Oratory is one of the most valuable skills that will help you convey your point of view to your interlocutor concisely, beautifully and without any problems. There are people who are natural speakers; just give them a topic and you can listen for hours. But what should those who want to master these skills do, but nature has not given them innate abilities?
Oratory, like any other skill, can be developed, trained, and improved. In this article we will give 6 useful tips, thanks to which you can develop incredible abilities in yourself, and in less than a month speak freely in public, concentrating the attention of listeners on your speech.
1. What causes the greatest difficulties for beginning speakers? As a rule, this is an insufficient vocabulary and limited vocabulary. The solution is simple, you need to talk, talk and talk again. You can do this at home. Take any item you see - a hairdryer, a vase, a frying pan, in general, it doesn’t matter what it is. And then, for 5 minutes, try to talk about it, characterize all the features of this item, explain how wonderful and necessary it is. It will be difficult at first, but over time you will easily cope with this task. When you see that five minutes is not enough, then increase the time, say 10, 20, 30 minutes. I knew people who, without any problems, could talk for hours on a given topic, and never repeat themselves in phrases or thoughts.
3. Rate of speech is another feature worth mastering. Watch how you speak. The listener may not be able to understand speech that is too fast, while speech that is slow will lead to boredom. Try to maintain pauses, highlight the right places with intonations, raise and lower your voice, thereby attracting the attention of the audience.
4. Talking about subjects at home is good, but in order to hone the skill of oratory, you need to communicate more with real people. The easiest way to hone public speaking is for students. You have access to speeches in front of your group, and during the speech you can track the reaction, behavior of the audience, their mood and desire to listen.
5. Your speech should not be dry. Try to use sayings, quotes from famous people, and humor from time to time. By the way, humor plays a very important role. The ability to make a timely and apt joke is the quality of a good speaker who can hold his audience without any problems and, at the right moment, relieve accumulated tension.
Over time, when you expand your vocabulary and begin to apply all the acquired knowledge in practice, you will notice how your speech has changed, how your interlocutor carefully listens to every word spoken, how the audience closely follows your statements and phrases.
The art of eloquence (oratory) is understood as the ability to capture the attention of an audience in order to psychologically influence it. Such qualities have always been highly valued in the world. Mastery in this area can be achieved by combining qualities such as:
Ability to speak competently;
present information freely and naturally;
as well as mastery of techniques for managing audience attention.
The methods and technologies of such art are studied by the science of rhetoric. Anyone can master public speaking; the main thing here is desire and painstaking work on oneself and one’s speech.
By the way, if you decide to master the art of public speaking, you should know that Larisa Solovyova’s studio is highly praised, and judging by reviews like “”, we can conclude that professionals in their field really work there.
Oratory: features
The art of a speaker lies in the special construction of his speech in such a way as to inspire listeners with his mood and interest in the subject, to evoke in them a response to his words, encouraging them to take certain actions. For this purpose, a certain psychological impact is created by the strength of character or expertise of the speaker.
The main qualities of oratory include the art of speech, fluency in the technique of presenting information, and the ability to hold the attention of those to whom such a word is directed. That is, it is not enough just to be able to speak competently, since people may get distracted after a certain period of time; it is necessary to be able to maintain interest in the information presented. And this can be achieved with the help of linguistic and verbal means of communication.
There are several types of this skill
In particular, it is natural eloquence. As a rule, it manifests itself in everyday life, without artificially creating the necessary conditions and does not require special training. For example, during a fire, people jump out of the house and scream to attract others and residents of the house to help. Or, when in an emotionally charged situation, a person may begin to speak loudly and sublimely, agitated by an external stimulus. In such cases, there are involuntary emotions created under the influence of some factors.
Another type is oratory. These are artificially acquired skills. So, speaking from the podium, the speaker must be able to control himself, as a result of the use of oratorical techniques. Oratory technologies take their origins from Ancient Greece and Rome. Even then, special attention was paid to methods of presenting the spoken word. Currently, technologies for presenting information meet the realities of the modern world and are supported by auxiliary means for a more complete impact on people.
But it must be taken into account that for a successful speech the correct psychological attitude of the speaker is necessary, since only his interest in the subject of the speech, conviction in its correctness and passion for it can lead to a successful presentation of the material. If the speaker is not inspired by the information being presented, he is unlikely to be able to ignite others with it, his speech will not evoke emotions and will not bring the desired results when presented. In order for speech to have brightness, you must be able to control it, as well as yourself - regardless of the surrounding circumstances.
The current situation in society and education encourages us to pay special attention to speech sciences that deal with the problems of effective communicative communication. The subject of rhetoric and speech culture is considered from the point of view of history, current content and comparison with other disciplines related to speech.
The state of modern society is characterized by the intensive development of speech communications. Technology gives rise to new forms of speech communication, which results in the emergence of not only new types and genres of communication, but also new educational communication disciplines. The twentieth century significantly enriched the composition of the sciences dealing with speech. These include speech culture, stylistics (practical, functional), pragmatics, speech etiquette, psycholinguistics, text linguistics, psychology of communication, and many others. etc.
Most of the new disciplines introduced into the educational process within the framework of socio-political, economic and even technical specialties are directly related to philology or verbal sciences. These will include public relations (a kind of new rhetoric in the field of political and business communication, since “PR” solves the problems of convincing and connecting a client or organization with the public environment, implementing projects and decisions), management and administration (solving business issues, as the content of these sciences shows, through speech), various business communications and many similar disciplines.
The actual speech practice of the mass media suggests that conducting PR campaigns during parliamentary or presidential elections is nothing more than the art of persuasive and effective speech, which has always been called rhetoric in European culture, and now, in connection with new trends in mass culture, it receives new naming. However, in a similar way, many authors write that “public relations” took place in ancient times, rethinking the classical teachings about speech in a new way.
