corax, who actually taught 
mous with freedom (cf. Aristotle Poi. 1317a). The techniques and methods of judicial oratory to those 
democracy did not mean, as Plato and others some­ unaccustomed to public speaking especially at thè 
times suggest, licence, chaos and anarchy where ev- law courts. It is said that while Corax was an ora- 
eryo'ne was free to talk and do exactly.what he liked. tor who taught politicai speech, Tisias concentrated 
Plato himself must have known that this is nonsense more on thè writing of judicial speeches, especially 
(Plato, Rep. 8.557; etc; Barker, 2009: 336-7). De­ those required during defences and appeals. Besides 
mokratia, rather, cherished individuai freedom of ac­ these, there were thè sophists who travelled from 
tion and o f speech subject to thè laws. This meant polis to polis, teaching politics, philosophy and thè 
both personal and politicai freedom for thè full Citi­ art of persuasion to young citizens sometimes for 
zen and even thè resident foreigner, though thè lat- some fees. It is said that rhetoric, as a self-conscious 
ter did not have thè freedom to take an active part in art, was extended by thè sophists, especially Geor- 
govemment. But he had thè liberty to speak his mind gias (Diodorus Siculus, 12.53.2). In this group of 
on politicai affairs. And so for an Athenian, talk was early sophists belonged Protagoras, Georgias, Pro* 
thè breath of life for any man could speak in thè as- dicus and Hippias who largely taught rhetoric as 
sembly meeting if he could get others to listen. Unlike an important part of Greek education and civil life. 
thè highly regimented and totalitarian state of Sparta, The other batch of fifth century B. C. Attic rhetores 
where no one was allowed to carelessly make state­ was Isocrates and Lysias. Some of thè distinguished 
ment against its govemment, democratic Athens, disciples of these early rhetoricians include Demos- 
flourished with men — satirists, comedians, philoso- thenes, Pericles, and Plato. Other lesser figures in­
phers, journalists, and so on —  who were at liberty to clude Thrasymachus, Tlieodorus, Antiphon, An- 
talk and make public criticisms of fellow Athenians tisthene, Alcidamas, Theodectes, and others who 
and their institutions. either modified, improved or influenced thè status, 
Therefore, as seen above, thè application of thè standards and forms of rhetoric — some improving 
famed Athenian democracy on a large scale to politi­ on its definitions, style, structure, divisions, figures of 
cai meetings and judicial courts was a huge factor in speech, delivery, etc. (Kennedy, 1963: 52-80).
thè blossoming o f rhetoric in Athens in thè fifth The traditional theory o f Greek rhetoric: thè 
century B. C. Given thè above situation, thè need tripartite  kinds and thè tripartite parts
arose for men of vocal power to bring their talents Among thè Greeks of thè fifth century B.C, three 
and abilities to bear on both thè politicai and judi­ kinds of rhetoric were clearly recognized: thè sym- 
cial spaces. In different city-states with varied chal- bouleutic rhetoric also referred to as ‘deliberative 
lenges, thè desire and ability to speak persuasively speech or oratory’; thè epideictic rhetoric other- 
and convincingly became so expedient that men wise cailed ‘demonstrative speech’; and thè judicial 
earnestly sought thè Services of teachers of oratory rhetoric also known as ‘dicanic or forensic oratory or 
cailed rhetors who, in turn, developed theories for speech’. While thè judicial (dicanic/forensic) oratory 
successful speech making and delivery. Success in was practiced in thè courts of law (dikasteria) and 
this engagement circumstances depended on one’s sometimes thè assembly (ekklesia), thè epideictic 
ability to persuade large audiences in thè assembly (demonstrative) oratory embraced all forms of fu­
or thè courts, thè latter ofwhich became more im- nerei, panegyric and festival orations including so- 
portant after thè judicial reforms of Ephialtes in 462 phistic oratory. The symbouleutic (demonstrative) 
(Worthington, 1994: 17). oratory was common within thè purview of politics,
1 7
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
« i a n  2 . Cultural £udie$
òliticarassemblies or history; it was thè common of something of someone; they were intended to 
>ól of politicai demagogues. Historians such as point out (demonstrate) thè honourable and thè 
lerodotus and Thucydides recorded great speech- dishonourable either by way of address to observ- 
;; credited to politicians and statesmen who were ers, spectators or in form of a write up to be read 
d atly influenced by thè rules of fifth century judi- outto them (Aristotle. Rhetoric, 1414 a 18). They are 
ial speeches and techniques even though many of speeches, delivered, 'not for thè sake of contest but 
iem.we.re not trained in rhetoric by thè then travel- of demonstration’, to reflect thè ability of thè speaker 
ng teachers, sophists. Many o f these politicians and (Aristotle. Rhetoric, 144 ob 13). Hence, epideictic 
tatesmen neither prepared their speeches nor pub- speeches encompassed not only funeral, paoegyric 
shed-them until much later when rhetoric became and festival orations but also all manners o f encomi- 
n art in literary forni (Kennedy, 1963: 203-204). um and invective speeches. Pericles is known to have 
At its beginning, thè deliberative (symbouleutic) delivered a famous funeral oration in 440 B.C in thè 
hetoric was not presented as published speeches as wake of the.plague that ravaged thè Athenian camp 
lany politicians never received formai training in during thè stirring times o f thè Peloponnesiàn War 
olitical speaking in schools until thè time of Ar- (Thucydides, 2. 34-35). Other notable epideictic 
itotle and Anaximenes (Hudson-Williams, 1951. rhetoricians include Lysias, Georgias, Socrates, Hy- 
. 68. ff). Unlike thè. judicial rhetoric which gained perides, Antisthenes, Hippias, etc.
