AbstractIndirect discourse presents problems in that it is speech that has been altered from the oral strategy that is deployed in direct discourse. Most particularly, references to actio seem to be irrelevant since indirect discourse is not a constituent of the context to which it refers. It appears, nevertheless, to be placed in context by references to words and gestures which are derived directly from actio. The gestures that reinforce speech arise from a veritable rhetoric of seduction, especially in respect of their theatricality, and vocal characteristics can be sensed even at the level of phrasing in indirect discourse. This too, therefore, is part of the rhetoric of speech.
- © The International Society for the History of Rhetoric