Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

scattered through the discourse. Thus in Webster's Bunker Hill address, the narrative is not all given in the second paragraph; after the first climax there are two pages of narrative (p. 78, l. 30—p. 80, 1. 18) that furnish the basis of the address to the survivors. On p. 83, l. 24 begins another section of the narration covering more than three pages, leading up to the address to La Fayette. Indeed, after every one of Webster's climaxes the discourse is resumed on the narrative plane.

But the chief use of the narrative and descriptive. parts of an expository address is to furnish the necessary amplification of the principal ideas of the discourse. Typical means of amplification are necessarily resorted to in every expository discourse. One of these is repetition of an idea in other words. This is especially necessary when the idea is not liked, or is somewhat difficult of apprehension, or, being essential, is to be made emphatic. Instances abound in Washington's Farewell Address. A case in point is the passage on page 43, lines 2 to 18. The idea of respect for the Federal Government is repeated in almost every sentence; and from line 19 to line 34, on page 43, the repetition is made by presenting the contrary of this idea, by dwelling upon the things that mean disrespect for the government.

Another of the means of amplification is enumeration. After declaring that every portion of our country has motives to guard the Union of the whole, Washington enumerates in one paragraph (p. 39, l. 30) the special motives that should act upon the North, the South, the East, and the West. A third means of amplification is the use of example. Washington refers (p. 42, 11. 9 to 20) to the treaty with Spain and to chat with Eng

land as examples of the nation-wide and non-sectional policy of the general government. The relative amount of amplification devoted to different ideas indicates their relative importance.

(4) A fourth element that may enter into the body of an address is proof and refutation. In an argumentative discourse it is naturally the chief element. But it may enter into a discourse of the expository type as an ancillary or subsidiary element. Thus in Washington's Farewell Address the section on “the baneful effects of the spirit of party” (p. 45, 1. 6—p. 46, 1. 23) is clearly argumentative. Party spirit should be repressed in a republic because (a) it means a revengeful despotism of the victorious faction over the defeated faction, (b) the despotism of factions alternately in power leads to intolerable disorders and miseries, (c) and these may incline men finally to seek security by setting up an individual despot, (d) even though it does not go so far as this, it enfeebles the public administration, (e) foments insurrection, and (f) opens the door to foreign interference. This also illustrates the kind of proof called the chain of reasoning from cause to effect.

Another kind of proof is the specific instance. The specific instances of disorder, insurrection, governmental embarrassment, foreign interference supported by domestic faction, were too recent to require mention: they were matters of common knowledge. The appeal to common knowledge or to universal exexperience is often offered in this way as a substitute for specific instances. One form of this appeal is the proverb and the maxim.

Instead of, or in addition to, the specific instances cited or the common knowledge appealed to, reference may be made to the testimony of individuals or to the

authority of books or of experts. It is usually necessary in employing this argument—the argument from authority-to show that the authority quoted is competent to speak to the point in issue, is disinterested and unprejudiced and entirely worthy of confidence. The argument derived from what we know of human nature, which Washington employs repeatedly in the Farewell Address, is a common form of the argument from cause to effect.

The order in which arguments shall be arranged must be determined anew for every address. Each address has its own logic, its own natural order, and the requirements of coherence are supreme. The advice is often given, not to place a weak argument first; but there is really no good place for a weak argument; a weak argument will not knowingly be used at all if a speaker discovers its weakness in time. The subject itself, the form of statement which the proposition takes, will always suggest some logical order for the argument, and this order will in general be the best and the most economical. But this order may be modified to meet the state of mind of the audience. It is well, for instance, to begin with an argument with which people are familiar; rather than with one that has been developed by research. It is well to begin with an argument that can be dealt with briefly, conclusively and simply, rather than with one that requires nicety of distinction and extended reasoning. It is well to close with the argument that the speaker himself values most. But all of these suggestions must give way in favor of logic and coherence.

The work of refutation is as important as the work of affirmation or direct proof. It consists not merely in replying to arguments that have actually been ad

gument, and this suggest some logiesh the propos

naturally sugeroving the ta that has

vanced, but also in considering unspoken objections that naturally suggest themselves. An argument is refuted either by disproving the fact on which it is based, or by disproving the inference that has been drawn from the fact. When the fact is admitted to be true and the inference drawn from it is true in part, and false in part, the refutation is effected by pointing out the distinction as Washington does (p. 46, 11. 9-23) in admitting the advantage of party spirit in a monarchy but denying its advantage in a republic. It does not follow (non sequitur), he says, that because party spirit is useful in Europe, it should be encouraged in America

3. The Conclusion. One purpose of the conclusion is to sum up in brief the whole matter that has been discussed. In an argumentative discourse the summary will often be bare and formal, recalling in order the points argued in the discussion. In an expository discourse the summary will not be made as an exact repetition, but will be presented with some variation and addition. Another purpose of the conclusion is to afford opportunity for a final appeal to the feelings. Here, if anywhere, the audience is prepared to receive such an appeal. The conclusion of Lincoln's First Inaugural (pp. 113-114) is highly persuasive partly on account of the introduction of the prophetic element and the element of faith in the supremacy of man's better impulses. An apt quotation often does this work most effectively. The conclusion should be brief and direct. It should be closely related in thought and spirit to the thought and spirit of the whole discourse.

FAREWELL ADDRESS

GEORGE WASHINGTON FRIENDS AND FELLOW CITIZENS—The period for a new election of a citizen, to administer the executive government of the United States, being not far dis

tant, and the time actually arrived, when your thoughts 5 must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprize

you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being 10 considered among the number of those, out of whom a choice is to be made.

I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured, that this resolution has not been taken

without a strict regard to all the considerations apper15 taining to the relation, which binds a dutiful citizen

to his country; and that, in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your

future interest; no deficiency of grateful respect for 20 your past kindness; but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.

The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me, have

been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion 25 of duty, and to a deference for what appeared to be

your desire. I constantly hoped, that it would have

« ZurückWeiter »