However, if we want not to get lost in the history of philological sciences and speech culture, today it makes sense to talk specifically about rhetoric, which in the last 15-20 years has been restored in Russia as a scientific and educational subject, as evidenced by extensive scientific research and teaching in school and universities. To avoid incorrect interpretations, let us define the subject of rhetoric as it appears both in the development of Russian philological science and in modern theory and practice.
Rhetoric
Definitions of rhetoric include the following ideas:
1) Rhetoric is a fundamental theory and art of speech: the theory studies the laws and rules of constructing all types of speech in the modern information society, and art is understood as a certain skill, technical “training,” practical “dexterity” to master thoughts and words in different communication situations. This definition goes back to the classic definition of rhetoric by K.P. Zelenetsky: “The subject of rhetoric is speech.”
2) Rhetoric is the art of thinking. Teaching speech in rhetoric has always involved simultaneous learning to think (and think morally), form a worldview, gain knowledge and express one’s life position in words. Hence the special seriousness of rhetoric as a real mental-speech creativity that expresses the position of each person in life.
The basis of rhetoric has always been philosophy and ethics; without this spiritual and moral basis, it is impossible to imagine modern methods of teaching rhetoric or other numerous speech technologies. Without a philosophical and ethical basis, teaching rhetoric turns into “idle talk.” These theses correspond to both Cicero’s thoughts on the connection between eloquence and philosophy, and the position of the classic of Russian rhetoric N.F. Koshansky that “grammar deals only with words, rhetoric deals with thoughts.”
3) Rhetoric - the theory and practice of perfect speech: persuasive, decorated, appropriate, effective, expedient, etc. All of the listed qualities can be questioned, because... any “beautiful” or “persuasive” speech can be turned, as they say, “for evil”... However, each era gives birth to its own rhetorical (communicative) ideal. Therefore, it is possible to say that rhetoric shapes a lifestyle through the style of speech. In accordance with man's desire for the perfect Word, it is advisable to call rhetoric the doctrine of perfect speech.
4) Rhetoric is the doctrine of speech education of the individual. Since the whole person is expressed in speech, rhetoric contributes to the formation of a person’s entire personality, first of all, his ideology, knowledge, life position, and the ability to express and defend his position in words. Compliance with this requirement allows us to raise a person for whom the language (word, mouth) becomes a true “wall” and “fence”, and the society in which he lives and works becomes prosperous due to properly organized speech connections.
5) Rhetoric is the study of all types, types and genres of speech (literature) in a developed information society. It is incorrect to limit rhetoric only to oratory; modern rhetoric studies the entire variety of texts included in culture: from everyday speech to speech in the media. A developed linguistic personality must be oriented and proficient in different types of literature, understand their nature and have communication skills in constructing texts. The task of philological science, which normalizes social speech practice, is the description and selection of cultural texts, i.e. those texts that are exemplary and can be included in teaching, ensuring the connection of generations and effective creative activity of society.
The objective place of rhetoric and its relationship with other speech science disciplines cannot be understood without understanding the history of speech sciences in Russia. Russia entered the twentieth century with developed linguistics and great reverence for artistic literature, which was called belles-lettres, and this image of a scientific subject (Russian language and literature) was preserved until the beginning of the third millennium. This is our philological tradition, but leading philologists have long noted a paradoxical situation: in reality there was no science that would deal with practical speech, normalizing social speech practice. Meanwhile, different speech sciences tried to fill this gap in the philological education of society at different times with varying degrees of success.
Subject "Culture of Speech"
Thus, starting from the 20s of the twentieth century, the subject of “speech culture” began to develop. Interest in issues of speech art in the twenties was especially great - it is enough to recall the Institute of the Living Word, opened in 1918, the collections “Russian Speech”, numerous works on oratory (A.V. Mirtov, B. Kazansky, V. Hoffman and etc.), where the authors sought to “teach the whole people to speak.”
Speech culture is a purely Russian phenomenon, a national term introduced into Russian science in the 20-30s by G.O. Vinokur, V.V. Vinogradov, S.I. Ozhegov. It is absent in foreign philologies due to the specificity of the problems generated by the very construction of the Russian language. In our country, the culture of speech was understood only as a doctrine of literary norms - and adding ideological and substantive components to it was dangerous. Evidence of this is the cessation of all research on oratory, starting at least from the 30s.
When the subject “culture of speech” was introduced into modern university curricula, the authors of new textbooks naturally understood the subject of culture of speech in accordance with tradition, in which the main term for speech culture was considered to be the language norm. Most modern programs for teaching this discipline, now introduced into all universities in Russia, are limited to normative topics. Meanwhile, for most teachers and students, the meaning of the subject “culture of speech”, of course, is the development of the culture of the linguistic personality as a whole, the formation of the image of a rhetorician (speaker or writer) as a highly qualified speech professional.
In order to make the transition to a culture of speech, as a doctrine of effective speech of society and the individual, it is necessary to understand what culture is in relation to speech and what public speech is. The concepts of rhetoric and culture are not compared by chance. The main idea of philology is the organization of life and the improvement of man through language. The philologist is interested in language not just as a system of signs, but as a promising application to its practical application.
As part of the classical sciences and arts, rhetoric as the doctrine of persuasive and effective speech is correlated with grammar (“the foundation of verbal sciences” and the general doctrine of the correctness of speech), logic (the doctrine of the truth of judgments and the consistency of statements, but logic alone is not enough for the art of persuasion), poetics (the study of artistic speech and “fiction”, but, unlike poetics, rhetoric studies real prosaic speech).
