Readings by Bitzer, Vatz, Morey, and Edbauer-Rice

Looking at the measured values ​​of Bitzer, Vatz, Morey, Edbauer-Rice, you can see that they are related to each other. First of all, in Bitzer, it is said that "situation affects rhetoric" and "rhetoric situation must exist as a condition necessary for rhetorical discourse" (Bizeur 5). But when he saw Watts, he opposed, "Rhetoric will influence the situation" (Vatz 159 ????) and "The meaning is not found in the context, but created by rheme Basically, Vatz is not "Realistic reflection" (Vatz 158) but "Transformers should be responsible for what they choose" (Vatz 158) and Audience I will tell it.

Wats' allegations about Bizzer's position show that they oppose the rhetorical situation premise and objective reasons, which in turn leads to rhetoric words of their own in a "rhetorical situation" That means that. It was created. In a sense, watts can be seen as rhetoric, at least from the influence of postmodernism, because he can rely on modernism assumption, that is to rely on observable and agreed ones. Truth But Watts - like just BITZER - shows a dual and causal relationship between rhetoric and context, ScottSénini in his article "Rhetoric and Its Context". On the last few pages, one of the conditions for recognizing questions and asking questions. a). Finally, the direct response from Well to Zell itself shows the subject's dramatic privilege, BITZER, that contains this knowledge.

Another answer to Bitzer and Vatz came from Scott Consigny. Consigny believes that Bitzer's theory provides appropriate expertise in rhetorical context but "misinterpret the situation as decision and decision", and Watts' theory gives rhetoric a correct character, but rhetoric Do not explain the ability correctly. The marginal Consigny found that rhetoric which conforms to these two conditions should be interpreted as a common place theme or art. After accepting the rhetoric of classical rhetoric, he interprets the subject as tools and context for rhetoric, enabling rhetoric to participate creative in this situation. As a challenge to Bitzer and Vatz, Consigny claims that Bitzer has a one-dimensional theory by treating the subject as a tool, Vatz incorrectly states that rhetoricists mistakenly create problems by ignoring the subject as circumstances I will forgive you.

In 1973, Richard E. Vatz made an important reaction to Zell 's theory. Wat believes that rhetoric defines the situation. Since the context of events and the selection of events can be described forever, persuasionors have to choose which events to use as part of their agenda. People select specific events without selecting other events and determine their relative value or importance. This creates some sort of existence or importance. Mr. Vatz says Chaim Perelman says: "By choosing certain elements and presenting them to the audience, they are implicitly included in the importance and relevance of the discussion ... ...."