rider spread than any other by thè fifth century, thè The most prominent type of Greek oratory 
eli.berative art of persuasion did not gain popularity was thè judicial one, thè spread of which, as noted 
ntil much later, thè earliest extant work — published above was facilitated by thè efflorescing of Athenian 
nd delivered — being Andocides' On thePeace with demokratia that required litigants to address thè 
'parta. The event that facilitated its publication was courts in defence or appeal. Although thè Athenian 
/a-rarited. Andocides, an Athenian, had been ex- court System allowed litigants to seek thè assistance 
iedin 391 B. C. after he and his colleagues failed to of third parties or advocates who could address thè 
he Athenians to iriake a truce with thè Spartans on court, nevertheless, thè litigants had to make their 
ccount o f thè protracted Peloponnesiàn War. Ln ex- own speech first. Advocates worked both as speech 
le, he was forced to plead and seek justice through writers and lawyers, searching for evidence, exam- 
he publication ofhis politicai speech since he was in ining thè law and advising on thè conduct of their 
io way able to do in person at Athens. Apart from clients. Sometimes thè speech-writer lawyer could 
Vndocides’work, other extant deliberative speeches assist his client to rehearse by listening to thè client s 
ater published were thè speeches of statesmen and delivery of thè written speech and advising him about 
politicians such as Isocrates (The Plantaicus, On thè necessary gestures and polishing ofhis orai presen- 
°eace and Areopagiticus) and Demosthenes (On thè tation (Kennedy, 1963: 127-128). In this group of 
Zhersonese and thè Fourth Philippic). As characteris- speech-writers, logographers and lawyers belonged, 
:ic of thè deliberative kind of oratory, many speeches, Antiphon, Lysias, Isaeus, Isocrates, Demosthenes, 
published or delivered with some educational tones, Hyperides and other lesser rhetoricians whose works 
vere attempts at politicai persuasion. were masterpieces of thè art of persuasion.
Epidèictic rhetoric etymologically derived from Among thè fifth century Greeks, thè traditional 
:he term epideixeis (demonstrations), that is, speech- theory of rhetoric recognised three main parts: in- 
»s that were neither deliberative nor judicial in na- vention '(Grk. euresis), arrangement (Grk. taxis) and 
Aristotle (Aristotle. Rhetoric, 1358b2ff) notes style (Grk. lexis). According to Kennedy, 'invention' 
:hat epideictic speeches aimed at thè praise or blame (euresis) is thè part of oratory that is concerned with
1 8
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
THE THREE FACES OF GREEK ANO ARISTOTEIIAN RHETORIC
thè subject itself, with finding out thè grave questions of speech, elevated diction, polishe'd prose rhythm, 
at'hand (called thè stasis) and thè appropriate argu- etc. Various rhetoricians, between fifth and fourth 
ment that must be used in proof or repudiation. In this centuries, either modified or expanded these basic 
part, proofs would include, first, all direct evidence tripartite segments of rhetoric by introducing thè 
to support thè stasis (Kennedy, 1963: 10-12). Such fourth and fifth segments respectively called mem- 
evidence could be witnesses, contracts, and oaths. ory’ (Grk.mneme) and‘delivery’ (hypckrisis). While 
Other proofs are thè argumentations from thè direct ‘memory’ relates to thè use of mnemonic strategies 
evidence and this would be done by means of syllo- while delivering speech, ‘delivery’ refers to thè con­
gisms. Final proofs could require other means of per- trol of voice (Kennedy, 1963: 11 — 12).