Until the middle of the 19th century, the science that united philological (verbal) disciplines was literature as the doctrine of the development of the gift of speech and the entire set of verbal works of speech culture. In the middle of the 19th century, after criticism of the revolutionary democrats and the birth of the “new Science of the Word,” stylistics emerged from rhetoric as the doctrine of the means of speech influence. The twentieth century left only fiction in place of classical rhetoric and literature and proposed a new subject - the culture of speech as a doctrine of the norms of literary language, and in school - the aspect of speech development.
An analysis of new theories and disciplines that emerged at the end of the twentieth century through the development of speech technologies shows that they historically go back to rhetoric, often touch upon similar problems and use its terminology. Each national philology offers its own set of speech disciplines. Thus, dictating the style of modern communication, American scientific technologies offer a theory of communication (sometimes with a false but attractive idea of developing “communication skills” in a person); the subject of speech (speech) allows you to both learn ways of argumentation and stylistic distribution of speech, and develop a personal style with advancement in the life of one’s own “theme”. The strength of American philology, and hence the special influence of Americanism as a way of life and human behavior, is associated with rhetoric as the basis of American philosophy. The American ship, given the unitarity of American ideology, is driven by collisions of rhetorical ideas and positions of different speakers and writers.
Focus on issues of language education has allowed the Japanese nation to take a leading position in the image of the modern world. The Japanese theory of linguistic existence set the goal of achieving effective communications in every sphere of social life and, above all, in the field of business relations - the result of such speech education of the nation was a change in the entire appearance of the state, the intensification of activity and the rise of all areas of the economy.
The failures of our perestroika are largely due to the absence in the consciousness of the nation of the idea of organizing the world through language. It is impossible to begin revolutionary changes in society without defining the meaning of words as the main concepts in which society must believe and, most importantly, understand what this or that word will mean, i.e. concept.
Serving as a tool for expressing thoughts, a tool for organizing activities, rhetoric is today a “general” science for all intellectual professions. The idea of a “commonality” of rhetoric and logic for all areas of activity was expressed in antiquity; in the Middle Ages, rhetoric was defined as “the queen of the sciences and arts,” which is why today there is a lot of talk about professional rhetoric, building theories of communication for different specialties. The main professions in society have always been “speech” ones, and the education of a specialist is usually structured like the preparation of a professional rhetorician. Therefore, the careers of an entrepreneur, politician, diplomat, lawyer, priest, teacher, military man, doctor, etc. are always based on the development of speech abilities and the formation of a professional linguistic personality.
The goal of rhetoric and speech culture is to improve the style of life through the style of speech. Lifestyle is shaped by speech style. In the style of speech - the richness or poverty of thought, the taste or bad taste of words, the grace or wretchedness of sound production. The goal of teaching rhetoric and speech culture is to teach how to analyze and create all types of modern literature.
Many of the troubles of our modern Fatherland in the twentieth century are due to the fact that no one taught us to listen and discern the meaning of prosaic words. Thus, in particular, the sweet deception of perestroika was born. Economic reforms were launched outside of verbal support. The reason for economic failures is the verbal lack of education and rhetorical disorganization of society.
The style of speech creates a social mood. The basis for this attitude lies in hidden thoughts and passions, in the verbal aura that is offered by society through examples of speech cultural activity in the media, the education system, family and other social institutions. Modern society, endowed with freedom of speech, has, to put it mildly, become unruly. Fashionable TV presenters sincerely discuss the problem of foul language, asking authoritative philologists: “Does it matter how you say it?..” The latter argue about whether all words are “equal”, they say, all words have the right to exist. Words really exist, but culture consists of limiting oneself and establishing prohibitions. In the new democratic culture, prohibitions were lifted, including on the selection of means of expression. As a result of prohibitions, the variety of words and situations that can be served by different words, a person flourishes because he works to cultivate the human element in himself.
New speech technologies create the basis for stylistic innovations. Types of communication on the Internet, by e-mail, and by mobile telephone offer a significantly new style of Russian speech. This speech cannot but be based on cultural tradition, but, no matter how innovative and creative the user is, he cannot but rely on the facts of the previous culture. As for assessments of this “current activity” (films, songs, books), which have not yet entered into culture, they should be organized based on cultural tradition, concepts of taste, elementary ethics and morality. It is not computers and television themselves that are bad, but how people use them.
The responsibility of a philologist in society creates an environment for the moral assessment of speech acts. A person must be responsible for every word he utters. Therefore, in my opinion, it is precisely this special section of rhetorical science – rhetorical ethics – that schoolchildren and students should be familiar with. The new generation has always wanted to live in a new way - the solution to these cultural contradictions is possible if the “new generation” bases its innovations on knowledge of culture, and the “conservative” carriers (the older generation) know how to joyfully accept the new. Still, it is the job of teachers to be able to direct the tastes of young people. The poeticization of crime and the romanticization of vices, thieves and criminal life - all this is the semiotic background against which other authors today are trying to form a style of thought, a style of speech, a style of life.
Rhetoric is compared with many non-speech sciences: philosophy, ethics, psychology. Philosophy and professional education have always been and remain the intellectual basis of communication. Outside of ethics, rhetoric becomes the art of manipulating public opinion.
Psychology has always been connected with rhetoric: even Plato demanded that rhetoric know “the types of human souls,” and the psychology of communication cannot but touch upon issues of speech influence. Considering many of today's books on business ethics and the culture of business communication, we see that their content and practical advice are directly taken from modern rhetorical or stylistic ideas, because they usually relate to the rules of conducting business dialogue, negotiations, and constructing speech in certain situations of business communication [ Kuzin 2000].
