Enargeia, Persuasion, and the Vividness Effect in Athenian Forensic Oratory

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Peter A. O’Connell
{"title":"Enargeia, Persuasion, and the Vividness Effect in Athenian Forensic Oratory","authors":"Peter A. O’Connell","doi":"10.1080/15362426.2017.1384766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay argues that enargeia, the “vivid” quality of language that encourages listeners or readers to develop mental images, was an integral element of rhetorical strategy in the courts of Classical Athens. It relies on ancient evidence and modern comparanda. Ancient rhetorical theorists demonstrate how enargeia would have contributed to a sense of presence and simulated in Athenian jurors an experience similar to that of actual eyewitnesses. Modern lawyers and authors of trial handbooks advise litigators to appeal to their jurors’ imaginations with language that recalls ancient descriptions of enargeia and the related concept phantasia, “imagination.” The results of modern psychology research into the “vividness effect,” especially the distinction between figural and ground vividness, show how enargeia may have increased the likelihood of Athenian jurors accepting an argument. Lysias deploys ground vividness in On the Death of Eratosthenes (1) to draw his jurors’ attention away from the question of entrapment and figural vividness in Against Eratosthenes (12) to focus their attention on the crimes of the Thirty Tyrants. Finally, Aeschines’ description of the Thebans’ sufferings in Against Ctesiphon (3) may have harmed his case by emphasizing a weak point through misplaced figural vividness.","PeriodicalId":38049,"journal":{"name":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","volume":"20 1","pages":"225 - 251"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15362426.2017.1384766","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in the History of Rhetoric","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2017.1384766","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

ABSTRACT This essay argues that enargeia, the “vivid” quality of language that encourages listeners or readers to develop mental images, was an integral element of rhetorical strategy in the courts of Classical Athens. It relies on ancient evidence and modern comparanda. Ancient rhetorical theorists demonstrate how enargeia would have contributed to a sense of presence and simulated in Athenian jurors an experience similar to that of actual eyewitnesses. Modern lawyers and authors of trial handbooks advise litigators to appeal to their jurors’ imaginations with language that recalls ancient descriptions of enargeia and the related concept phantasia, “imagination.” The results of modern psychology research into the “vividness effect,” especially the distinction between figural and ground vividness, show how enargeia may have increased the likelihood of Athenian jurors accepting an argument. Lysias deploys ground vividness in On the Death of Eratosthenes (1) to draw his jurors’ attention away from the question of entrapment and figural vividness in Against Eratosthenes (12) to focus their attention on the crimes of the Thirty Tyrants. Finally, Aeschines’ description of the Thebans’ sufferings in Against Ctesiphon (3) may have harmed his case by emphasizing a weak point through misplaced figural vividness.
雅典式法庭演讲中的虚情假意、说服与生动效应
摘要本文认为,在古典雅典的宫廷中,语言的“生动”品质是修辞策略的一个组成部分,它鼓励听者或读者发展心理形象。它依赖于古代的证据和现代的比较。古代修辞学理论家论证了enargeia如何促成了一种存在感,并在雅典陪审员中模拟了一种类似于实际目击者的体验。现代律师和审判手册的作者建议诉讼律师用古代对“幻觉”(enargeia)和相关概念“幻想”(phantasia)的描述来吸引陪审员的想象力。现代心理学对“生动效应”的研究结果,特别是对形象生动和地面生动之间的区别,表明了生动是如何增加雅典陪审员接受论点的可能性的。吕西亚斯在《论埃拉托色尼之死》(1)中运用了地面的生动,把陪审员的注意力从诱捕问题上引开,在《反对埃拉托色尼》(12)中运用了人物形象的生动,把他们的注意力集中在30个暴君的罪行上。最后,在《反对忒西芬》(第三章)中,埃斯钦对底比斯人苦难的描述可能会因为用错误的生动形象来强调一个弱点而损害他的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Advances in the History of Rhetoric
Advances in the History of Rhetoric Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信