University of Texas at Austin
Libraries Home | Mobile | My Account | Renew Items | Sitemap | Help |
support us
University of Texas Libraries
Celebrating the Life

Classical Greek rhetorical theory and the disciplining of discourse

[Longhorn Review] Classical Greek rhetorical theory and the disciplining of discourse

Material Type: All, Books — Tags: Greek and English syntax — Posted on October 19, 2010, 8:59 am

By: David M. Timmerman, Edward Schiappa

On the one hand, it's a fascinating book. In Chap.2, after a footnote on Socratic
elenchus and techne, the discussion continues on dialegesthai and dialektike. But,
on the other hand, in the midst of this, is "if Protagoras is going to dialogue with
him..." - where must he go to do so? Quo usque, O Authors, with this neologism? Why
not "if Protagoras wants to dialogue..."? And then, "Socrates asks Callicles if his
guest Gorgias would consent to dialogue with he and Chaerophon" A triple
disingenuity - 1st,wrong sequence of tenses - 'asks' should be with 'will consent',
not 'would consent'. 2nd, wrong conjunction - 'his guest...' is not a condition
clause - 'if' should be 'whether'. 3rd - the object of a preposition must be
accusative - 'with him', not 'with he'. Shame! And then, in a 'quotation', a
translated quotation, "have you got a dog?" Why the past tense 'got' after the
present tenst 'have'. Surely Dionysodorus did not say the Greek equivalent of this
stupid neologism - the English should be 'do you have a dog?'. Ditto for "has he got
puppies?'. Again, O Authors, where is your own "level of sophistication" -
dialegesthai dunatotatous? I say to both of you "if my answer is not good, it is
your job to refute me." At the bottom of that page, a, perhaps, minor point - but
did Socrates avoid minor points? "Plato uses the adjective or adverbial form..." -
should be "... adjectival or adverbial form..." or "adjective or adverb form..." -
be consistent.

On to Chap.3, and diaireo, diorizo, horizo, philosophia, philosopheo,
philosophoumen - the authors are back in familiar ideas. But then, "what could be
called the predisciplinary stages of philosophy..." - why the past tense 'could'?
And "I don't think we should call ..." why negate the main verb? - why not "I think
we should not call..."?

Then Chap.4, and demegoria and symboule, and "our goal was
to examine the uses of these terms when ..." - why the temporal adverb rather than
"...these terms where..."? And then, circumlocution - "each step is of
significance..." - why not "each step is significant..."?

And Chap.5 "the linguistic
task of changing Greek syntax and vocabulary to facilitate abstract, theoretical,
and analytical thought and expression" - please, extend your efforts, O Authors, to
English syntax and vocabulary with the same goal.

However, I'm glad to have read the
book. The Greek parts of it are very interesting.

Reviewer: Doc

View this item in the Library Catalog

Submit your own review of this item