As an example of methodological ideas that are promising for the educational process, we point to the development of the first section of the rhetorical canon - the invention of thoughts based on topoi, as ways of arguing, creating and developing the content of speech. The topic makes it possible to understand that the process of creating a speech concept is not spontaneous, but is controlled by certain possible techniques, which modern rhetoric defines as “semantic models” of generating a statement. The classic composition of topoi (definition, genus and species, whole and parts, properties, cause and effect, comparison, example, evidence, etc.) allows the student to imagine the possible mental moves of the creator of speech.
Another interpretation of commonplaces (topoi) is as value categories on the basis of which agreement with the audience and its persuasion occur. The systematization of topoi shows a picture of today's moral and social values, a general system of conceptual categories, the knowledge of which allows one to develop proof.
Russian rhetoric has received a fundamental and ramified development in the last decade, which until now has not been the subject of scientific generalization. Let's try to do this at least briefly.
In 1997, the Russian Association of Researchers, Teachers and Teachers of Rhetoric was formed, annually holding international conferences in one of the country's leading universities. Currently, the Association includes more than 400 members.
Over the past years, we can talk about at least the following rhetorical scientific and pedagogical schools and directions that have developed in Russia:
1) school of Moscow University, created at the department of general and comparative historical education by academician. RAO Yu.V. Rozhdestvensky (1926-1999), continued by the works of prof. A.A. Volkova - see the bibliography in the work of Yu.V. Rozhdestvensky “Theory of Rhetoric”;
2) pedagogical school of MPGU (Ladyzhenskaya T.A., Ippolitova N.A., etc.) - see primarily the educational complex for schools “Rhetoric” (grades 1-10);
3) Perm School of Rhetoric, formed on the basis of the West Ural Educational and Scientific Center under the leadership of S.A. Mineeva. The center has published many books, textbooks, and programs on rhetoric. Summer courses for the training of rhetoric teachers are held annually (26 schools have already been held).
4) Krasnoyarsk school of rhetoric and stylistics under the leadership of prof. A.P. Skovorodnikov (see the stylistic works of the founder of the school and his many students);
5) Saratov School of Stylistics, Rhetoric and Speech Culture under the guidance of prof. O.B. Sirotinina (works on Russian colloquial speech, research on “good speech” and many others);
6) Voronezh school under the leadership of prof. I.A. Sternin and his many students (see the latest updated book “Practical Rhetoric”);
7) Ekaterinburg School of Stylistics, Rhetoric and Speech Culture (N.A. Kupina, T.V. Matveeva, V.N. Marov, etc.).
This list would be far from complete without mentioning the names and works of Prof. O.I. Marchenko (St. Petersburg), prof. L.G. Antonova (Yaroslavl), prof. A.A.Vorozhbitova (Sochi), T.G.Khazagerov (Rostov-on-Don) and many others. etc. Many doctoral dissertations on rhetoric have been defended. It is even more strange that with all this, there is still no place for rhetoric in the list of specialties of the Higher Attestation Commission. Therefore, “rhetoricians” become doctors of either “philosophical” (C.B. Daletsky, O.I. Marchenko), or “cultural”, or pedagogical sciences, although it is obvious that the activities of the science of speech relate primarily to philology and linguistics .
It is impossible not to mention the popularization of rhetoric, since many professionals and different segments of the population feel the need for rhetorical studies. Therefore, various courses arise, and various trainings in one way or another address issues of practical mastery of public speech and the art of dialogue. A number of popular books have appeared - see, for example, the textbooks “Rhetoric” and “In Pursuit of Cicero” by D.N. Aleksandrov; “Anyone can become Cicero” by I.A. Malkhamova. Such books cannot but be welcomed, despite a number of obvious inaccuracies and popularization simplifications.
The prospects for the development of Russian teachings about speech are obvious. They can be realized only if we are aware and objectively familiar with the classical heritage of Russian philology and intensive work in the modern field of domestic social and speech education.
“The magazine “Grapes” cultivates the “taste” of the heart,” said Ekaterina Gradova about the magazine.
The Orthodox educational magazine “Vinograd” is a publication for everyone who is interested in Russian culture and education.
The authors set themselves the goal of filling the gaps formed as a result of the loss of spiritual and moral roots. The magazine will help readers understand issues of education, as well as the perception of national spiritual culture.
Sections of the magazine: philology, history, natural science, education, art.
The theme of the September issue of the magazine “Grapes” is “Friends of my children.” How should we behave when a child begins to be more drawn to his friends than to his parents? Is it possible to influence a child's choice of friends? What should a child do if he is not like other children? What happens to our children when they are among their peers?
Introduction.
Rhetoric is the art of eloquence.
1) On the need for eloquence in ancient society.
2) Orators of Ancient Greece
a) Sophists - the first teachers of eloquence
b) Socrates, Plato, Aristotle - philosophers, rhetoricians
c) Development of theoretical rhetoric (Demosthenes)
3) Roman eloquence.
a) Cicero - “tribune of all times”
b) rhetoric of M. F. Quintilian.
111. Conclusion.
1. In the popular works of Dale Carnegie, a very large place is devoted to the importance of the ability to speak. He wrote, “...the greatest successes in the business world have come from people who, in addition to their knowledge, also have the ability to speak well, persuade people to their point of view, and advertise themselves and their ideas.”* He considered these qualities more important than knowledge Latin verbs and a diploma from Harvard University. D. Carnegie is convinced that almost every person can give speeches quite successfully if he has self-confidence and an idea that passionately excites him. He also believes that speaking in public is an art. In his works, Carnegie convincingly proves that oratory has helped a huge number of ordinary people achieve colossal success in life and make a dizzying career. Mastering the art of public speaking can give a person the confidence he needs to maximize his latent abilities. The ability to speak is the basis of human communication and depending on how well a person succeeds in this is his opportunity to become a leader.