suasion such as thè orator s use of emotional appeals, Speech as a key tool of persuasion
pathos, gestures, and passionate words — for instance, As with modem method, speech (logos), beside 
weeping children, slaughtered girls, famished orphans, write-ups, was thè single indispensabie tool for thè 
bloody swords, anger and calmness, ffiendliness and Greek art of persuasion; it was equallya requisite in- 
enmity etc. (Aristode. Rhetoric, 2.2.27). strument for thè Greek philosophers who sought thè 
Arrangement ( taxis) refers to thè organization of relationships between speech itself, truth, and morai- 
speech, both written and orai, into various segments. ity. The Greeks' socio-political and cultural mechan- 
The segments are: ics were primarily in form of orai expressions, best 
a) The prooemium (Grk. prooimion), which cov- emblazoned in their classic democracy, judiciary, 
ers 'thè introduction’; Homeric epics, entertainment, memoirs, myths, ora- 
b) The narration (Grk. diegesis), which refers to tions, literatures, philosophy, drama, and so on (Ken­
'thè exposition’ of thè background and factual details; nedy, 1963: 4). Several orai literatures only became 
c) The proof (Grk. pistis), which is a firmer expo­ written long after rhetoric had significantly expedit* 
sition of thè main body; ed thè leap in Greek intellectual life. The Graeco-Ro- 
d) The conclusion or epilogue (Grk. epilogos), mans generally were aware of thè cruciai role of good 
that is thè summary and final submission. speech, verbal expressions, as a tool for distinguish- 
All these segments have their functions. The ing humans (homo sapientes) from brutes. Quintil- 
prooemium is intended to secure thè interest and ian, whose work sums up thè tradition and theory 
attention o f thè audience from thè start with thè of rhetoric, described thè art as ‘bene dicendi scientia', 
speaker giving an indication that he does not know thè Science of speaking well (Quintijian, 2.15). For 
how to speak eloquently. The narration aims at pre- later writers after Quintilian, Science’ was not too 
senting brief, sharp and persuasive exposition of convenient a term for rhetoric and so thè term art’ 
thè unfolding issues at hand and must be supported was preferred, thè explanation being that oratory’ re­
firmly with evidential proofs. The conclusion aims at fers to actual speech while ‘rhetoric’ would embrace 
stirring thè emotion of thè audience through appeals, both thè speech and thè theory or technique of good 
refutations, counter-refutations and recapitulation of speaking or persuasion. On thè overall, good verbal 
points earlier affirmed or exposed at thè beginning expression was thè basis of civilization. And in thè 
(Kennedy, 1963: 11). words of Isocrates (Isocrates. Nicocles 5 fi.; Antidosis 
Style ( lexis) usually involves thè organization of 253 fi ), even re-echoed by Cicero much later (Ci­
rhetorical speeches around four parameters of cor- cero. De Oratore 1.30 ff), speech is a sine qua non to 
rectness’ of details/facts; ‘clarity’ of speech to re­ any meaningful development, thought or action:
move all ambiguities; ‘propriety’ of speech, methods, In most of our abilities we differ not at all from 
etc.; and adornment (ornamcntation) with figures thè animals; we are in fact behind in swiftness and
1 9
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
Seaion 2. Cultura! siudies
strength and other resources. But because there is branch of philosophy along with logie and dialectic. 
born in us thè power to persuade each other and to To Aristotle, while logie is concerned with reason- 
show ourselves whatever we wish, we not only have ing to reach some scientific certainty, rhetoric and 
escaped from living as brutes, but also by coming dialectic are more focused on probability which is 
together have founded cities and set up laws and in- a subj’ect or tool best fitted for human affairs. While 
vented arts; and speech has helped us attain practi- dialectic is a tool for philosophical debates, rhetoric 
caìly all of thè things we have devised. For it is speech functions as a tool for practical debates, aimed at 
that has made laws about justice and injustice, and persuading a generai audience through thè use of 
honor and disgrace, without which provisions we practical matters.
should not be able to live together. By speech we re- Like thè generai traditional Greek theory, thè 
fute thè wicked and praise thè good. By speech we Aristotelian oratory is also divided into three parts: 
educate thè ignorant and inform thè wise. We regard thè judicial (dicanic/forensic), thè deliberative 
thè ability to speak properly as thè best sign of intel­ (symbouleutic) and thè epideictic (demonstrative). 
ligence, and truthful, legai, and just speech is thè re- The judicial oratory finds thè law court as an avenue 
flection of a good and trustworthy soul. With speech for its expression, while deliberative oratory is often 
we contest about disputes and investigate what is un- made to advise politicai assemblies on thè making 
known. We use thè sanie argument in public councils ofpolicies. The epideictic oratory is forceremonial 
as we use in persuading private individuals. We cali occasions of praise or blame over current events. 
