Abstract
In the Institutio Oratoria of Quintilian we find a presentation of a theory of the virtues of eloquence: purity of language (latinitas), clarity (perspicuitas), appropriateness (aptum) and ornament (ornatus). All of them were originated by earlier Greek philosophers Aristotle and Theophrastus. Later this theory was taken on and elaborated by Roman rhetoricians – Cicero and Quintilian. Aristotle in his Rhetoric explicitly identified three of the four virtues (clarity, appropriateness and correctness). Theophrastus created a theory of four virtues of eloquence (correctness, clarity, appropriateness and ornament). His system was adopted by most of others. Dionysius, however, developed the most complex system of virtues. He presented a theory of virtues, which were divided into necessary (purity of language, appropriateness, lucidity and brevity) and accessory ones. The accessory virtues were further subdivided into another three groups. Rhetorica ad Herennium offered a three fold system: elegantia (including both correctness and clarity), compositio (similar to appropriateness) and diginitas (similar to ornament). Basically, in almost all aspects being closer to Cicero (who continues the tradition of Theophrastus), Quintilian is more focused on his theory of eloquence. He discusses the virtues of eloquence very widely and deeply, step by step, drawing a number of examples and including the educational process of an orator. Above all, although the theory of four virtues of Quintilian has been influenced by Ciceron, to some extent in general it does not claim originality and plays a paramount role in modern rhetorics, stylistic and pedagogy.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Most read articles by the same author(s)
-
Genovaitė Dručkutė,
Surrealism in André Breton’s Autobiographical Story “Nadja”
,
Literatūra: Vol. 58 No. 4 (2016): World Literatures
-
Audronė Kudulytė-Kairienė,
The Homeric hymn to Demeter: the allegory of the myth and the tradition of the genre
,
Literatūra: Vol. 50 No. 3 (2008): the Classics
-
Pavel Lavrinec,
“The most prominent and at the same time most harmful”: D. D. Bokhan in Wilno (1921–1923)
,
Literatūra: Vol. 61 No. 2 (2019): Russian Literature
-
Aliona Sofija Ivinskaja,
Balys Sruoga – the first translator of Anna Akhmatova’s poetry
,
Literatūra: Vol. 61 No. 2 (2019): Russian Literature
-
Наталья Ковтун,
Актуальная литература в зеркале манифестов («Мой манифест» В. Распутина, «Учение ЁПС» В. Ерофеева и «Отрицание траура» С. Шаргунова)
,
Literatūra: Vol. 58 No. 2 (2016): Russian Literature
-
Павел Лавринец,
Вильнюс как «другое пространство» в русской литературе
,
Literatūra: Vol. 57 No. 5 (2015): Special Issue
-
Kyoko Koma,
L’univers «Japon» romanesque en tant que scénographie dans Stupeur et Tremblement d’Amélie Nothomb
,
Literatūra: Vol. 51 No. 4 (2009): World Literatures
-
Артем Марченков,
Карла Соливетти,
Физическое, юридическое, значительное лицо в гетеротопии власти (Шинель Гоголя в свете теорий Мишеля Фуко)
,
Literatūra: Vol. 57 No. 5 (2015): Special Issue
-
Deimantė Daugintytė,
Simona Diržinauskaitė,
XVI studentų lituanistų konferencijos „Laimei, Maironis“ apžvalga
,
Literatūra: Vol. 54 No. 1 (2012): Lithuanian Literature
-
Jovita Dikmonienė,
The Roman theatre and Seneca’s tragedies Hercules Furens, Oedipus
,
Literatūra: Vol. 51 No. 3 (2009): the Classics