The differences between abstract language and concrete language

The Differences between Abstract Language and Concrete Language
As the term suggests, an abstract language refers to a mode of communication in which people exchange ideas or concepts that typically bear no direct physical reference. Concrete language, on the other hand, serves as a medium by which people utter specific tangible details that are well within the five human senses. While abstract language may at times tend to be figurative and appear to challenge intellect in grasping the meanings of words with potential ambiguity, concrete language is often literal and is widely used in reporting or illustrating real stories to depict instances with which human imagination can readily connect. For instance, Wordsworth used in his sonnet ‘ Oh! raise us up, return to us again; And give us manners, virtue, freedom, power’ which meant pleading to John Milton in the hope of restoring qualities and values instead of material wealth. In Sylvia Plath’s poem saying ‘ the desert is white as a blind man’s eye, comfortless as salt; snake and bird doze behind the old masks’ offer a more concrete representation of the main theme though emotions play a major part at some point.
Describe and discuss the orginis of Rhetoric and Persuasion as a specific field of study.
The ‘ Father of Rhetoric’ known as Empedocles was initially opposed by Plato. He became the teacher of Gorgias who later introduced rhetoric to Athens or where many sophists sought wisdom. Sophists like Isocrates became a successful rhetorician and actor along with Protagoras and Aristotle, a student of Plato who taught Alexander the Great and identified the three types of rhetoric which are deliberative, forensic, and epdeictic (Goldblatt). Discovery of substance, structure and composition, recollection of speech, delivery, diction and enumeration were contributed into rhetoric as well by Aristotle while Cicero of the Ancient Rome focused on how to make rhetoric work with intricate style and substance while maintaining appeal in any discourse. Francis Bacon authored books on communication theory and through the 18th century, great men like George Campbell and Richard Whately came up with principles behind the philosophy and elements of rhetoric respectively. After Habermas and several others who preceded him to theorize on communication, substance, logical structure, and even aesthetics in enhancing persuasion for the rhetoric, Stephen Toulmin developed a non-reasoning model out of socially constructed arguments (Goldblatt).
Define and discuss the Toulmin Model of argument, including the major parts of the model.
With Toulmin’s practical argument, the justificatory function of argumentation is signified instead of drawing inferences according to a set of principles through theoretical arguments prior to a claim. For Toulmin, it is better to use justification as a means of reasoning that involves challenging present ideas in order to form or determine new ones. Under this proposition, he considered six elements or major parts of the model namely grounds as evidence and reasoning, warrants as link between grounds and claim, backing or evidence to sustain warrant, degree of certainty or modal qualifications, rebuttals, and claims or the conclusion.
Works Cited
Goldblatt, Noah. “ The History of Rhetoric and Persuasion.” 8 May 2007. http://www. helium. com/items/118866-the-history-of-rhetoric-and-persuasion. 1 May 2011.