orators those who are able to discourse best among In each, there is thè conscious attempt to persuade 
themselves. If I must sum up on this subject, we shall thè audience to perceive something in thè light of a 
find that nothing done with intelligence is done with­ speaker s appraisal.
out speech, but speech is thè marshal of all actions Persuasion, by Aristotelian theory, is rhetoric 
and of thoughts and those who most use it have thè which functions by three means: by appeal of thè 
greatest wisdom. speaker s personality or character (ethos), by thè ap­
Aristotle's rhetoric: thè tripartite  means and peal to thè audiences emotions (pathos), and by ap­
functionality peal to their reason (logos) (Corbett, 1990: 37). The 
According to tradition and if thè work of Plu- Greek words, ethos, pathos and logos are, according to 
tarch (Lives o f thè Ten Orators) is to be believed, Aristotle, thè three means of oratory. Ethos, basically, 
there were ten distinguished Attic Greek orators, is a projection of personality or good character of 
namely: Antiphon, Lysias, Andocides, Isocrates, thè orator which must be worthy of respect from thè 
Isaeus,Demosthenes, Aeschines, Lycurgus, Hyper- audience. It is concerned with thè establishment of 
ides, and Dinarchus. Aristotle, although featured thè persuaderà credibility. Pathos functions by put- 
most prominently in thè field of philosophy, con- ting thè audience in an appropriate mood, by playing 
tributed quite sign ifican ti to thè efflorescing of on its feelings. It is intended to evoke pity or anger 
rhetoric through his monumentai work, Rhetoric. from thè audience by means of a speaker s deploy- 
Aristotle defines rhetoric as 'thè counterpart (an- ment of touching words on thè emotions or areas of 
tistrophos) o f dialectic (Arist. Rhetoric, 1.1.1-2). psychic activity of thè audience. Logos (logie) is a 
He says rhetoric is thè ability of thè rhetor, in grave word which carries many meanings; in relation to 
situations, to see thè available means of persuasion, rhetoric, its plainest meaning is 'rational argument’ 
and make use of thè appropriate modes of persua­ which is aimed at proving or disproving a matter or 
sion — ethos, pathos and logos — thè modes/terms case under review (Lanham, 2012: 166). Logos must 
are explained below. He also notes that rhetoric is a be a sound reasoning that will appeal to thè audience.
2 0
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
THE THREE FACES OF GREEK AND ARISTOTEIIAN RHEiORIC
Corbett writes in respect of thè Aristotelian means because his ethos appealed more to thè audience. 
of rhetoric (Corbett, 1990: 5): . Thus in ethos, character and charisma are brought 
Instead o f moving on thè surface as thè ordinary to bear on thè overall speech.
rhetorician did, with his precepts for each part of thè Pathos
speech and each type of oration, Aristotle goes to Aristode explains pathos as an appeal to thè emo­
thè sources of persuasion. He investigates thè form tions of thè audience. In this mode of persuasion, thè 
of rhetorical proofs, thè enthymeme or incomplete witty speaker deploys every piercing word in his ar- 
syllogism, and thè means of arousing emotion and senal to effect desired responses and reactions from 
of cónveying a favorable impression of thè speak­ thè audience, and since this means is more result- 
er s character, which are to him excellent elements oriented in thè forensic (dicanic) space, his target is 
equal in importance to demonstration. Rhetoric thus usually at thè jurors so that in thè end justice will 
connects on thè one hand with dialectic, on thè other swing in his (or his client s) favor.
