Has Frye ignored ethos in ethical criticism?

Influenced by the interpretive attitudes of the Middle Ages and committed to the teachings of New Criticism, Frye, drawing on structuralist methodology, developed innovative ideas for analyzing the structure of a literary work. In his literary poetics, he assumes that the meaning of a literary work consists of elements and components that can be determined by focusing on mode, symbol, archetype, and genre. In such a framework, he considers the components of ethos, mythos, and dianoia as the basic elements that make up meaning. Meanwhile, however, it seems that Ethos has not been adequately addressed. In this essay, we first attempt to answer why ethos seems to be neglected in his ethical critique, which is necessarily based on ethos, through an analysis of the theoretical implications and consequences of what Frye holds. In what follows, along with the methodological explanation of Frye's analysis, we attempt to show how the seemingly neglected ethos reappears in Frye's theoretical framework. In the end, it turns out that ethos is part of Frye's theoretical framework not because of methodological considerations, but because of teleological considerations.