ABSTRACT
Unless something is known about how a certain set of words was uttered, subsequent analyses of a speech are narrowly qualified. That is, whereas literature may be analyzed from a rhetorical perspective using no more than a nomic text, vivacious speech may not be well represented nomically. Put another way, there is more to speech than language. Speech is language plus prosodic features and the pragmatics of interaction. One very important aspect of spoken language is “speech melody” (Bolinger, 1986; Rush, 1872). Of the “cues” speakers use to manage spoken meaning, speech melody may be most effective (Bolinger, 1986). Speech melody is a term that can be appreciated to entail many if not all features of prosody. Of “prosodic cues,” Gumperz (1982) had much to say:
They carry some of the weight of selecting among a variety of possible interpretations by directing the listener among shades of meaning inherent in the semantic range of the words used; [and]… they tie these key semantic features together into a theme, and mark out a developing line of argument, (p. 104, emphasis added)
Speech melody, otherwise known as intonation, is the musical aspect of speech, formed by variation in vocal pitch, duration, and intensity. Speech melody is akin to the tune of a song, but its intervals are less precise; that is, there is really no such thing as a “note” in speech melody such as we might find in common music notation. However, people produce and expect to hear melodic intervals and intonations that can be perceived as expected-or, in other words, as “permissible” or “impermissible” a la Hadding & Naucler, 1980). This chapter demonstrates some of the means by which a rhetorical analyst can expand the appreciable qualities of speech by illustrating performance details of a news commentary by American broadcaster, Paul Harvey. Harvey is chosen because his style is highly melodic, even quaint, and therefore ideal for demonstration purposes.