with ethics and psychology; thè orator must be able Appeals to audience’s emotions usually mount 
to syllogise and must also have knowledge of human pressure on thè human will in such a manner that 
character and emotions. true or correct justices’ may not run its full course, 
Ethos or worse stili, become thwarted. The ability to con- 
By Aristotle standards, a person’s good reputation jure up images in thè mind s eye is usually thè cal- 
naturally attracts respect from thè society. An indi­ culated attempt of every skilled rhetor. He attempts 
viduali wealth, social status and other contributions to make thè audience imagine a scenario that often 
to thè welfare of his community may also serve to evolves pity or anger. In doing this, thè speaker 
enrich his already existing good reputation. An in­ could make use of exaggeration as a device of per­
dividuali wisdom, virtue, integrity, goodwill, and suasion and appeal, especially in a situation where 
trustworthiness are some constituents of thè ethical thè speaker or even his client assumes a pitiable de- 
appeal. By inferente, these aforementioned qualities meanor, or even resorts to acting skills to aid deliv­
are capable of producing arguments based on sound ery in court. Oftentimes, a mode of persuasion may 
reasoning. The speech itself creates in thè audience subtly manifest in a discourse where another mode 
an impression that 'thè speaker is a person of sound features more prominently. Aristotle thus presup- 
sense (phronesis), high moral character (arète), and poses that pathos, although figures more promi­
benevolence (eunoia). It is thè speech itself that must nently in judicial oratory, can also manifest in thè 
create this impression (Corbett, 1990: 80). Since deliberative oratory where ethos predictably holds 
ethos is thè ethical appeal thus focuses on reputa­ sway because most policies are made as a result of 
tion, caution must be taken by thè orator as regards direct legai tussle or influence. Both kinds of rhe­
his conducts for every speech affords a speaker thè torical discourses are similar in nature because a 
opportunity o f maintaining or building upon thè al­ speaker either proposes or opposes an argument 
ready familiar reputation which he had among thè to thè end that his proposition may be accepted.
audience. An iota of error or illogical reasoning may . Logos
be perceived by thè audience as a display of instabil- Logos, thè Aristotelian third mode of persuasion, 
ity on thè part of thè speaker. Inconsistencies may is thè skilled speakers sound appeal to thè reason of 
be very severe for thè speaker. Grave situations may thè audience. It is thè orator’s ability to argue con- 
occur where two speakers are pitched wit-for-wit structively, based on sound logicai proofs including 
against each other; one speaker may triumph over testimonies, documents, scientific analysis, laws and 
thè other not because thè truth was emphasized but other forms of evidence. This is most likely to draw
2 1
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
Secilòn 2 . Cultural siudies
admiràtion and respect from an audience. Aristotle drawn from both before a conclusion is arrived at. The 
thus postulates two types of logicai proof: example and thè enthymeme share a common weak- 
1. Deductive Argument: ness, that is, thè conclusion is often woven around a 
In this regard, thè proofs or premises must be probability, even though thè former may have strong 
scientìfically demonstrated. Another term for sci- persuasive value. By sound reasoning too, thè oppos- 
entifically proven deductive argument is syllogism. ing speaker might also allude to familiar circumstanc* 
If thè premises, however, are only probably true, thè es where proposed measures, (perhaps as examples 
term for thè argument is enthymeme. Syllogism and given by thè first speaker) were taken, but negative 
thè enthymeme are thè schematic devices used by results were achieved. In inductive argument, thè ap- 
Aristotle to analyze and test deductive reasoning. peals, argues or provides evidence from thè particular 
W hile syllogism is a three-line argument to state to thè generai to arrive at desired conclusions, whereas 
proof, enthymeme is often a two line structure, and thè reverse is thè case with thè deductive counterpart. 
may be referred to as an imperfect syllogism. Both Thus, through deductive and inductive reasoning, thè 
expressions may be considered below: orator can reach a desired knowledge or proof.
Syllogism: All lecturers are honest; Professor Aristotles three modes of rhetoric also relates 
Henry is a lecturer; Therefore, Professor Henry is to three kinds of times and audiences: thè past, 
an honest man. present and thè future. The past is concerned with 
Enthymeme: Professor Henry must be a lecturer; thè forensic (judicial) type of rhetoric which deals 
hence, he loves to talk and lecture. with determining of facts and assigning faults. Herc, 
In thè syllogism, there is a combination of two one rpan accuses thè other, while thè other defends 
truths or arguments arriving at a logicai conclusion, himself, both referring to events done in thè past. 
while thè enthymeme expresses a knowledge based Tire present refers to thè demonstrative (epideictic) 
on an observation, leading to aprobable conclusion. type oforatory which emphasizes values, praises and 
Conclusions from both are often made with thè use blames, rights and wrongs. In this case, all men, dur- 
of function words such as 'therefore', ‘hence', conse- ing funeral or ceremonial oratory, either praise or 
quently’, and so on. blame themselves in view of present or existing cir- 
2. Inductive Argument: cumstances. As for thè deliberative (symbouleutic) 
This type of argument is intended to appeal to thè type oforatory, a kind of politicai debates, this relates 
audience, thè orator accounts for all instances to sup- to decision-making about what to do in thè future. 
port thè phenomenon or matter at hand. Such induc- The politicai orator is concerned with policies that 
tion is also scientific. However, if only selected in­ might influence thè future, about things to be done 
stances are cited, thè argument is from examples or jettisoned and he argues in support of either.
