“午夜法官的案例”和多观众话语:首席大法官马歇尔和马布里·v·麦迪逊

William L. Benoit, J. M. D'Agostine
{"title":"“午夜法官的案例”和多观众话语:首席大法官马歇尔和马布里·v·麦迪逊","authors":"William L. Benoit, J. M. D'Agostine","doi":"10.1080/10417949409372928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rhetorical theory and criticism offer scant advice on approaching multiple audiences, despite that fact that much discourse addresses heterogeneous audiences. This analysis of Chief Justice Marshall's Supreme Court opinion in the case of Marbury v. Madison illustrates the use of separation and incorporation (a form of integration) in a multiple audience situation. It also offers insight on a landmark case in the development of our tripartite system of government.","PeriodicalId":212800,"journal":{"name":"Southern Journal of Communication","volume":"23 7","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“The case of the midnight judges” and multiple audience discourse: Chief Justice Marshall and Marbury V. Madison\",\"authors\":\"William L. Benoit, J. M. D'Agostine\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10417949409372928\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Rhetorical theory and criticism offer scant advice on approaching multiple audiences, despite that fact that much discourse addresses heterogeneous audiences. This analysis of Chief Justice Marshall's Supreme Court opinion in the case of Marbury v. Madison illustrates the use of separation and incorporation (a form of integration) in a multiple audience situation. It also offers insight on a landmark case in the development of our tripartite system of government.\",\"PeriodicalId\":212800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Southern Journal of Communication\",\"volume\":\"23 7\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Southern Journal of Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949409372928\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Journal of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949409372928","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

修辞理论和批评在接近多种受众方面提供了很少的建议,尽管事实上许多话语针对的是异质受众。对马歇尔首席大法官在马布里诉麦迪逊案中的最高法院意见的分析说明了在多受众情况下使用分离和合并(一种整合形式)。它还提供了一个具有里程碑意义的案例,在我们的政府的三方体制的发展见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“The case of the midnight judges” and multiple audience discourse: Chief Justice Marshall and Marbury V. Madison
Rhetorical theory and criticism offer scant advice on approaching multiple audiences, despite that fact that much discourse addresses heterogeneous audiences. This analysis of Chief Justice Marshall's Supreme Court opinion in the case of Marbury v. Madison illustrates the use of separation and incorporation (a form of integration) in a multiple audience situation. It also offers insight on a landmark case in the development of our tripartite system of government.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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