Humanistic Knowledge-Making and the Rhetoric of Literary Criticism: Special Topoi Meet Rhetorical Action

Written Communication Jan 2023

Humanistic Knowledge-Making and the Rhetoric of Literary Criticism: Special Topoi Meet Rhetorical Action

Sarah Banting Mount Royal University

Abstract

This article examines the power of special topoi to characterize the discourse of literary criticism, and through emphasis on rhetorical action, it sheds light on the limitations of topos analysis for characterizing research articles in disciplinary discourse more generally. Using an analytical approach drawn both from studies of topoi in disciplinary discourse and rhetorical genre theory, I examine a representative corpus of 21st-century literary research articles. I find that while most of the special topoi recognized by Fahnestock and Secor and Wilder remain prevalent in recent criticism, contemporary literary critics tend to draw on only a select subset of those topoi when making claims about their rhetorical actions. The topoi they use most often— mistaken-critic and paradigm—help identify the ways knowledge-making work is undertaken in literary criticism, a discipline often considered epideictic rather than epistemic. But what the special topoi do not capture is precisely the distinctly motivated, actively epistemic character of this disciplinary rhetoric. Based on these findings, I suggest that special topoi must be seen as functioning in the context of the rhetorical action undertaken by literary research articles. These articles undertake not simply persuasion but the particularly humanistic act I refer to as contributing to scholarly understanding: a rhetorical action worth attending to for scholars of disciplinary discourse, because it is deliberately more concerned with practice than product.

Journal: Written Communication
Published: 2023-01-01
DOI: 10.1177/07410883221133290
Open Access: Closed
Topics: rhetorical theory genre theory scientific writing

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

Li (2025)

Beyond Surfaces and Depths: An SFL Analysis of Fine Gradations of Meaning in Un…

Written Communication

Cites in this index (8)

Carter (2021)

The Construction of Value in Science Research Articles: A Quantitative Study of…

Written Communication
Corrigan (2017)

Teaching What We Do in Literary Studies

Pedagogy
Walsh (2010)

The Common Topoi of STEM Discourse: An Apologia and Methodological Proposal, Wi…

Written Communication
Warren (2006)

Literary Scholars Processing Poetry and Constructing Arguments

Written Communication
Wilder (2005)

“The Rhetoric of Literary Criticism” Revisited

Written Communication

Show all 8 →

Tardy (2003)

A Genre System View of the Funding of Academic Research

Written Communication
Carter (1992)

Scholarship as Rhetoric of Display; Or, Why Is Everybody Saying All Those Terri…

College English
FAHNESTOCK et al. (1988)

The Stases in Scientific and Literary Argument

Written Communication

Also cites 29 works outside this index ↓

10.1353/esc.2016.0019

↗
10.1086/678694

↗
10.2307/j.ctt46nxp6

↗
10.7330/9781607324430.c002

↗
10.1353/lit.2015.0006

↗
10.1215/03335372-2879838

↗
10.1353/dia.2015.0003

↗
Coleman D. (2011)

Retooling the humanities: The culture of research in Canadian universities

↗
10.13110/criticism.57.2.0191

↗
10.1353/nlh.2015.0003

↗
Dobson K. (2011)

Retooling the humanities: The culture of research in Canadian universities

↗
10.1353/lit.2015.0034

↗
10.1525/ncl.2015.69.4.427

↗
10.1093/applin/ams050

↗
10.31468/cjsdwr.781

↗
10.31468/cjsdwr.845

↗
10.31468/cjsdwr.728

↗
10.2307/357971

↗
10.3368/cl.56.1.23

↗
10.1353/mfs.2015.0051

↗
10.1080/00335638409383686

↗
10.14393/LL63-v31n3a2015-5

↗
10.31468/cjsdwr.843

↗
10.1086/689662

↗
10.1353/chq.2015.0002

↗
10.1017/CBO9781139524827

↗
10.7330/9781607324430.c009

↗
10.1353/esc.2017.0049

↗
10.1353/elh.2015.0042

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 4 View in citation network →