Cover not available
Part of
Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in Media Genres
Edited by Assimakis Tseronis and Charles Forceville
[Argumentation in Context 14] 2017
► pp. 25–50

Chapter 1
Rhetoric, argumentation, and persuasion in a multimodal perspective

The study of multimodal argumentation and rhetoric raises difficult issues due to the hegemony of the verbal in argumentation and rhetoric. From this point of view, it is not sufficient to say that such study implies the analysis of the “interactions” between verbal and iconic elements, since their contribution to multimodality is hardly balanced. This chapter addresses two issues: First, the relationship between rhetoric and argumentation. Based upon a discussion of authors who have tried to fill the gap between rhetoric and argumentation, it would seem that rhetoric could be useful for argumentation thanks to the persuasiveness that it provides. However, if images are persuasive, can they also be argumentative? Second, the relationship between verbal and visual rhetoric will be discussed from the debate in French-speaking countries between “transpositionists” and “antitranspositionists.” This issue can be resolved if we consider that rhetoric is not intrinsically linguistic, but that it consists rather of cognitive operations that can be realised both verbally and visually.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Figures of rhetoric and arguments
    • 2.1Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca
      • 2.1.1Figures of presence
      • 2.1.2Phryne, a paradigmatic case of persuasive presence
    • 2.2Reboul and Bonhomme
      • 2.2.1Metonymy
  • 3.Visual and verbal figures
    • 3.1The pioneers of visual rhetoric
    • 3.2Transpositionists and antitranspositionists
      • 3.2.1Visual rhetoric beyond figures
      • 3.2.2Multimodal rhetoric
  • 4.Perspectives for multimodal studies
    • 4.1Visual argumentation and visual rhetoric
    • 4.2Multimodal interactions
    • 4.3Persuasion and argumentation
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 20 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.14.02roq
References

References

Adam, J. -M., & Bonhomme, M.
(2005) L’argumentation publicitaire. Rhétorique de l’éloge et de la persuasion. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Anscombre, J. -C., & Ducrot, O.
(1986) Argumentativité et informativité. In M. Meyer (Ed.), De la métaphysique à la rhétorique (pp. 79–94). Brussels: Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Aristotle
(trans. 2005) Poetics and Rhetoric, E. Garver (Trans.). New York: Barnes & Noble.Google Scholar
Barthes, R.
(1964) Rhétorique de l’image. Communications, 4, 40–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bateman, J. A.
(2014) Text and image. A critical intoduction to the visual/verbal divide. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Blair, J. A.
(2004) The rhetoric of visual arguments. In C. A. Hill, & M. Helmers (Eds.), Defining visual rhetorics (pp. 41–61). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2012) Argumentation as rational persuasion. Argumentation, 26, 71–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bonhomme, M.
(1998) Les figures clés du discours. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
(2008) Peut-on parler de métonymie iconique? In S. Badir, & J. -M. Klinkenberg (Eds.), Figures de la figure. Sémiotique et rhétorique générale (pp. 215–228). Limoges: Presses Universitaires de Limoges.Google Scholar
(2009) De l’argumentativité des figures de rhétorique. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours, 2, special issue, Rhétorique et argumentation. Retrieved from [URL]. DOI logo
Bonsiepe, G.
(1965) Visual/verbal rhetoric. Ulm 14–15–16, 23–40.Google Scholar
Doury, M.
(2012) Preaching to the converted. Why argue when everyone agrees. Argumentation, 26, 99–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ducrot, O.
(2015) Argumentation et persuasion. In G. Roque, & A. L. Nettel (Eds.), Persuasion et argumentation (pp. 221–239). Paris: Classiques Garnier.Google Scholar
Durand, J.
(1970) Rhétorique et image publicitaire. Communications, 15, 70–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eco, U.
(1972) La structure absente. Introduction à la recherche sémiotique. Paris: Mercure de France.Google Scholar
Fontanier, P.
(1968) Les figures du discours. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
Forceville, C.
(1996) Pictorial metaphor in advertising. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Metonymy in visual and audiovisual discourse. In E. Ventola, & A. J. Moya Guijjaro (Eds.), The world told and the world shown: Multisemiotic issues (pp. 56–74). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Forceville, C., & Urios-Aparisi, E.