(Lanham, 2012: 166). The inductive form of reason­ Aristotle also believes that thè audience is de- 
ing projects examples' as its logicai equivalent, un­ fined along three lines: thè speaker, subject and thè 
ii ke thè deductive which uses thè enthymeme. While person being addressed — thè last of which judges 
both proofs hinge on inferences, thè inductive dwells or determines thè gravity or persuasiveness of thè 
so much on phenomena that could be easily verifìed, speech (Arist. Rhetoric, 1358b). The listener, who is 
whereas 'statements' are thè reference points of thè being addressed, is similarly a three-party listener. 
deductive form of reasoning. He could be a juryman who would need to take 
Speakers applying thè inductive form of reasoning decision based on appeal/speech before him con- 
often allude to instances or situations that are similar cerning an event that happened in thè pas or he 
to thè one in view, to thè end that an analogy could be could be an observer who merely makes decisions
2 2
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
THETHREE FACESOF GREEK AND ARISTOTEIIAN RHETORK
or forms an opinion based on an orator s speech or tice, where these have failed through inefficient 
skill of persuasion. Moreover, he could be an assem- speech. It provides effective defense; it enables thè 
bly man who needs to be convinced by thè orator s speaker to prove opposites and refute an opponent. 
speéch so as to decide on future policies that would who might be making unfair use of arguments (Ar­
b.e of benefit to his people. Thus, in Aristotle’s view, istotle, Art of Rhetoric. Freese J. H. trans, xxxii). In 
rhetoric is more associated with speaking than writ- retrospect, thè table below provides a summary of 
ing and functions in a number of ways. It enables both thè Greek and Aristotles three faces of rheto­
thè speaker to skillfully put forward truth and jus- ric as examined in this paper.
Table 1.
The Three The Three The Three The Three 
The three Types Parts Means Elements Times The Three Listeners
Greek and Symbouleutic/ Invention Speaker Future Members of thè 
Aristotelian Deliberative (euresis)
Ethos assembly
Epideictic/ ArrangementRhetoric Demonstrative Pathos Speech Present
Observers at 
(taxis) ceremonials
Judicial/ Style (lexis) Logos Listener Past Jurymen at thè Dicanic courts
Conclusion
The art of speaking and writing well, elegantly thè modes of pathos, ethos, and logos for a speaker is 
and effectively is rhetoric that is intended to per­ not firm on his oratorical stand if he is not capable 
suade or influence people. W hether its product of possessing thè minds of his audience by execut- 
or language is completely true or otherwise is an- ing thè three modes o f persuasion in contcxts of 
other issue. It however aims at persuading or mo- necessity. Thus, thè art of persuasion is rhetoric, de- 
tivating target audiences in specific situations by ployed in circumstances where difficulties arise in 
appealing to their emotional and logicai sentiments convincing an audience or providing thè proof of 
and leveraging on their weakness or gullibility on a a matter. And in situations where truth is literally 
particular subject which they know little or nothing missing and cases appear terribly bleak, probabil­
about. As seen in thè foregoing, thè ancient Greek ità  rather than dead end, would predictably be thè 
theoreticians divided rhetoric into three types and next resort o f thè audience if thè orator is able to 
segments. And by thè recommendation of Aristo­ effectively deploy a proper mode and method of 
tle, thè art of persuasion can be executed through Aristotelian rhetoric.
References:
1. Àkinboye ‘A., Goke & Adekannbi G. O. The Fundamental Principles of Greek Participatory Democracy 
for Contemporary Nigerian Community Development. Nigerian Community Development Journal. -  
Voi. 4 ,-Ju n e  -  2016 .- P. 100-116.
2. Aristotle. The Politics.T. A. Sinclair (trans.). Betty Radice (ed.), reprint edition, Harmondsworth: Pen- 
guin Books.- 1979.
3. Aristotle, Rhetoric W., Rhys Roberts (trans.). Mockingbird Classics Publishing. -  201-5.
4. Barker E. Greek Politicai Theory: Plato and His Predecessors. Routledge Library Editions. -  2009.
5. Cicero. On thè Orator (De Oratore), Books 1-2. E.W. Sutton and H. Rackman. Harvard, London and 
New York: LOEB Classical Library No. 348. Harvard University Press. -  1942.
2 3
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
Section 2. Cultural studies
6. ClarkeM.L., Rhetoric at Rome: A Historical Survey.D.H. Berry(rev). London: Cohen and West. -  1996.
7. Corbett P.J. Edward. Classical Rhetoric for thè M odem Student. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University 
Press.- 1990.
