As a modern-day student of English Compostion, how is the study of rhetoric and rhetorical canon valuable to me? Well as I read the difference between the two and how it's changed thru the times. What does rhetoric actually means during the twentieth century? Rhetoric refers to the "the art or the discipline that deals with the use of language, either spoken or written, to inform or persuade or motivate an audience, whether that audience is made up of one person or a group of persons" (Corbett 3). But for some it means many things from a certain eloquence to deceptive ornamentation, "all show, but no substance". It's what politicians use in their speeches to persuade voters to see a false statement to be a true statement. The use of this language is called doublespeak, is which the writer makes the bad seems good. This doesn't mean rhetoric is necessarily a negative way in informing or persuading readers or audience. Some will take the direct positive approach in persuading or informing their audience or readers by clearly presenting accurate information about a subject under discussion. Rhetoric is a noble art if practiced honestly and study with positive intentions. It haves many meanings, it's both a field of humane study and a practical art.
Canons has been redefined thru the years and restored in contemporary times. It has been divided into five parts to provide the speaker with a set of terms that describe the different aspects of a speech. Providing it for educational efficiency, here are the five parts of canons: invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. Now to redefined canons and restore it in contemporary times, spoken language were transferred to writing. The canons of memory and delivery became extinct in modern discussion of rhetoric and writing but the need for memory it had to be eliminated or absorbed by delivery. The canons of memory reappears in written forms as highlighted terms...