ATLAS OF LANGUAGE

AT-HWRH-0004 · ATLAS 260

Rhetoricality

A gradable property and analytical perspective used to examine how strongly, and in what ways, communication is rhetorically organised through audience-oriented selection, arrangement, form, medium and effect.

Part of the subject path Rhetoric and Style

Why is this entry in the Atlas?

A · Analytical concept R1 · Distinct contribution to understanding

Rhetoricality contributes a graded analytic perspective on audience-oriented organisation rather than assuming a binary division between rhetorical and neutral communication. A claim that all reality is rhetorical exceeds the locally operationalised comparative criteria used for analysis.

Colours and admission grounds

The rectangular label identifies the entry function: F – linguistic figure or procedure; A – analytical concept; G – foundational concept; E – selected concrete case. The rounded badge indicates the admission ground: R1 – distinctive contribution; R2 – necessary foundation; R3 – justified illustrative case. This editorial rationale explains the current selection rather than claiming an undocumented original selection history.

Explanation

Rhetoricality shifts attention from “Which figure is present?” to “How, and to what extent, does this representation operate rhetorically?” Analysis may address selection, arrangement, audience design, metaphor, the production of evidence, speaker position and medial staging. A narrow reading treats rhetoricality as an examinable property of concrete procedures. A strong reading claims that language, knowledge or reality is rhetorical through and through. The Atlas keeps both readings visible but admits only explicitly operationalised criteria and comparative formulations into scientific analysis.

Movement of thought

1. A representation is read for its formal decisions as well as its content. 2. Analysis identifies concrete rhetorical procedures and their audiences. 3. It reconstructs the attention, plausibility or scope for action produced by those procedures. 4. Alternative formulations show whether and how strongly the effect depends on form. 5. The claim's range is marked: local procedure, generic feature or general thesis of rhetoricality.

Scientific use case

A study of abstracts can operationalise rhetoricality by coding claim strength, evidential markers, hedges, metaphors and order. Comparison with data and full texts can then distinguish forms that merely compress information from those that shift the asserted degree of certainty.

Example

Two reports describe the same uncertainty. One presents it as a limitation in the opening sentence; the other places it in an appendix and opens with a decisive result. The data remain unchanged, while arrangement and audience design alter perceived certainty.

Counterexample

Not every difference of linguistic form is rhetorically relevant. A claim of rhetoricality must identify audience design, selection, form, situation and an observable or well-grounded reconstructed effect, preferably against a less rhetorically organised alternative. Finding a metaphor in a scientific text proves neither that its result is false nor that science is nothing but rhetoric. “Everything is rhetorical” is not a sufficient analysis.

Distinction

Performativity asks what reality is brought forth, Multimodality how modes interact, Scientific language how disciplines communicate, and Hypertext rhetoric supplies a concrete digital case. Rhetoricality examines their possible persuasive or attention-ordering formation. A blanket star network to all rhetorical figures is expressly rejected. No link is canonical before the gate.

Effect on thought and perception

Rhetoricality makes the formative work of representation visible without reducing its object to mere effect.

Resonance

A finding never reaches an audience without form. Rhetoricality describes how its linguistic and medial body changes the field of possible responses.

Provenance

HWRh, Bd. 8, Artikel Rhetorizität, Sp. 213–220; independent source, terminology and relation review dated 14 September 2026

Cite this entry

Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Rhetoricality“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-HWRH-0004. ATLAS 260, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HWRH-0004

https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HWRH-0004

The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-15. Include your access date for precise references.

Historical background

Kalivoda and Zinsmaier’s account in the 2005 volume identifies Rhetorizität as a newer differentiation within rhetorical terminology, glossing it as a quality of texts. They associate such terms with increasing specialization and interdisciplinary relevance. This documents a modern terminological placement, not an ancient use of the word. The volume’s dedicated chapter on Rhetorizität was not inspected; its detailed treatment of degrees and an independent English genealogy remain open.

How conceptual history changes the analysis

Describe rhetorical organization through address, arrangement and anticipated effects. One ornamental expression does not determine its degree.

References for the historical section

Historical source evidence and Atlas applications remain separate; this import does not assert new first attestations or a fresh exhaustive source verification.