(Eds.) (2009) Multimodal metaphor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Groupe µ.
(1976) La chafetière est sur la table. Communication et Langages, 29, 37–49.Google Scholar
(1982) Rhétorique générale. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
(1992) Traité du signe visuel. Pour une rhétorique de l’image. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Hill, C. A.
(2004) The psychology of rhetorical images. In C. A. Hill, & M. Helmers (Eds.), Defining visual rhetorics (pp. 25–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Hill, C. A., & Helmers, M.
(Eds.) (2004) Defining visual rhetorics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Hocks, M. E., & Kendrick, M. R.
(Eds.) (2005) Eloquent images. Word and image in the age of new media. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R.
(1963) Essais de linguistique générale. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. H.
(2000) Manifest rationality: A pragmatic theory of argument. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Jowett, G. S., & O’Donnell, V.
(1992) Propaganda and persuasion (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, Cal. & London: Sage.Google Scholar
Kennedy, J. M.
(1982) Metaphor in pictures. Perception, 11, 589–605. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kenney, K., & Scott, L. M.
(2003) A review of the visual rhetoric literature. In L. M. Scott, & R. Batra (Eds.) Persuasive imagery. A consumer response perspective (pp. 17–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C.
(1979) L’image dans l’image. Revue d’Esthétique, 1–2, 193–233. Special issue, Rhétoriques sémiotiques.Google Scholar
Kjeldsen, J. E.
(2012) Pictorial argumentation in advertising: Visual tropes and figures as a way of creating visual argumentation. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Topical themes in argumentation theory. Twenty exploratory studies (pp. 239–255). Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kjleldsen, J. E.
this volume). The rhetorical and argumentative potentials of press photography.
Le Guern-Forel, O.
(1981) Peut-on parler de métaphore iconique? In Parcours sémantiques et sémiotiques (pp. 213–26). Saint-Étienne: Université de Saint-Étienne, CIEREC.Google Scholar
Lévy, C., & Pernot, L.
(1997) Phryné dévoilée. In C. Lévy, & L. Pernod (Eds.), Dire l’évidence (Philosophie et rhétorique antiques) (pp. 5–12). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Lévy, C., Pernot, L.
(Eds.) (1997) Dire l’évidence (Philosophie et rhétorique antiques). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Massey, I.
(1977) Two types of visual metaphor. Criticism, 19(4), 285–95.Google Scholar
Messaris, P.
(1997) Visual persuasion. The role of images in advertising. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Micheli, R.
(2012) Arguing without trying to persuade? Elements for a non-persuasive definition of argumentation. Argumentation, 26, 115–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nettel, A. L., & Roque, G.
(2012a) Introduction. Argumentation, 26, 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012b) Persuasive argumentation versus manipulation. Argumentation, 26, 55–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noguez, D.
(1974) Petite rhétorique de poche pour servir à la lecture des dessins dits “d’humour”. Revue d’Esthétique, 3–4, 107–137. Special issue, L’art de masse n’existe pas.Google Scholar
O’Keefe, D.
(2012) Conviction, persuasion and argumentation: Untangling the ends and means of influence. Argumentation, 26, 19–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olson, L. C., Finnegan, C. A., & Hope, D. S.
(Eds.) (2008) Visual rhetoric: A reader in communication and American culture. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L.
(1969) The new rhetoric. A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Plantin, C.
(1990) Essais sur l’argumentation. Introduction à l’étude linguistique de la parole argumentative. Paris: Kimé.Google Scholar
(2009) Un lieu pour les figures dans la théorie de l’argumentation. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours, 2, special issue, Rhétorique et argumentation. Retrieved from [URL]. DOI logo
(2012) Persuasion or alignment? Argumentation, 26, 83–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pratkanis, A., & Elliot Aronson, E.
(2001) Art of propaganda: The everyday use and abuse of persuasion. New York: W.H. Freeman & Company.Google Scholar
Quintilian
(trans. 2012) The Institutio Oratoria of Quintilian. Miami, FL: HardPress Publishing.Google Scholar
Reboul, O.
(1986) La figure et l’argument. In M. Meyer (Ed.), De la métaphysique à la rhétorique (pp. 175–187). Brussels: Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar
(1991) Introduction à la rhétorique: Théorie et pratique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Roque, G.
