Page 54 - Critical and Cultural Theory

RHETORIC
us how to interpret the sentence, let alone deliver precise meanings.
Rhetorical questions exemplify this state of affairs. A rhetorical
question is commonly defined as a question that does not expect
an answer or for which an answer is more or less obvious. Yet,
strictly speaking, nothing stops us from treating it as though it
were an open question and from giving it an answer. Thus, a
rhetorical question is a good example of the type of sentence that
combines a familiar structure with an ambiguous meaning. By and
large, the context in which a question occurs and its utterer's into-
nation tell us whether it should be taken grammatically or rhetori-
cally. However, these are extra-grammatical factors. Nothing in
the grammatical structure itself indicates beyond doubt how it
should be approached. Consider the following passage:

'Right. Well, if you want to chicken out, Bum, that's your
business. I wouldn't blame you.'
'Sure you would.'
'Okay I would. What's the difference?'
Logically of course that question can be read both rhetori-
cally and grammatically.
The rhetorical reading is 'fuck it'. The grammatical reading is
'the difference between my blaming you and not blaming you is
that on the one hand I will never speak to you again and hold
you in the utmost disdain whilst on the other hand I won't'.

'Fuck it,' Bum said, opting wisely for the rhetorical reading.
(Bostock 1999: 261-2)

Grammar and rhetoric are interlocked at all times. Once this
interlocking is acknowledged, it becomes evident that rhetoric
cannot be marginalized as a perversion of ordinary discourse. It is
generally accepted that grammar plays a crucial part in the opera-
tions of language, by laying down the rules on the basis of which
adequate propositions are formed. The part played by rhetoric is
far less commonly recognized. However, the realization that
grammar inevitably tends to merge with rhetoric makes the latter
no less vital an underpinning of human discourse.

37