The article deals with a classification of rhetorical figures. This classification views rhetorical figures in a context of their goals. The author believes that classical rhetoric did not aim to give a systematic description of figures. Ancient lists of terms were simple catalogues, similar to modern product catalogues, and for cultivation of a communicative space, this approach was relevant. Classical rhetoric experience can be used today because strictly logical classifications of figures lost their social role in the end of the twentieth century. An adequate approach to the classification of figures depends on speaker's objectives. This article discusses three types of those objectives. The first one deals with hic and nunc . We call it short-term pragmatics. The second one is related to the reputation and image of a speaker. It is continued pragmatics. The third is aimed at the cultivation of a communicative space and we call it long-term pragmatics. Thus, we have three strategies for classifying rhetorical figures that can have both social and academic value. In case of the short-term pragmatics, the main purpose of figures classification is pedagogical. A classification should be simple and memorable. In case of the continued pragmatics, we need to connect figure types with speaker intentions, showing which type contributes to which image. This means that to start with, we need to create a map of intentions that would serve a basis for the classification. In case of the long-terms pragmatics, we need to create open lists of figures like they did in ancient times, and ensure their distribution in the public space outside of the university walls.

rhetoric, classical rhetoric, figures of rhetoric, classification