The Mistranslation of Rhētorikē: Rereading 462b to 466a of Plato's Gorgias

Abstract

This dissertation presents a close re-reading of Plato’s Gorgias, 462b to 466a. Contrary to popular belief, the ancient Greeks never spoke of “rhetoric (n.).” In the ancient world, rhētorikos (i.e., “rhetoric”) functioned as an “-ic” suffixed adjective. The ancients described things and people as being “rhetoric (adj.)” in the way we call things “rhetorical,” but they had no concept of “rhetoric (n.)” as an object unto itself. Translators often assume that rhētorikē was always a noun like it is today. This habit generally results in only a minor loss of meaning. Yet in one key passage—462b to 466a—this assumption is of paradigm-shifting significance. Generations of scholars have been told that, from 462b to 466a, the character Socrates calls “rhetoric” a knack-based species of flattery. Yet a close reading of the Greek text demonstrates that translators have been misreading Plato’s nuanced use of the word rhētorikē. The dissertation proposes a revised reading of this passage, in alignment with a forgotten historical precedent. The classical world appears to have read a version of the Gorgias rather different from the translations we have today. This study aims to show how this happened and why it matters. The dissertation argues that a crucial instance of Plato’s wordplay has been overlooked from 462b to 466a. Where English translators place the noun “rhetoric (n.)” there is truly wordplay occurring with the substantive use of the adjectival phrase hē rhētorikē (i.e., “the rhetorical”). Implicit to this phrase’s usage within this passage is a dissociation between two nouns which this phrase might imply: hē rhētorikē (technē) vs. hē rhētorikē (empeiria). Or, in English, “rhetorical (art)” vs. “rhetorical (practice).” Far beyond an interesting nuance added to our understanding of the Gorgias, this dissociation between a “rhetorical art” and a “rhetorical practice” allows us to see a consistent rhetorical theory developed between the Gorgias and the Phaedrus where before scholars often imagined a contradiction. The dissertation begins by considering the adjectival origin of the word “rhetoric” through the ancient Greek signifier rhētorikos. From here it presents evidence of the above wordplay and its significance before outlining the survey of readers throughout antiquity who observed this dissociation between hē rhētorikē technē and hē rhētorikē empeiria. The dissertation closes by considering a revised picture of Plato’s place in the rhetorical tradition afforded by this more nuanced reading of 462b to 466a of the Gorgias.