![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank David Beard, Diane Davis, and Bill Keith for their sage advice.
Notes
1. Gilles Deleuze, “He Stuttered,” trans. Constantin V. Boundas, Gilles Deleuze and the Theater of Philosophy, ed. Constantin V. Boundas and Dorthea Olkowski (New York: Routledge, 1994), 27.
2. Deleuze, “He Stuttered,” 24–25.
3. In general, “stuttering” refers to the involuntary repetition of sounds and silences (“blocks”) in speech. We do not mean to refer to the clinical condition.
4. Deleuze, “He Stuttered,” 26.
5. We mean many senses of “face” here, including Erving Goffman, “On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction,” Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes 3 (1955): 213–31. For an account of the “affective turn,” see Jenny Edbauer Rice, “The New ‘New’: Making a Case for Critical Affect Studies,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 94 (2008): 200–12.
6. See Herman Cohen, The History of Speech Communication: The Emergence of a Discipline, 1914–1945 (Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association, 1994); and William M. Keith, Democracy as Discussion: Civic Education and the American Forum Movement (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2007).
7. Gerry Philipsen, “The Early Career Rise of ‘Speech’ in Some Disciplinary Discourse, 1914–1946,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 93 (2007): 352–54.
8. Cohen, History, 14.
9. J. A. Winans, “The Need for Research,” Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking 1 (1915): 17–23.
10. Everett Lee Hunt, “The Scientific Spirit in Public Speaking,” Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking 1 (1915): 185–93.
11. J.P. Ryan, “Terminology: The Department of Speech,” The Quarterly Journal of Speech Education 4 (1918): 1–11.
12. For example, see Smiley Blanton, “The Voice and the Emotions,” Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking 1 (1915): 154–73; and F.H. Lane, “Action and Emotion in Speaking,” The Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking 2 (1916): 221–28.
13. For a good, psychoanalytic account of how this happened in the academy to the social sciences, see Bruce Fink, Lacan to the Letter: Reading Écrits Closely (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004), 141–66.
14. Cohen, The History; Keith, Democracy, 29–30. Delsarte's understanding of “expression” can be traced to Swedenborg's theology. See Genevieve Stebbins, Delsarte System of Expression (New York: Edger S. Werner, 1887), esp. 33–38.
15. For example, see Gilbert Austin, Chironomia, or, A Treatise on Rhetorical Delivery, ed. Mary Margaret Rob and Lester Thonssen (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1966).
16. Hunt, “Scientific,” 192, 185.
17. Elocution was also considered a private practice. Although space prevents discussion, the centuries-long association of speech with the body, the private, the feminine, and affect is at work here. See Joshua Gunn, “Speech is Dead; Long Live Speech,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 94 (2008): 343–64.
18. David Zarefsky, “On Defining the Communication Disipline,” in Toward the 21st Century: The Future of Speech Communication, ed. Julia T. Wood and Richard B. Gregg (Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1995), 106.
19. Jonathan Rowe, “‘Your Response is Your Character’ (Response to Stuttering),” Washington Monthly 20 (December 1988): 18–22.
20. Emmanuel Levinas, “Meaning and Sense,” trans. Simon Critchley and Adriaan Peperzak, in Basic Philosophical Writings, ed. Adriaan Peperzak, Simon Critchley, and Robert Bernasconi (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996), 54.
21. Diane Davis, “Addressing Alterity: Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and the Nonappropriative Relation,” Philosophy and Rhetoric 38 (2005): 191–212.
22. We underscore performance studies as a very important exception.