DIGITAL RHETORIC: SPECIFICS AND PERSPECTIVES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24919/2522-4700.44.3Keywords:
rhetoric, digital rhetoric, digitalization, digital text, online communication.Abstract
Summary. Digitalization of all spheres of human life leads to significant changes in the scientific field, including rhetoric. The emergence of digital rhetoric as a new stage in rhetoric is due to changes caused by the peculiarities of today's communicative processes. The paper considers a number of issues related to the definition of specific features inherent in digital rhetoric and its interaction with the theoretical achievements of other stages in the development of rhetorical science. In addition, the interaction of digital rhetoric with the theoretical achievements of other stages in the development of rhetorical science is studied. To do this, the canons of classical rhetoric (invention, arrangement, style, memory, delivery) are compared with digital rhetoric and additionally considered another section of rhetoric (relaxation) in accordance with the requirements of digital rhetoric. The purpose of the paper is to explore the main features and perspectives of digital rhetoric. Methodological principles. The results of the study were obtained through the use of the following methods: comparative-historical method for considering the concept of «digital text», as well as when comparing the concepts of «live» speech and «digital text»; comparative analysis when considering the comparison of theories of classical and digital rhetoric; as well as methods of analysis and synthesis. Scientific novelty. The author substantiates the imitation of digital rhetoric of the achievements of previous stages in the development of rhetoric (classical rhetoric and neorhetoric) with their improvement in accordance with modern requirements. Conclusions. The concept of «digital text» should be understood as non-fixed and interactive, where the reader can change it and become a writer at the same time. In addition, digital text should be considered in the context of the concept of «spime» (a kind of source of information). The canons of classical rhetoric can also be applied to digital rhetoric by adapting them to the realities of today.
References
1. Етичний кодекс університетської спільноти. Ухвалений на Конференції трудового колективу Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка, протокол № 2 від 27.12.2017 р., 12 с. URL: http://www.univ.kiev.ua/pdfs/official/ethical-code/Ethical-code-of-theuniversity-community.pdf (дата звернення 11.02.2022).
2. Крикун В. Ю. Риторика : навч. посіб. К. : ВПЦ «Київський університет», 2019. 224 с.
3. Пам’ятка норм етичної поведінки для учасників освітнього процесу Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка.
Затверджений Вченою радою Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка, протокол № 5 від 10.11.2021 р., 4 с. URL:
http://senate.univ.kiev.ua/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Памятка-норм-етичної-поведінки-для-учасників-освітнього-процесу-КНУ.pdf (дата звернення 11.02.2022).
4. Цицерон. Об ораторском искусстве : трактаты / Пер. с лат. М. Л. Гаспарова, Ф. А. Петровского. Спб. : Азбука, Азбука-Аттикус, 2021. 496 с.
5. Buchanan R. Declaration by Design: Rhetoric, Argument, and Demonstration in Design Practice. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press. Design Issues.
1985. 2(1), Р. 4–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1511524
6. Eyman D. Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice. MI : University of Michigan Press, 2015. 173 р. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/
dh.13030181.0001.001
7. Eyman D. Looking Back and Looking Forward: Digital Rhetoric as Evolving Field. Enculturation. 2016. Issue 23. URL: http://enculturation.net/
looking-back-and-looking-forward (дата звернення: 27.07.2021).
8. KNU Teach Week – підвищення кваліфікації для викладачів Університету, 2021. URL: http://www.univ.kiev.ua/news/11415 (дата звернення 14.12.2021).
9. Lanham R. The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1993. 302 p.
10. Lanham R. The Implications of Electronic Information for the Sociology of Knowledge. Leonardo. 1994. Vol. 27(2). Рp. 155–163.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1575985
11. Losh E. Defining Digital Rhetoric with 20–20 Hindsight. Digital Rhetoric Collaborative. 2012. URL: https://www.digitalrhetoriccollaborative.
org/2012/06/25/defining-digital-rhetoric-with-20-20-hindsight/ (дата звернення: 28.07.2021).
12. Losh E. Virtualpolitik: An Electronic History of Government Media-Making in a Time of War, Scandal, Disaster, Miscommunication, and Mistakes. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press, 2009. 432 p.
13. Zappen J. P. Digital rhetoric: Toward an integrated theory. Technical Communication Quarterly. 2005. 14(3). pp. 319–325.