There is a whole science that aims to teach a person the art of eloquence. This science is called rhetoric (Greek Teche cretopike - the art of eloquence). It arose, like many other sciences, back in the era of antiquity. In this work we will talk specifically about ancient rhetoric and outstanding speakers of antiquity.
The natural sociability and innate oratorical abilities characteristic of the southern peoples, as well as the absence in ancient times of other means of mass communication (written documents could be distributed in very limited quantities) were the reasons that in antiquity the living word was much more important than now, especially since possession of it was the most important and most effective way to achieve authority in society and political success.
Ancient Greece is considered the birthplace of eloquence, although it was already known in Egypt, Assyro-Babylonia and India. In the lands of Hellas, there was a belief that eloquence is an art. In the 5th century BC, cities were widespread in Hellas - states in which slave-owning democracy developed. They created a special atmosphere for the flourishing of eloquence. The supreme body in such a state was the people's assembly, to which the politician addressed directly. In order to win over the people, it was necessary to present your ideas in the most attractive way. Not only political issues were resolved publicly, but also trials were carried out.
At the same time, there were no prosecutors, and anyone could act as a prosecutor. The accused defended himself, convincing the judges of his innocence. The number of judges in Athens was, for example, 500, and in total up to 6,000 people took part in deciding the fate of the accused. Under such conditions, those who had the gift of speech and knew how to win over listeners found themselves in a more advantageous position.
Thus, the social life of Ancient Greece was such that a politician had to speak in council meetings and at public meetings, a commander - in front of the army, a private person - in front of the court, as well as at festivals, friendly meetings, funerals, which were quite crowded. In such conditions, eloquence becomes necessary for every person.
The first textbook of rhetoric was probably written in the 5th century BC. e. by two Sicilian Greeks from Syracuse, Coracus and Thisseus, an unsurvived work. The first achievements of artistic eloquence were transferred from Sicily to Athens by Gorgias. Soon the first paid teachers appeared - sophists (from the Greek Sophistes - artist, sage) who not only taught practical eloquence, but also composed speeches for the needs of citizens.
The sophists achieved a special art of eloquence, or rather “senior sophists,” in the 5th century BC. It was at this time that a school of philosophers and educators emerged in Athens, who created an unprecedented cult of the word.
They masterfully mastered all forms of oratory, the laws of logic, the art of argument, and the ability to influence an audience. Hellas produced many famous rhetoricians, of whom in the 5th century BC. The following were especially well known: Dinarchus, Hegesitus, Hyperides, Gogius, Isocrates, Iseus, Escinus, Philocrates.
The popularity of sophist teachers was unusually great. They traveled all over Greece, speaking to listeners and helping those who wanted to master eloquence. The sophists gathered inquisitive youth, giving them “lectures” and holding conversations with them. They saw the goal of their theoretical studies, and especially oratory, as preparing people for practical activities. As a rule, the sophists were revered and rich people. Many of them carried out diplomatic missions, for example Hippias and Gorgias, it is known that Prodicus was engaged in government activities, Protagoras drafted laws. According to legend, the most famous of the sophists, Gorgias, was erected a golden statue for his speech at Olympia - a call for unanimity among the Greeks in the fight against their enemies. But there is also information that Goriy erected this statue for himself.
The sophists paid great attention not only to the practice, but also to the theory of eloquence. It was they who laid the foundations of rhetoric as the science of oratory. Calling eloquence (rhetoric) art, the ancient Greeks put specific and definite content into this concept.
By the 5th century BC. e. When the culture of monologue was fully developed, when its types were clearly understood and considered obvious, then the task of the speaker is threefold:
explain (something)
induce (to a certain thinking, decision, and even more so action)
bring pleasure to the listeners.
According to the sophists, the goal of the speaker is not to reveal the truth, but to be persuasive. And, as Gorgias, for example, believed, only a skillfully composed speech can convince, and it does not matter whether it corresponds to the truth or not. According to this opinion, the meaning of the word sophistry is a deliberately false conclusion. The sophists knew how to destroy the opponent's argument with ridicule, and to respond to his ridicule with dignity. A true orator, according to Gorgias, must be able to praise and condemn the same thing. In the time of the Sophists, rhetoric was the “queen of all sciences.”
The ancient Greek philosopher Socrates (about 470-399 BC) spoke out against the sophists’ position on the relativity of truth. For Socrates, absolute truth is divine, it is above human judgment and is the measure of all things. Socrates condemned sophist orators for their desire for success, for their readiness to convince the public of anything by the power of eloquence. He considered it unacceptable to charge for lessons, as the Sophists did, arguing that “the sale of wisdom is tantamount to the sale of beauty.”
These thoughts of Socrates were expressed to his students by Plato (about 427-347 BC) in the famous dialogues “Gorgias”, “Sophist”, “Phaedrus”, the central character of which was Socrates. In his writings, Plato comes to the definition of a sophist as an imaginary sage, and sophistry as imaginary wisdom. He said “The duty of an orator is to tell the truth.”*
To the rhetoric of the sophists, which Plato does not consider science, he contrasts genuine eloquence, based on knowledge of the truth, and therefore accessible only to the philosopher. This theory is expounded in the dialogue Phaedrus, which presents a conversation between the philosopher Socrates and the youth Phaedrus. Its essence is as follows.
Before you start talking about any subject, you need to clearly define the subject. “In any matter, young man,” Socrates addresses Phaedrus, “to discuss it correctly, you must start with the same thing, you need to know what exactly is being discussed, otherwise continuous mistakes are inevitable.”