8. Diodorus Siculus. Universal History. ed. C .H. Oldfather, F. Walton et al. Harvard, London and New 
York: LOEB Classical Library, Harvard University Press. -  1967.
9. Aristotle.The 'Art' óf Rhetoric. J.H. preese (trans). London: LOEB Classical Library, Harvard University 
Press. -  1990.
10. Gagarin Michael. Probability and Persuasioni Plato and £arly Greek Rhetoric. Persuasioni Greek Rheto­
ric in Action, ed. lan Worthington. Oxford, USA and Canada: Routledge.- 1994.
•11. Hudson-Williams H.Li. Politicai.Speeches in Athens. The Classical Quarterly, (1) -  1951.- P 68-73.
12. Isocrates. On thè Peace; Areopagiticus; Against thè Sophists; Antidosis; Panathenaicus. -  Voi. li. George 
Norlin (trans.); Loeb Classical Library, -  No. 229. Harvard University Press. -  1929.
1.3. Isocrates. To Demonicus; To Nicocles; Nicocles or The Cyprians; Panegyricus; To Philip and Archida- 
mus. Lo.eb Classical Library, -  No. 209. Harvard University Press. -  1928.
14. Kennedy G. The Art o f Persuasion in Greece. Princeton N.J: Princeton University Press. -  1963.
15. Lai)ham A., Richard. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. 2nd ed. California: University of California Press. -
2012 .
16. Plato. The Republic. P. Sholey (trans.). 2 Vols. Loeb Classical Library, London: William Heinemann.- 
1924.
17. Plato. Protagoras and Meno. Adam Beresford and Lesley Brown (trans.). Penguin Classics*- 2006.
18. Plutarch. Lives of thè Ten Orators. John Dryden (trans.). USA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing 
Platform, OLA Press. -  2015.
19. Quintilian. Institutes of Oratory. John Selby Watson (trans.), Curtis Dozier and Lee Honeycutt (ed.). 
USA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, OLA Press. -  2015.
20. Thucydides. History of thè Peloponnesian War. Ed. Rex Warner, USA: Penguin Classics.- 1972.
21. Worthington I. (ed.). The Art of Persuasion: Greek Rhetoric in Action. Oxford, USA and Canada: Rout­
ledge.- 1994.
2 4
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
Contents
Section 1. History..................................................................................................................................................3
Martirosyan Armari Rajikovich
THE POSITION OF THE SYRIAN ARMENIANS REGARDING THE ISSUES OF
ALEXANDRET SANJ AK DURING THE YEARS OF THE “SETTLEMENT” (1936-1939)............ :................3
Morozova Anna Evgenjevna
“HARD BREXIT” VS. “SOFT BREXIT” IN THE UK.......................................................................................... 7
Nazim oglu Elvin Pashayev
POST-SANCTIONS IRAN: IMPLICATIONS FORTHE NATIONAL ECONOMY AND
GLOBAL ENERGY M A R K E T S ......................... .......................................................................................  11
Section 2. Cultural studies....................... ..................................................................... ................................  15
‘Goke A. Akinboye, Bosede Adefiola Adebowale
THETHREE FACES OF GREEK AND ARISTOTELIAN RHETORIC........ .................................................  15
Kocaevli Giil§en
A COiMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: LINGUISTIC INTEGRATION OF MEXICANS IN THE
. UNITED STATES AND TURKS IN GERMANY............................................................................................25
Lapchuk Olesya Oleksandrivna
THE FESTIVAL OF UKRAINIAN SINGING POETRY «OBERIG» IN TIME AND SPACE....................... 32
Section 3. Philology and Iinguistics................................................................................................................. 38
Lychuk Maria Ivanivna
COMPLETIVE ATTRIBUTIVE SYNTACTICALLYINDIVISIBLE WORD
COMBINATIONS IN THE MODERN UKRAINIAN LANGUAGE................................................ .............. 38
Malakhov Sergey Viktorovich
INVESTIGATION ON THE GOD OF DEATH SOKAR................................................................................. 43
Section 4. Pedagogy...............................................................................................................................   65
Avramenko Olga Valentynivna, Biletska Yulia Hryhorivna
MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE OF STATEMENTS IN DISTANCE
LEARNING COURSE OF CALCULUS......................................... 65
Bulku Altih, Kapedani Kujtim, Ikonomi Edison
STATISTICAL AND TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF A COMPETITION IN ALBAN LAN
WRESTLING . ................................................    69
Kalizhanova V  S., Toleuzhanov K. T.
