Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“Katherine Mansfield about Katherine Mansfield”: Rhetorical Analysis of Virginia Woolf’s ‘A Terribly Sensitive Mind’

  • Published:
Neophilologus Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article proposes a rhetorical analysis of “A Terribly Sensitive Mind”, an essay by Virginia Woolf that reviews Katherine Mansfield’s diary and praises her figure after her death. The argumentative nature of Woolf’s essay can be assessed following a rhetorical model of analysis in which I examine (1) the inventive level (inventio), related to the generation of arguments; (2) the dispositive level (dispositio), concerned with a specific arrangement of ideas devised to gain the audience’s adherence; and (3) the elocutive level (elocutio), traditionally associated with the recognition of stylistic features such as rhetorical figures. The interaction among inventive, dispositive, and elocutive elements allows the identification of first-order effects in the form of arguments and rhetorical figures that can come together and result in an interpretation of presence. This form of presence can help to explain why “A Terribly Sensitive Mind” is expressive.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albadalejo, T. (1989). Retórica. Madrid: Editorial Síntesis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arenas-Cruz, M. E. (1997). Hacia una teoría general del ensayo. Construcción del texto ensayístico. Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle (1909). The rhetoric of Aristotle. R. Claverhouse Jebb (Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthes, R. (1982). Investigaciones retóricas I. La antigua retórica. B. Dorriots (Trans.). Barcelona: Ediciones Buenos Aires.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brosnan, L. (1997). Reading Virginia Woolf’s essays and journalism. Breaking the surface of silence. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicero (1949). De inventione. De optimu genere oratorum. Topica. H. M. Hubbell (Trans.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicero (1981). Rhetorica ad herennium. H. Caplan (Trans.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosswhite, J. (2011). Awakening the topoi: Sources of invention in The New Rhetoric’s argument model. In J. T. Cage (Ed.), The promise of reason. Studies in The New Rhetoric (pp. 185–205). Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.

  • Dusinberre, J. (1997). Virginia Woolf’s renaissance: Woman reader or common reader?. IA: IA University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahnestock, J. (1999). Rhetorical figures in science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahnestock, J. (2005). Rhetorical stylistics. Language and Literature, 14(3), 215–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahnestock, J. (2011). ‘No neutral choice’: The art of style. In J. T. Cage (Ed.), The promise of reason. Studies in The New Rhetoric (pp. 29–47). Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.

  • Fernald, A. (2006). Virginia Woolf. Feminism and the reader. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Graff, R., & Winn, W. (2006). Presencing ‘communion’ in Chaïm Perelman’s New Rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 39(1), 45–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graff, R., & Winn, W. (2011). Kenneth Burke’s ‘identification’ and Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca’s ‘communion’: A case of convergent evolution? In J. T. Cage (Ed.), The promise of reason. Studies in The New Rhetoric (pp. 103–133). Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, A. G., & Dearin, R. D. (2003). Chaïm Perelman. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gualtieri, E. (2000a). The impossible art: Virginia Woolf on modern biography. The Cambridge Quarterly, 29(4), 349–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gualtieri, E. (2000b). Virginia Woolf’s essays: Sketching the past. London: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lausberg, H. (1983). Manual de retórica literaria. Tomo I. J. Pérez-Riesgo (Trans.). Madrid: Editorial Gredos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perelman, Ch. (1979). The New Rhetoric and the humanities. Essays on rhetoric and its applications. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Perelman, C. H., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric. A treatise on argumentation. J. Wilkinson and P. Weaver (Trans.). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plantin, C. (2009). A place for figures of speech in argumentation theory. Argumentation, 23(3), 325–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quintilian (1920). Institutio oratoria, Vols I-IV. H. E. Butler (Trans.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reche-Martínez, M. D. (1991). Teón. Hermógenes. Aftonio. Ejercicios de Retórica. Madrid: Editorial Gredos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saloman, R. (2012). Virginia Woolf’s essayism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez-Cuervo, M. E. (2004). La argumentación retórica en los ensayos de Virginia Woolf. Tesis doctoral. Granada: Servicio de publicaciones de la Universidad de Granada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez-Cuervo, M. E. (2007). Elementos del ensayo en Virginia Woolf. Valoración argumentativa. Boletín Millares Carlo, 26, 261–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez-Cuervo, M. E. (2010). ‘Ah, but what is herself? I mean, what is a woman?’: Rhetorical analysis of Virginia Woolf’s feminist essays. ES. Revista de Filología Inglesa, 31, 263–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez-Cuervo, M. E. (2013). ‘But, I ask myself, what is reality? And who are the judges of reality?’: The appearance/reality opposition in Virginia Woolf’s essays. PhiN. Philologie im Netz, 64, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1999). Katherine Mansfield and Virginia Woolf. A public of two. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tindale, C. W. (2004). Rhetorical argumentation. CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vickers, B. (1988). In defence of rhetoric. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolf, V. (1958). Granite and rainbow. London: The Hogarth Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolf, V. (1984). The common reader. First series. In Andrew McNeillie (ed.) NY: Harcourt Brace.

  • Woolf, V. (1992). A woman’s essays. Selected essays. (Vol. 1). R. Bowlby (Ed.), Harmondsworth: Penguin.

  • Woolf, V. (1994). The essays of Virginia Woolf. Volume IV. 1925-1928. A. McNeillie (Ed.), The Hogarth Press: London.

  • Zulick, M. D. (1998). The normative, the proper and the sublime: Notes on the use of figure and emotion in prophetic argument. Argumentation, 12(4), 481–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas, Spain

    Margarita Esther Sánchez Cuervo

Authors
  1. Margarita Esther Sánchez Cuervo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Margarita Esther Sánchez Cuervo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sánchez Cuervo, M.E. “Katherine Mansfield about Katherine Mansfield”: Rhetorical Analysis of Virginia Woolf’s ‘A Terribly Sensitive Mind’. Neophilologus 99, 335–349 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11061-014-9417-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11061-014-9417-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation