what is it called in rhetoric if instead of answering a question i deconstruct how im going to answer it - if that makes sense - not sure if correct use of the word deconstruct

What you’re describing sounds like a rhetorical technique known as metadiscourse. This involves discussing the structure, approach, or strategy of your response rather than directly answering the question. It can serve to clarify your thought process, set expectations, or guide the audience through your reasoning. While “deconstruct” might imply breaking down the question itself, metadiscourse focuses on the commentary about the discourse itself.

so metadiscourse is a rhetorical technique, tell me more

Metadiscourse refers to the elements in communication that help organize, engage, and guide the audience through the text or speech. It doesn’t add new information about the subject matter but rather provides insight into the speaker’s or writer’s intentions, structure, and engagement strategies.

There are two main types of metadiscourse:

Interactive Metadiscourse: Helps organize the content and guide the audience. Examples include transitions (e.g., “firstly,” “on the other hand”), frame markers (e.g., “in conclusion”), and endophoric markers (e.g., “as mentioned earlier”).
Interactional Metadiscourse: Engages the audience and involves them in the discourse. Examples include hedges (e.g., “perhaps,” “might”), boosters (e.g., “clearly,” “indeed”), and engagement markers (e.g., “consider,” “note that”).

Metadiscourse enhances clarity, coherence, and reader or listener engagement, making it a valuable tool in effective communication.

okay so maybe we are nto talking about the same thing. if someone said to me - tell us how to over come fear - and i said there are lots of ways to anser this question, since it likely requires advice i will use the following structure : situation, problem, solution, benefits - then i give answer - then i reflect on how my anser met the framework proposed

Ah, I see what you’re getting at. The technique you’re describing is more about framing and signposting within your response.

Framing: You set up a structure or framework for your answer, which helps the audience understand how you will approach the topic. This is akin to providing a roadmap for your response.
Signposting: You guide the audience through your response by indicating the structure and flow, such as mentioning the “situation, problem, solution, benefits” framework.

Reflecting on how your answer met the proposed framework is a form of self-reflection or meta-commentary, which helps reinforce the structure and effectiveness of your response.

which rhetorical situations benefit from these techniques we are discussing

Framing, signposting, and meta-commentary are particularly beneficial in several rhetorical situations:

Public Speaking: When delivering speeches or presentations, these techniques help maintain audience engagement and ensure clarity, especially in complex or lengthy discussions.
Academic Writing: In essays and research papers, they guide readers through arguments and analyses, enhancing coherence and comprehension.
Persuasive Writing: In marketing or opinion pieces, they help structure arguments logically, making them more convincing.
Instructional Content: In tutorials or educational materials, they provide clear guidance, making it easier for learners to follow and understand the material.
Debates and Discussions: They help articulate positions clearly and respond effectively to counterarguments, ensuring the audience follows the logic and reasoning.

Overall, these techniques enhance clarity, engagement, and persuasiveness across various contexts.

you see im thinking about this method of reflecting on the question itself in addition to answering it as a means of buying time in conversation or other speaking situations - but wondered if certain professionals already know to do it

Yes, reflecting on the question and outlining your response structure can be an effective way to buy time in conversation, and several professionals often use this technique:

Politicians: They frequently use this method to carefully consider their responses and ensure they align with their messaging.
Lawyers: In courtrooms or negotiations, they may outline their argument structure to buy time and ensure clarity.
Educators: Teachers and lecturers often use this technique to organize their thoughts and provide clear, structured explanations.
Consultants: When addressing complex client questions, they may outline their approach to ensure comprehensive and thoughtful responses.
Public Speakers: They use it to maintain audience engagement while organizing their thoughts on the fly.

These professionals leverage this technique to enhance clarity, manage time, and ensure effective communication.

so i havent just made this up - it is an existing thing - relay again to me the techniques we are discussing in laypersons terms

Certainly! Here’s a simplified breakdown of the techniques:

Framing: Before diving into your answer, you outline the structure you’ll use. It’s like giving a roadmap of your response so the listener knows what to expect.
Signposting: As you go through your answer, you use cues or markers to guide the listener through each part. It’s like saying, “First, we’ll talk about this, then that.”
Meta-commentary: After answering, you reflect on how your response fit the structure you outlined. It’s like saying, “Here’s how I addressed each part of the roadmap I mentioned.”

These techniques help you organize your thoughts, buy time, and communicate more clearly and effectively.

okay but bare in mind my rhetorical situation is speaking at a public speaking club… so in a way i am turning a table topic into an educational piece since the anser becomes about using rhetorical templates as well as anser itself. does this also strike you as another technique and are there other comparable situations

Yes, what you’re describing is a technique that blends education with response, effectively turning an impromptu speaking opportunity into a teaching moment. This approach not only addresses the question but also enriches the audience’s understanding of rhetorical strategies.

Comparable situations include:

Workshops and Seminars: Facilitators often use questions as springboards to teach broader concepts or techniques.
Panel Discussions: Experts might use questions to illustrate broader industry insights or methodologies.
Q&A Sessions: Speakers can use audience questions to delve into related topics, providing additional value.
Interviews: Interviewees might use questions to highlight their expertise or share insights beyond the immediate query.

This technique is effective in environments where the audience is open to learning and can appreciate the dual focus on content and method.

i think it will work if the anser comes off well but is a little risky because it requires some ethos. im going to new club and if a i fluff an answer there is a risk they think he is trying to educate but cant perform. ill probably charm my way out of it by admitting bad response before concluding if this happens which may in turn buy ethos.

Your approach is thoughtful and strategic. Acknowledging the risk and having a backup plan shows good preparation. Here are a few tips to help you navigate this:

Confidence and Clarity: Start with confidence, even if you’re trying something new. Clear communication can help establish credibility.
Humor and Humility: If things don’t go as planned, using humor and humility can endear you to the audience. Admitting a misstep with a light-hearted comment can humanize you and build rapport.
Engagement: Involve the audience by asking for their thoughts or feedback. This can shift focus and create a collaborative atmosphere.
Practice: Rehearse your approach to become more comfortable with the technique, reducing the chance of flubbing.

By being prepared and adaptable, you can turn potential challenges into opportunities to connect with your audience.

what does flubbing mean

“Flubbing” means making a mistake or error, especially in speaking or performing. It often refers to stumbling over words, forgetting lines, or delivering a response that doesn’t go as planned. In the context of public speaking, flubbing might involve losing your train of thought or not articulating your ideas as clearly as intended.