(1983) Ceci n’est pas un Magritte. Essai sur Magritte et la publicité. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
(1990) Les mots au milieu de la figure. In M/I/S. Mots/Images/Sons, colloque international de Rouen (pp. 255–268). Mont St Aignan & Paris: Centre International de Recherches en Esthétique Musicale & Collège International de Philosophie.Google Scholar
(2005) Sous le signe de Magritte. In J. Pier, & J. -M. Schaeffer (Eds.), Métalepses. Entorses au pacte de la représentation (pp. 263–276). Paris: Éditions de l’École des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales.Google Scholar
(2008) Political rhetoric in visual images. In E. Weigand (Ed.), Dialogue and rhetoric (pp. 185–193). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) What is visual in visual argumentation ? In J. Ritola (Ed.), Argument cultures, Proceedings of the OSSA 09 Congress (pp. 1–9). CD-ROM, Windsor, ON: Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.Google Scholar
(2011) Rhétorique visuelle et argumentation visuelle. Semen 32, 91–106.Google Scholar
(2012) Visual argumentation: A further reappraisal. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Topical themes in argumentation theory. Twenty exploratory studies (pp. 273–288). Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Persuasion, visual rhetoric and visual argumentation. In B. Garssen, D. Godden, G. Mitchell, & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th international conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation 1–4 July 2014 (pp. 1241–1254). Amsterdam: SicSat.Google Scholar
Saouter, C.
(1995) Rhétorique verbale et rhétorique visuelle: Métaphore, synecdoque et métonymie. Recherches Sémiotiques/Semiotic Inquiry, 15, 145–61.Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de
(1916/1995) Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Scott, L. M., & Batra, R.
(Eds.) (2003) Persuasive imagery: A consumer response perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Seidman, S. A.
(2008) Posters, propanganda and persuasion in election campaigns around the world and through history. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Spangeburg, R., & Moser, K.
(2002) Propaganda. Understanding the power of persuasion. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
Tindale, C. W.
(2004) Rhetorical argumentation. Principles of theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Todorov, T.
(1977) Théories du symbole. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Tseronis, A., & Forceville, C.
this volume). The argumentative relevance of visual and multimodal antithesis in Frederick Wiseman’s documentaries.
Van Belle, H.
(2009) Playing with oppositions. Verbal and visual antithesis in the media. In J. Ritola (Ed.), Argument cultures: Proceedings of the OSSA 09 Congress (pp. 1–13). CD-ROM, Windsor, ON: Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.Google Scholar
Van Belle, H., Gillaerts, P., Van Gorp, B., Van de Mieroop, D., & Rutten, K.
(Eds.) (2013) Verbal and visual rhetoric in a media world. Leiden: Leiden University Press.Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, F. H.
(2010) Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vouilloux, B.
(1995) Des deux statuts rhétoriques de l’image et peut-être d’un troisième. In L. H. Hoek, & K. Meerhoff (Eds.), Rhétorique et image. Textes en hommage à Á. Kibédi Varga (pp. 101–114). Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Wollheim, R.
(1993) Metaphor and painting. In F. R. Ankersmit, & J. J. A. Mooij (Eds.), Knowledge and language (pp. 113–25). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Worthington, I.
(Ed.) (1994) Persuasion: Greek rhetoric in action. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Zanker, G.
(1981)  Enargeia in the ancient criticism of poetry. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, 124, 297–311. +++ Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Adler, Silvia & Ayelet Kohn
2024. Politicians in a nutshell: four-minute documentary portraits of three Israeli leaders. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11:1 DOI logo
Bonilla, Laura
2022. Claves para analizar datos en Twitter. Recolección y procesamiento de corpus. Cuadernos de Lingüística Hispánica :39 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kohn, Ayelet
2023. Props as visual arguments in the political speeches of Binyamin Netanyahu. Social Semiotics 33:2 ► pp. 373 ff. DOI logo
Tseronis, Assimakis
2021. From visual rhetoric to multimodal argumentation: exploring the rhetorical and argumentative relevance of multimodal figures on the covers ofThe Economist. Visual Communication 20:3 ► pp. 374 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.