Rhetorical Criticism and Literary Criticism between Convergence and Distinction: Reassessing Theoretical Foundations and Fields of Analysis

Abstract

This study reconsiders the relationship between rhetorical criticism and literary criticism by examining the extent of their convergence and distinction in both theoretical foundations and analytical practice. It investigates the shared principles and methodological differences that shape each discipline's approach to the interpretation and evaluation of literary texts. Using a comparative analytical approach, the study explores their respective theoretical frameworks, evaluative standards, and critical methodologies, while also identifying the principal analytical domains in which they intersect. These include emotion, imagery, imagination, style, context, textual cohesion and coherence, literary borrowing, intertextuality, and organic and thematic unity. The findings reveal that although rhetorical criticism and literary criticism differ in their theoretical premises and critical objectives, they frequently converge in their practical analysis of literary texts and complement one another in uncovering their aesthetic and semantic dimensions. The study concludes that rhetorical criticism should be recognized as an autonomous critical discipline possessing its own conceptual foundations and analytical methods rather than being viewed merely as an auxiliary instrument of literary criticism. It therefore highlights the value of integrating the strengths of both disciplines to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of literary discourse.