Prior Analytics: Rhetoric, Dialectic, Logic

I've been trying to listen to Prior Analytics while running this week. (Octavius Owen translation.) Overall I find the book almost impossible to follow in audio format. Aristotle focuses so much on the structure of syllogisms that I can't follow his outline without the text in front of me. It's algebra class all over again. I did find the introduction, where Aristotle distinguishes between dialectic and syllogism, particularly this brief statement: "the dialectic proposition is to him who inquires an interrogation of contradiction, but to him who syllogizes, an assumption of what is seen and probable."

There are several interesting distinctions in this statement:

First, dialectic is a different genre of discourse from syllogism; in other words, dialectic and logic were not not synonymous for Aristotle, as they are often seen today.

Second, dialectic is a negative discourse, whereas syllogism is positive. One "interrogates contradiction." The other makes a statement that might then be interrogated. (Note that this is a different concept from Peirce's, who argues that logic cannot create new knowledge but only test knowledge.)

Third, syllogisms deal with the "probable," something that is seen in On Rhetoric as the province of rhetoric, not logic.

Overall, the introduction to Prior Analytics provides interesting insight into what Aristotle might have meant when he wrote that rhetoric was the "antistrophos" of dialectic. In much of the writing concerning the relationship between rhetoric and philosophy, this passage is seen as a defense of rhetoric as the counterpart of logic, that the two are intertwined. If that is the case, however, how do we account for this passage, where dialectic is seen as distinct from logic, or indeed, the title of this work, where logic is discussed as though syllogisms are the building blocks for effective rhetoric?