Aristotle on the Period (Rhet. 3. 9)

• Published in: Classical quarterly 1982-01, Vol.32 (1), p.89-99
• Main Author: Fowler, R. L.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Antitheses; Aristotelian rhetoric; Aristotelianism; Contradictories; Oratory; Peripateticism; Poetry; Sentences; Terminology
• ISSN: 0009-8388; 1471-6844
• DOI: 10.1017/S0009838800022837

Aristotle (Rhet. 3.9) distinguishes two types of style, the ‘periodic’ or ‘rounded’ (λ⋯ξιςκατεστραμμέη) and the ‘non-periodic’, ‘strung-on’ or ‘continuous’ (λέξιςε;ἰρομένη).* The latter is typical of prose in its young and unsophisticated state, and Aristotle is not much interested in it; his discussion of the periodic style is much longer, with subdivisions being introduced and numerous examples given. His basic definition of the period is not, however, clear, and the point has seen some controversy. There are two possibilities. (1) He defines the period ‘rhythmically’ (as I shall call it). The essential feature of the period is that its beginning and end are marked off by specific metrical rhythms (discussed in the preceding chapter, 3.8, where Aristotle recommends the paean).1 (2) He defines it ‘logically’. The period is a syntactic structure with an inner cohesion produced by the logical, pre-planned arrangement of its parts according to the requirements of the whole.2 The current consensus at least of written opinions is that Aristotle intended the first;3 I believe that the issue can be settled fairly decisively in favour of the second.