Editing Visual rhetoric (section)

== Related studies ==

=== Composition ===
The field of [[composition studies]] has recently returned its attention to visual rhetoric. In an increasingly visual society, proponents of visual rhetoric in composition classes suggest that increased literacy requires writing and visual communication skills. In relation to visual rhetoric, the composition field positions itself, more broadly, into challenging reductive definitions of composing and rhetoric that gravitate toward verbal communication only. Touching upon rhetorical processes/decisions that affect a visual design is a venue for calling composition scholars’ attention of the function that arrangements of images and words play out in writing practices and thus communication, emphasizing the complex relationship between verbal and visual meanings.<ref name=":04"/><ref name=Gatta2013/><ref name=":23"/> Visual communication skills relate to an understanding of the mediated nature of all communication, especially to an awareness of the act of representation.<ref name="Hill2003" /><ref name="George2002" /> Visual rhetoric can be utilized in a composition classroom to assist with writing and rhetoric development.  {{Main|Visual rhetoric and composition}}[[File:Canada Stop sign.svg|thumb|A stop sign is an example of semiotics in everyday life. Drivers understand that the sign means they must stop. Stop signs exist in a larger context of road signs, all with different meanings, designed for traffic safety.]]
[[File:Hanging traffic light sign for Route 55.jpg|alt=Traffic Light|thumb|A traffic light is another example of everyday semiotics that people use on a daily basis, especially on the road. It is a set of automatically operated colored lights, typically red, yellow, and green, for controlling traffic at road junctions and crosswalks. Those who drive understand the meaning of each color without the usage of written words.]]

=== Semiotics ===
Semiotic theory is defined as a theory that seeks to describe the rhetorical significance of sign-making. The central idea of the theory is that a sign does not exist outside of a contextual experience, but it only exists in relation to other signs, objects, and entities. Therefore, the sign belongs to a larger system, and when taken out of context of other signs, is rendered meaningless and uncommunicable. The parts of a semiotic are divided into two parts: the material part of the sign is known as the ''form of expression,'' the meaning of the form of expression is known as ''form of content''.<ref name="Ehses, Lupton" /> In semiotic theory, the expression only has meaningful content when existing in a larger contextual framework.

=== Areas of focus ===
While studying visual objects, rhetorical scholars tend to have three areas of study: nature, function, or evaluation.<ref name=Foss2004/>  Nature encompasses the literal components of the artifact.<ref name=Foss2004/>  This is a primary focus of visual rhetoric because in order to understand the function of an image, it is necessary to understand the substantive and stylistic nature of the artifact itself.<ref name=Foss2004/>  Function holds a somewhat literal definition—it represents the purpose an image serves for an audience.<ref name=Foss2004>{{cite book |last1=Foss |first1=Sonja K |chapter=Framing the Study of Visual Rhetoric: Toward a Transformation of Rhetorical Theory |pages=303–313 |chapter-url=http://people.uncw.edu/atkinsa/496/Framing%20the%20Study%20of%20Visual%20Rhetoric.pdf |doi=10.4324/9781410609977-19 |editor1-last=Hill |editor1-first=Charles A. |editor2-last=Helmers |editor2-first=Marguerite |title=Defining Visual Rhetorics |date=2004 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |doi-broken-date=1 November 2024 |isbn=978-1-4106-0997-7 }}</ref>  The function, or purpose, of an image may be to evoke a certain emotion.<ref name=Foss2004/>  The evaluation of an artifact determines if the image serves its function.