# Can "Eloquence" refer to the written word?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [February 17, 2008, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944 "2008-02-17T01:36:13Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 11\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bienville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@bienville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bienville)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2008, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/1 "2008-02-17T01:36:13Z")

</div>

Hey  
I’m working on a lyric in which a speaker’s style is compared to a writer’s style.

I’m frustrated as that it seems that adjectives that describe speech are generally, by definition, applied to speech- whereas, adjectives that describe writing are generally, by definition, applied to writing.

So far, “eloquence” is the best I can come up with:  
_(Bob being an orator, Sam being a writer)_  
**Bob had an eloquence to rival even Sam.**

[Dictionary.com](http://Dictionary.com)’s first definition of “Eloquence”

> [@](#):
>
> the practice or art of using language with fluency and aptness

So, it seems I’m o.k. using “eloquence” for both speech and writing, however . . .

. . . [Dictionary.com](http://Dictionary.com)’s second definition of “Eloquence”

> [@](#):
>
> eloquent language or discourse

now, “discourse” implies speech.

So, it seems it is _acceptable_ to use “eloquence” to describe writing, but it feels a little off to me. This is the case one way or another for every word I’ve been able to come up with. Looking up synonyms, words that apply perfectly to writing seem “off” when applied to speech, while words that apply perfectly to speech seem “off” when applied to writing.

What say Dopers?  
Can I use the word eloquence for both speech and writing?  
If not, what is the perfect word I am looking for? What is a synonym for eloquence that I can apply to both speech and writing?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Laughing\_Lagomorph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/6bbea6/32.png) [@Laughing\_Lagomorph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Laughing_Lagomorph)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2008, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/2 "2008-02-17T01:40:04Z")

</div>

[QUOTE=bienville]  
…  
If not, what is the perfect word I am looking for? What is a synonym for eloquence that I can apply to both speech and writing?  
[/QUOTE]

Persuasivness?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![maggenpye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecc23a/32.png) [@maggenpye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/maggenpye)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2008, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/3 "2008-02-17T01:50:56Z")

</div>

Perhaps lyricism?

According to my Concise Oxford, it has elements of both song and poetry which would cover your verbal and written elements. But really, I see nothing at all wrong with your usage of eloquence in that situation.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2008, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/4 "2008-02-17T02:48:55Z")

</div>

The OED says:

> [@OED](#):
>
> Primarily of oral utterance, and hence applied to writing that has the characteristics of good oratory.

So writing can clearly be called “eloquent.” Trying to apply it only to spoken word is an overnicety on the level of saying “you can’t orient yourself toward the west.”

And, the word was applied to a novel in one of my favorite critical putdowns:

> [@Damon Knight](#):
>
> “This eloqent novel,” begins the blurb for \<novel name\>, making two errors of fact in three words.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bienville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@bienville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bienville)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2008, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/5 "2008-02-17T03:48:37Z")

</div>

Thanks for the feedback so far.  
Seems like I’m o.k. to use “eloquence”, although further Doper scrutiny is welcome.  
This is one of those _mot just_ things that I sometimes spend days on.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2008, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/6 "2008-02-17T05:46:32Z")

</div>

I have no problem attributing eloquence to the written word. Read the Gettysburg Address; it’s eloquent, whether written or spoken.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bienville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@bienville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bienville)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2008, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/7 "2008-02-17T17:17:07Z")

</div>

I’ll probably end up using it.  
If this post, as a bump, brings out some of the SDMB hard-core logophiles who want to weigh in, I’ll will be happy for the scrutiny and will proceed with more confidence. As it is, however, my confidence level is stronger than when I started the Thread.  
Thanks!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MikeS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MikeS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MikeS)\
**Post date:** [February 17, 2008, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/8 "2008-02-17T17:31:04Z")

</div>

I agree that it’s equally fine to say that a speech or a written tract is “eloquent”, and that it means much the same thing in both cases. What’s not quite clear to me is whether it’s acceptable to describe a _person_ having “eloquence” because of their writing. In other words, if you told me “Jessica is eloquent”, then without further context I’d assume you were referring to her speaking skills; to say that she writes well, you’d have to say “Jessica’s writing is eloquent”.

You know that feeling you get when you repeat a word often enough that it doesn’t seem like a word any more?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![movingfinger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@movingfinger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/movingfinger)\
**Post date:** [February 18, 2008, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/9 "2008-02-18T02:42:10Z")

</div>

I have heard the term “Belletristic” applied to well-crafted writing. I may have mis-spelled it, though.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\
**Post date:** [February 18, 2008, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/10 "2008-02-18T03:03:14Z")

</div>

A Google search on the phrase “eloquent prose” returns over [24,000 hits](http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4DKUS_enUS212US212&q=%22eloquent+prose%22).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![maggenpye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecc23a/32.png) [@maggenpye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/maggenpye)\
**Post date:** [February 18, 2008, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-eloquence-refer-to-the-written-word/437944/11 "2008-02-18T03:26:08Z")

</div>

_Roget’s Thesaurus_, Eloquence - oratory, rhetoric, power, fluency, persuasiveness, volubility.

Fluency might be a good substitute. It has the connotation of expert and eloquent use of language.