ON THE FUNDAMENTALS OF TEACHING ELECTRONICS AND
MECHATRON1CS IN EDUCATIONINSTITUTIONS...................................................................................73
MONITORING CHILDREN'S GROSS MOTOR COORDINATION DURING ONE
YEAR; EVIDENCE BASED ON GENDER DIFFERENCES.................................... ...................................... 76
Osova Olha
ZUR ROLLE DES LEHRERS1M FREMDSPRACHENUNTERRICHT MIT
DER NEUEN MEDIEN............; .......................... ................... ........................................................................ 81
Ostapenko Anna Viktorivna
I. P. LVOV — HISTORICAL ACADEMIC FIGURE OF CHERNIHIV PEDAGOGICALINSTITUTE........85
1 8 2
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
Popova Tetiana Sementina
IMPLEMBNTATION OF THE EUROPEAN EXPERJENCE OF SOCIAL AND
EDUCATIONAL WORK WITH CLIENTS OF THE PROBATION SERVICE IN UKRAINE........................91
Section 5. Politicai Science...............................................................................................................................96
Mirzazade Lilia Fridunovna
NEW POSSIBILITIES OF SATISFACTION OF AMBITIONS.......................................................................96
Tsurtsumia Alexander
THE.MAIN PHASES OF GEOPOLITICAL CHANGES IN ARAB-ISRAELI 
CONFRONTATION. (COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WITH CONFLICTS’lN
GEORGIA AND KOSOVO)............................ ................... ! ................... : ........... . .......................................100
Section 6. Psychology.............. ................................................................................................... ................. 106
Davydova Oksana Volodymyrtina
THE EXPERIENCE OF OVERCOMING EDUCATIONAL STEREOTYPES BY
TEACHERS AND THEIRTYPICAL PSYCHOLOGICAL CHALLENGES..................................................106
Rosea Maria
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EVALUATION AND SELF-ESTEEM IN
PRIMARY SCHOOL AGE................. . ................................................................ .................... ..'..................I l i
Section 7. Sociology..................................... ................................................................................................ 118
Karimova Gulzirakhon
MAKHALLA AS-AN INSTITUTION OF NATIONAL UPBRINGING........................................................ 118
Mammadova Saadet Davud qizi
SOCIAL STATE AND SOCLALLY-ORIENTED MARKET ECONOMY.................................. :  .................. 121
Uzakova Saiima Andromasovna, Simonovich bìikolay Evgenievich, Kaliyeva Zhadra Abzhamievna 
SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SECURITY OF AN INDIVIDUAI IN THE MODERN
KAZAKH SOCIETY.  ....................................................................................................................................125
Cheti NuOj Wang Betty
PREDICTING RISK.OF BEING VICTIMS OF DATING VTOLENCE FOR HIGH
SCHOOL STUDENTS USING ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK.......................................... '.................. 130
Section 8. Philology and linguistics....... ....................................... .............................................................. 145
Gurbanova Shahla
EXILDERÓSTERREICHISCHEN AUTOREN 1933-1945 UND SEIN POSITIVER
EINFLUSS AUF DIE GESCHICHTE DER WELTLITERATUR....................................................................145
Section 9. Philosophy........... .........      •.................... 149
Mentuz Dimitry
"THE PO LITI CS OF RECOGNITION IN A MULTICULTURAL SOCIETY”............................................. 149
Shikiyeva Sevda, Manajova Irada
ENGLISHINSTRUCTORS’ PERSPECTIVES AS A FACILITATOR ABOUT TEACHING 
STRATEGIES, STUDENT MOTIVATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN
SECONDARY SCHOOLS..........................................   .*.....................153
Shikhiyeva Sevda, Huseynova Arifa
MAXIMIZING LEARNING IN LARGE CLASSES........................................................................................159
1 8 3
UNIVERSITY O
 IBADAN LIBRARY
Section 10. Economics and management...................................................................................................... 163
Batirova Nilufar
THE IMPACT OF INDUSTRIALE ATI ON ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND
ATTRACTING FOREIGN INVESTMENTTOTHISSPHERE................................................................... 163
Gabadadze Izolda, Mushkudiani Nino, Tsereteli Ineza
THE 1NTERRELATION OF MOTIVES AND STIMUL1 IN THE PROCESS OF A
COMPANY’S MANAGEMENT............. '.......................................................................................................167
Fedulova Lyubov Ivatiivna
PROBLEMS AND PRECONDITIONS OF UKRAINE REGIONS INNOVATIVE
DEVELOPMENT..................................... ....................................................................................!..................170
Section 11. Science of law........................................................... ................................................................ 174
Khairuìlina Elmira Faritovna
LEGAL REGULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF LAW: INTERACTION OF PROLEMS...............174
1 8 4
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY