In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

St1'ategies of Style and Composition then feel afraid, we cry and then feel sad-not the reverse order? Does Edwards anticipate modem psychology in his emphasis upon nonverbal dimensions of communication? In his attempt to gain heightened impact by moving his listeners sWiftly and strikingly from the experiencing of a negative emotion to that of an affirmative emotion [2:7, 8; 3:10; 4:5]? Do you find that anyone of the speakers comes appreciably closer than the others to modem rhetorical practices in his development of arguments or in his attitudes toward himself as the speaker, toward his listeners, and toward the speaking situation? If not, can you cite specific respects in which one or another speaker-in contrast' to the others-seems to be somewhat more modem [1:3; 2:1; 5:2, 3, 12]? Strategies of Style and Composition A requirement of the Puritan sermon was orality. It had to sound personal and immediately direct. It had to prOvide for instant comprehension. Nothing should be permitted to come between the listener and his contact with the word of God-not the learning of the preacher, not the abstruseness of his style and composition, not the intrusion of his personality, not the adornments of the church or the distractions of the liturgy. Mter you have read aloud representative excerpts from each of the speeches, do you believe the language of Gay is as "communicative" as that of Cbauncy and Edwards [5:8]? Why is this so? Does Edwards maintain quite the same standard of orality in each of his speeches? What differing circumstances might have affected the degree of his orality? A correlative requirement of the Puritan sermon was "plainness" and "painfulness." The speaker should spare himself no pain in the effort to make his speaking so plain that even the "meanest" sort could be instructed. As well as you can, measure each of the speeches against these criteria: the expression of ideas in the simplest manner consistent with aC4 curacy of representation; the concreteness of expression, or the use of particularization and specificity instead of generalization and ahstraction; the exactitude of language or the precise INQUffiY choice of exactly the right word to produce the intended meaning ; the appropriate use of purpose statements, definitions, and connective and transitional words and phrases [1:3; 2:1; 3:4, 8; 4:2; 5:4, 6, 7, 12]. A third correlative requirement of the Puritan sermon was that its language should be appropriate to the office of the preacher, to the listeners, and to the speaking situation. Although this volume has supplied limited resources from which you may draw, estimate the suitability of the style and composition for each of the speeches [5:1]. What evidences do you find that the speakers are concel'Iled about the propriety of their utterance? For example, did each of them make determined efforts to seem appropriately objective, patient, and chadtable-thus conforming to the proper image of a Godly servant? To the extent that it did not interfere with clarity, simplicity , and propriety, the Puritan sermon was expected to be vigorous and impressive. Rhetoricians sometimes suggest that in order for style to be forceful it must possess economy. How would you define "economy" of language? Even after the pruning necessitated by our space limitations, none of our speakers are concise. Does this mean that they are wordy? That their language lacks force? What determines whether style is redundant [1:4, 10; 2:12]? Customarily a lively style is characterized by varied sentences, with short, simple ones pl'edominating . Do you find any significant differences among our speakers as to the length or construction of their sentences [1:5, 8; 5:1, 5, 8J? If so, how do you account for these differences? How do you compare our speakers in their use of vital, specific adjectives and of «exact" nouns which evoke sense imagery in the listeners? In their use of constructions such as similies, metaphors, personification, antithesis, and contrast? In the ol'iginality of their choice of language? In their adjustment of style to fit changing rhetorical needs [1:5, 7, 8; 3:13; 5:1, 3, 5, 8]P Inasmuch as Edwards is perhaps the most sensitive stylist among the Puritans, concentrate especial attention upon the life and freshness of his approach [1:2, 5, 7, 8a. For instance , review his skill in guiding the listeners from the known ...

Share