Sulle ragioni di un dialogo (mancato): retorica e filosofia del linguaggio in Italia

  • Mauro Serra

Abstract

In Italy there is no real dialogue between rhetoric and philosophy of language. Rhetoric is a discipline practiced almost only by philologists and literary scholars. One important reason for this lack of dialogue, I argue, is that in Italy there has not been a reconsideration of sophists’ rhetorical theory. Two main consequences can be derived from that reconsideration: 1) rhetoric was in its origins a philosophy of language, which didn’t consider language autonomously but in close relationship with what is out of language; 2) rhetoric did focus on the agonistic dimension of linguistic practice and therefore did think about the complex relationship between language and violence (power). I take the field of argumentation theory as a good example of what it means to give up to a rhetorical point of view about language.

References

AIKIN, Scott F., TALISSE, Robert B. (2014), Why We Argue (And How We Should). A Guide to Political Disagreement, Routledge, New York-London.

BARNEY, Rachel (forthcoming), «Gorgias: Encomium of Helen», in, SCHLIESSER, Eric (edited by), Ten neglected Classics of Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford-New York.

BARTHES, Roland (1970), «L’ancienne rhétorique. Aide-mémoire», in Communications, 16, 1970, pp. 172-223 (trad. it. La retorica antica, Milano, Bompiani, 1985).

CASSIN, Barbara (1995), L’effet sophistique, Gallimard, Paris.

CIMATTI, Felice (2014), «Dal linguaggio al corpo», in Lo sguardo. Rivista di Filosofia, n.15, (II) pp. 149-164.

D’AGOSTINI, Franca (2010), La verità avvelenata, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino.

DANBLON, Emanuelle (2013), L’homme rhetorique, Cerf, Paris.

FOUCAULT, Michel (1971), L’ordre du discours, Gallimard, Paris (trad. it. L’ordine del discorso, Torino, Einaudi,1972).

FOUCAULT, Michel (2012), Del governo dei viventi. Corso al Collège de France (1979-1980), Feltrinelli, Milano.

FOUCAULT, Michel (2013) Mal fare, dir vero. Funzione della confessione nella giustizia. Corso di Lovanio (1981), Einaudi, Torino.

GAGARIN, Michael (2001), «Did the Sophists Aim to Persuade?», in Rhetorica, 19, 3, pp.275-291.

GAONKAR, Dilip Parameshwar (1990), «Rhetoric and its Double: reflections on the Rhetorical Turn in the Human Sciences», in SIMON, Herbert W. (edited by), The Rhetorical Turn, Chicago University Press, Chicago-London, pp. 341-366.

GENSINI, Stefano (a cura di), (2012), Filosofie della comunicazione, Carocci, Roma.

IACONA, Andrea (2005), L’argomentazione, Einaudi, Torino.

KOCH, Christian (2009), «Choice is not true or false. The domain of rhetorical argumentation», in Argumentation, 23, pp. 61-80.

LO PIPARO, Franco (1998), «Cosa accade quando capiamo una frase. La verità come regola generatrice di senso», in Siculorum Gymnasium, I, 437-454.

LO PIPARO, Franco (2003), Aristotele e il linguaggio. Cosa fa di una lingua una lingua, Laterza, Roma-Bari.

LO PIPARO, Franco (2014), Il professor Gramsci e Wittgestein. Il linguaggio e il potere, Donzelli, Roma.

LORAUX, Nicole, (1997), La cité divisée. L’oubli dans la mémoire d’Athènes, Payot&Rivages, Paris (trad. it. La città divisa, Vicenza, Neri Pozza, 2006).

MARTINICH A. P. & SOSA, David (2001), A Companion to Analytic Philosophy, Blackwell, Oxford.

MERCIER, Hugo, SPERBER, Dan (2011), «Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory», in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34, pp. 57-111.

NOËL, Marie Pierre (2002), «Aristote et le ‘debuts’ de la rhétorique. Recherches sur la Sunagōgē technōn et sa fonction», in CALBOLI MONTEFUSCO, Lucia (edited by), Papers on Rhetoric, IV, Herder, Roma, pp. 223-244.

PIAZZA, Francesca (2006), «Opinione e persuasione nell’animale umano. Osservazioni su Aristotele, De Anima, III, 3, 428a19-24», in Forme di vita, 5, pp. 151-157.

PIAZZA, Francesca (2015), «Retorica vivente. Per un approccio retorico alla filosofia del linguaggio», in RIFL, 9, 1.

RIBEIRO, Henrique J. (2012), «On the Divorce between Philosophy and Argumentation Theory», in Revista Filosófica de Coimbra, 42, pp. 479-498.

SCHIAPPA, Edward (1991), Protagoras and Logos, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia.

SCHIAPPA, Edward (1999), The Beginnings of Rhetorical Theory in Classical Greece, Yale University Press, New Haven & London.

SERRA, Mauro (2012), «Elogio del disaccordo: per una filosofia politica del linguaggio», in RIFL, 6, 3, 121-132.

SERRA, Mauro (2014), «Toward an epistemology of rhetoric. The role of doxa in Gorgias and Aristotle», in CALBOLI MONTEFUSCO, Lucia e CELENTANO, Maria Silvana (edited by), Papers on Rhetoric, XII, Pliniana, Perugia, 2014, 209-220.

SERRA, Mauro (in stampa), «Argomentazioni in conflitto: buona o cattiva retorica?», in Blytiri, 1, 2014.

WILLIAMS, Bernard (1973), Problems of the Self, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

How to Cite
Serra, M. (1) “Sulle ragioni di un dialogo (mancato): retorica e filosofia del linguaggio in Italia”, Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, 9(1). Available at: http://rifl.unical.it/index.php/rifl/article/view/278 (Accessed: 26September2020).

Most read articles by the same author(s)