Further, according to Socrates, it is necessary to know the truth, that is, the essence of the subject: “First of all, one must know the truth regarding any thing that is said or written, be able to determine everything according to this truth; the true art of speech cannot be achieved without knowledge of the truth... Who does not know truth, but chases after opinion, that art of speech will apparently be ridiculous and inexperienced."
The dialogue speaks clearly and clearly about the construction of speech.
In the first place, at the beginning of the speech, there should be an introduction,
in second place is the presentation,
on the third - evidence,
on the fourth – confirmation and additional confirmation, refutation and additional refutation,
collateral explanation and indirect praise.
What is valuable in Plato’s theory of eloquence is the idea of the impact of speech on the soul. In his opinion, the speaker “needs to know how many types the soul has.” In addition, Plato said: “Eloquence is the art of controlling minds.”
Plato's thoughts on oratory were brilliantly developed by his student Aristotle (384 - 322 BC), who spent 20 years at the Academy as a teacher.
The greatest thinker of antiquity, Aristotle, first approached the science of eloquence as a researcher. Written in 335 BC. e. “Aristotle's Rhetoric is an analysis of the language, style and structure of speech of the orators of that time, whose skill can still be recognized as exemplary.
In the first and second books, the thinker, analyzing the primary role of language, wrote that if speech is not clear, it does not achieve its goal. Explaining his thought, Aristotle continues that speech should not be hackneyed, that is, consisting of overused words. Speech should be distinguished by beauty and nobility. Aristotle considered clarity and intelligibility of speech as the primary condition for the success of oratory.
It is obvious that the main thing for Aristotle, as for the sophists, is the persuasiveness of speech. However, if truth was not important for the latter, then for Aristotle, as for Plato, the reliability of what is said in speech is important. Aristotle devotes a lot of space to logical proofs that convince the listener of the truth of what was said.
However, according to Aristotle, it is impossible to use only reliable knowledge. It is not always available to humans. Wanting to convince people of something, we often use various examples from life, present judgments of a probable nature and draw from them, although not entirely accurate, convincing conclusions. Such conclusions are not absolutely reliable, but they claim to be plausible, that is, they are true for the most part and deserve trust. These conclusions speak of the truth as it is accessible to the prover, and they are made in good faith.
In the third book of Rhetoric, much attention is paid to style. And in this case, Aristotle still put clarity in the first place.
“The virtue of style is clarity... Style should be neither too low nor too high, it should correspond to the subject of speech...”*
Aristotle's general requirements for style are clarity, accessibility, artlessness, softness, grace, nobility. The basis of style, the philosopher wrote, is the ability to speak correctly. And this requires skillful placement of words in the construction of a phrase, precise designation of the characterized objects, except for some, obliges to correctly use the genders of names -
-male
-female
-average
coordination of singular and plural numbers, etc.
“A style is full of feeling if it is presented in the language of an angry person when it comes to an insult, and in the language of an indignant and restrained person when it comes to things ungodly and shameful, if things that are praiseworthy are spoken of with admiration, and things that excite compassion are spoken of modestly, similarly in other cases.”* A style will have the proper qualities, as Aristotle believed, if it is full of feeling, if it corresponds to the true state of affairs. The latter happens when important things are not spoken of lightly and trifles are not spoken of solemnly. Otherwise the style seems buffoonish. The style of speech depends on the subject of presentation: one should speak about praiseworthy things with admiration, about things that arouse compassion, with humility.
Aristotle's rhetoric touches not only the area of oratory, it is devoted to the art of persuasive speech and dwells on the ways of influencing a person with the help of speech.
Simultaneously with the development of theoretical rhetoric, its highest flowering was achieved in Greece in the second half of the 5th-4th centuries BC. e. practical eloquence in the person of Demosthenes and other orators subsequently included in the canon of ten ancient orators.
Demosthenes (c. 384-322 BC) is the first great star in the oratorical elite, he is actually the head of the school of orators, the great master of the ancient public word. The following have survived to our time: 61 texts of speeches, 56 “speeches” to speeches and several letters of Demosthenes. Some of his speeches, for example, “On the criminal embassy” (343) and “For Xenophon on the crown” (380), have more than a hundred pages. This is an indication that these speeches lasted more than 2 - 3 hours, attracting an attentive mass of people.
Demosthenes' speeches are rich in a variety of factual material, containing many personal observations and characteristic details noticed in the thick of life. In his judicial speeches, Demosthenes often became a writer of everyday life, from whose gaze, it seemed, no trifle escaped. Either ironizing over unlucky people, or exposing the decline of morals, Demosthenes the orator appears to the public not only as a moral teacher, but also as a public judge and political leader.
A resourceful polemicist and profound psychologist, Demosthenes knew how to make people listen to himself in any situation and listen to the end.
As is generally accepted, he did not shine in the judicial speeches with which he began his brilliant practice as a lawyer, Demosthenes, however, was particularly distinguished in his political speeches, most often directed against the continuous invasions of the invading troops of the Macedonian king Philip 11. In such speeches, Demosthenes often recalled “glorious ancestors” of the Athenians, calling to honor their memory and follow their past civic exploits. The speaker appealed to the listeners to the sense and consciousness of the honor of a citizen of a free republic. Bold and lampooning in style, full of anger and patriotic dignity, these speeches inspired the Athenians to great deeds, left a deep mark on the spiritual life of the Athenian state, and entered the history of political struggle under the common name “philippics.”
