Research Article| January 01 2006 Presencing “Communion” in Chaïm Perelman's New Rhetoric Richard Graff; Richard Graff Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Wendy Winn Wendy Winn Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Philosophy & Rhetoric (2006) 39 (1): 45–71. https://doi.org/10.2307/20697133 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Richard Graff, Wendy Winn; Presencing “Communion” in Chaïm Perelman's New Rhetoric. Philosophy & Rhetoric 1 January 2006; 39 (1): 45–71. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/20697133 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All Scholarly Publishing CollectivePenn State University PressPhilosophy & Rhetoric Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2006 The Pennsylvania State University2006The Pennsylvania State University Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Abstract At Rhetoric 3.12 Aristotle describes differences between a “written”; style, which he associates with the epideictic genre, and a “debating”; style suited to deliberative and forensic oratory. This paper argues that this seemingly unproblematic distinction constitutes a crucial indicator of the orientation of Aristotle's style theory as a whole. Passages throughout Rhetoric 3.1–12 offer precepts oriented toward the medium of writing and the reading of texts‐that is, they describe a specifically “written “ style of prose. In contrast, Aristotle largely neglects the agonistic style of practical oratory, a fact that can be taken as another indication of the literary, and literate, bias pervading Aristotle's account of prose lexis. In addition to disclosing nuances in the text of Rhetoric 3, this study contributes to our understanding of the ways in which early rhetorical theory responds to and is constrained by the circumstances of written composition and oratorical performance.