The Athenian tribune used direct appeal to “citizens” willingly and skillfully. He did not leave any remarks addressed to him unanswered, and did not get lost when political passions flared up and the atmosphere became tense. His appeals came from the deepest conviction of his own rightness and, of course, the awareness of his personal influence on public opinion. The ancient orator's frequent appeal to the “citizens of Athens” and the instant reaction of the temperamental, if not exalted, mass of people were proven methods of psychological influence on the audience. Such techniques of eloquence, as one might think, kept the listeners in suspense, in a state of co-creation, and sometimes like-mindedness, and activated the thinking of those gathered.
As one might assume, Demosthenes' oaths or his calls to God made a great impression on the listeners, especially the ordinary ones.
(to the gods) So, for example, as if interrupting the smooth flow of his own speech, the speaker says: “No, I swear by Zeus” or “I swear by the gods, I will tell you frankly the whole truth and will not hide anything.”*
On rare occasions, Demosthenes did not appeal to the authority of the gods. Appealing to them was a method, as one can narrow down his speech from the texts, of psychological impact on those gathered who worshiped their gods. It was obviously designed for an external effect, to which ancient rhetoric attached considerable importance.
Demosthenes’ speeches are reasoned, clear in presentation, the phrases in them are usually short, filled with pathos and passion. He said: “It is not good when they shout with a great voice, but it is great when they speak well.”*
It is known that speakers of different generations not only of Hellas, but also far beyond its borders, learned from Demosthenes’ speeches, especially in Rome.
Demosthenes, the pinnacle of ancient Greek eloquence, is the sharpest weapon of political struggle and at the same time a phenomenon of high spiritual culture. Without this eloquence, it is impossible to imagine not only oratorical practice, but also the ancient theory of rhetoric developed in those days.
For this theory, what is especially noteworthy in the past is the enormous importance that was attached to the word, capable of affirming both the beautiful and the ugly, both the truth and the lie.
Assessing ancient Greek rhetoric in its practice and theory, we can say that it is a remarkable phenomenon of ancient civilization, especially its civil life. Ancient Greek eloquence, which developed along with other arts, is not only a huge achievement of the spiritual culture of Hellas, but also a primary indicator of its socio-political maturity. His experience and traditions, as well as his theoretical foundations and principles, however, did not remain within the confines of Athens and the ancient Greek city-states in general. Along with achievements in the field of culture, especially philosophy, legal views and aesthetics, ancient Greek rhetoric penetrated into other countries.
The culture of ancient Greece, including achievements in the field of rhetoric, was creatively adopted by Ancient Rome. The heyday of Roman eloquence occurred in the 1st century AD, when the role of the People's Assembly and courts especially increased. During this period, Rome puts forward a large group of brilliant orators led by the great (after Demosthenes) tribune of all times, Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 AD)
It was he who considered Demosthenes to be the head of the best rhetoricians in Greece and called on his contemporaries to learn from him the art of public speech. Honoring Demosthenes, Cicero independently developed the art of oratory, especially the skill of judicial speech, where he, admittedly, significantly surpassed the “teacher.”
Cicero is the greatest ancient Roman orator, politician, and writer. His name even became a household name. Of his rhetorical works, three books are of great importance: “On the Orator,” in which the author shows an ideal, comprehensively educated orator-philosopher,
“Brutus, or On Famous Orators” is a history of eloquence, “The Orator” is a work in which the question of the best style is developed and one’s own ideal is theoretically justified. These are monuments of ancient humanism that had a huge influence on European culture.
What are Cicero's views on oratory? The author complains that eloquence. Among all the sciences and arts, it has only representatives. And this is no coincidence, in his opinion, true eloquence is something that is more difficult than it seems.
“It is necessary to acquire,” he writes, “a wide variety of knowledge, without which fluency in words is meaningless and ridiculous; it is necessary to impart beauty to the speech itself, and not only by selection, but by the arrangement of words; and all the movements of the soul with which nature has endowed the human race must be studied to the finest detail, because all the power and art of eloquence must be manifested in order to either calm or excite listeners.”*
Cicero believed that the basis of oratory is, first of all, a deep knowledge of the subject; if behind the speech there is no deep content, assimilated and known by the speakers, then verbal expression is empty childish chatter.
In all three treatises of Cicero, the question of the relationship between rhetoric and other sciences, in particular philosophy, is constantly raised. And he always steadily comes to the principle of subordinating all sciences to the main oratorical goal. One question divided philosophers and rhetoricians: is rhetoric a science? Philosophers (Socrates, Plato) argue that rhetoric is not a science. Rhetors argued the opposite. Cicero offers a compromise solution: rhetoric is not true, i.e. speculative, science, but it represents a practically useful systematization of oratorical experience.
The responsibilities of the speaker are as follows:
find something to say
put what you found in order
give it verbal form
commit it all to memory
pronounce.
Cicero adhered to the classical scheme established in the ancient world, according to which a five-part division of the rhetorical process was proposed. Rhetorical process -
-ALL THE WAY FROM THOUGHT TO SOUNDING PUBLIC WORD
In addition, the speaker’s task includes:
win over listeners
state the essence of the matter
establish a controversial issue
strengthen your position
refute the enemy's opinion
in conclusion, to give shine to your positions and finally overthrow the position of the enemy.
Cicero demonstrated deep insight into the essence of oratory, creating an oratory theory based on his rich experience. A brilliant theorist, he generalized and comprehended the views of theorists and practitioners of eloquence.
Roman theories or concepts were also developed by Marcus Fabius Quintilian (c. 35-95 AD), a great orator and teacher of rhetoric. He is the author of twelve books of Rhetorical Instructions. Quentilian's work is systematic and strictly thought out. It takes into account all the experience of classical rhetoric and summarizes the relevant experience of a teacher of rhetoric and a trial lawyer. This is the pinnacle of the study of oratory. Neither before nor since there have been works that provide such thorough theoretical and practical analysis of eloquence. Quitilian talks about the upbringing of a future speaker, classes at a rhetoric school, talks about the study of grammar, philosophy, art, law, analyzes exemplary speakers, writers, poets, talks about the system of government, gives recommendations for reading works of art and brilliant speeches.
In his essay, Quintilian poses the question: “What does it mean to be eloquent?” - and answers: this is nothing more than the ability to express in words what we think about and communicate it to listeners. And rhetoric is the science of the ability to speak well and the power to persuade. Therefore, the words must be clear and pure, correspond to our intention, they must be correctly and simply located. But speaking correctly and clearly, according to Quintilian, does not yet mean being an orator. The speaker is distinguished by grace and beauty of speech. However, the decoration must be in accordance with the subject and purpose of the speech, it is necessary to take into account the interests and reaction of the audience (listeners). He refers to the beauty of speech as a living image of things and the recreation of living pictures, passions, because a detailed description is more palpable than a simple message.
The pinnacle of oratory, according to Quintilian, is the ability to speak without preparing, and this requires knowledge and a variety of skills.
111 If for the Greeks the main thing in rhetoric was the art of persuasion, then the Romans valued more the art of speaking well. With the fall of Rome, the development of oratory stopped. The era of the Middle Ages - the era of maracobesia and scholasticism - naturally did not give rise to and could not parody speakers like Demosthenes and Cicero. This era did not require conviction and evidence. Faith in the dogmas of the church, blind admiration for authorities - that’s all that was required of an educated person of that time.
Eloquence becomes the property of theological preachers. A bizarre construction of verbal expressions in the absence of deep content, a connection with life - this is what rhetoric became at this time. The achievements of the oratory art of the ancient world were the basis for the development of eloquence in subsequent periods of history - feudalism and capitalism.
Natural eloquence
Manifestations of natural speaking ability are often found in everyday life. Let's imagine a situation: one person walks along the road, not seeing the danger threatening him, and another, raising his voice, warns him about it. Another example. One person falls into the water, and another raises a cry for those around him to come to the rescue. Examples of natural eloquence can be found in villages, where people communicate loudly and emotionally, almost shouting to each other (“across the street”), or in the market, where everyone communicates something about their product. Such manifestations of eloquence do not require special preparation. The voice in such cases rises naturally, under the influence of feelings and appropriate circumstances.
Oratory
There are situations when a person needs to say something beautifully and convincingly, but the necessary emotions are not present at the moment. This requires special self-management skills, which can be acquired in the process of learning public speaking in public speaking schools or in special trainings. Oratory, as a special form of art, arose in ancient Greece. No other ancient culture - neither Egyptian, nor Akkadian, nor Chinese, nor Indian - pays such close attention to oratory as the Greek, and does not provide high examples of the substantive and stylistic perfection of dialectics and the art of the spoken word. Oratory teaches how to make ordinary speech oratory. The traditions of modern oratory go back to the ancient rhetoric of Ancient Greece and Rome.
Properties of oratory speech
Notes
Literature
- Kornilova E. N. Rhetoric is the art of persuasion. M.: URAO, 1998. - 208 p. - ISBN 5-204-00146-8
- Averky (Taushev). A Guide to Homiletics. - M.: PSTGi, 2001. - 143 p. - ISBN 5-7429-0110-0
- Soper P. L. Fundamentals of the art of speech. - M.: Phoenix, 2006. - 448 p. - ISBN 5-222-07060-3
- Shakhijanyan V.V. Learning to speak publicly
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
Synonyms:- Olympic (football club, Baku)
- African Theater of World War II
See what “Oratory” is in other dictionaries:
ORATORY- (from the word speaker). The art of eloquence, oratory. Dictionary of foreign words included in the Russian language. Chudinov A.N., 1910. ORATORY the art of speaking in public with all the techniques that enhance the impression of words and... ... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language
oratory- eloquence, oratorical talent, gift of speech, gift of speech, eloquence, eloquence Dictionary of Russian synonyms. oratory noun, number of synonyms: 8 gift of speech (6) ... Dictionary of synonyms
Oratory- see Rhetoric. Literary encyclopedia: Dictionary of literary terms: In 2 volumes / Edited by N. Brodsky, A. Lavretsky, E. Lunin, V. Lvov Rogachevsky, M. Rozanov, V. Cheshikhin Vetrinsky. M.; L.: Publishing house L. D. Frenkel, 1925 ... Literary encyclopedia
Oratory- ORATORICAL ART see Rhetoric ... Dictionary of literary terms
Oratory- or the art of eloquence - the ability to speak coherently, logically and artistically in order to attract attention, and at the same time sympathy of listeners to some matter. Even in ancient times, the vocation of an orator was considered to teach, please and touch (dicet,... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron
Art- * Author * Library * Newspaper * Painting * Book * Literature * Fashion * Music * Poetry * Prose * Public * Dance * Theater * Fantasy Art Art is Eve giving the young artist an apple. Who tastes... Consolidated encyclopedia of aphorisms
ART- a form of culture associated with the subject’s ability to be aesthetic. mastering the life world, its reproduction in a figuratively symbolic way. key when relying on creative resources. imagination. Aesthetic attitude to the world is the premise of the artist. activities in... ... Encyclopedia of Cultural Studies
art- Creative artistic activity. Limitless, idealess, sterile, pointless, meaningless, brilliant, combative, eternal, militant, exciting, magical, free (obsolete), lofty, humanistic, humanitarian (obsolete), ... ... Dictionary of epithets
