[lit-ideas] A Princely Implicature
- From: jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:52:52 -0400 (EDT)
Pleonetetic Implicatures
In a recent post, Donal McEvoy refers to my three posts sent yesterday.
One he cares to comment, in "Re: impopper" (a genial witticism on the
Austrian philosopher´s surname, negativised).
About the "veri similis", McEvoy compares it with the two other posts
(the aforementioned "impopper", and the third one, called "test") and
implicates a few thing. Referring to a post entitled "test", McEvoy
writes, via implicature, about my "veri similis".
McEvoy:
"This perhaps merits a reply because of the three posts JLS sent today
it contains, some might say 'by far', the least number of mistakes and
mere fancies. As well as being quite easy to digest, being v short and
to the point. Cheers."
I´m not sure "test" is "to the point". Note that it´s not too clear --
"by far" some might add -- who is testing what.
The implicature is:
"veri similis" contains, in McEvoy´s view, some opinions whom he deems
"mistakes" and illustrating this or that "fancy" (how can a fancy be
mere? Cfr. Torquato Tasso´s "Rinaldo", celebrating this year the
tercentenary).
----
Implicatures are difficult to grasp. Cfr. the speech by Prince Charles
yesterday:
"As a nation this is our opportunity
to thank you [the Queen of England
celebrating her Diamond Jubilee] and
my father [not really celebrating but let
that go] for always being there for us,
for inspiring us with your selfless duty
and service and for making us proud
to be British, proud at a time when I know
how many of our fellow-countrymen are
suffering such hardship and difficulties."
In 1954, Geach (a Cambridge logician) coined "pleonetetic". He notes
that while "every" (as in "Every nice girl loves a sailor") is somewhat
clear between a thetic and a categorial reading (Geach borrows -- but
never returns -- this from Brentano) it is quite a different "animal",
he metaphorises, to utter,
"Most nice girls love a sailor".
Similarly with "many" -- another pleonetetic quantifier in Geach´s view.
Note that what Prince Charles said was NOT:
I know MANY of our fellow-countrymen are suffering [a lot of] hardship
and difficulties.
Rather, he expressed the opinion that he knew
HOW MANY were thus suffering.
The implicature is slightly different --:
"I know how many balls there are in the room"
¨How many?"
"Two".
One may argue that two balls are not THAT many balls -- which is
Geach´s point. The implicature is cancelled:
"I never said there were many balls. I said I knew how many there were".
Mutatis mutandis with the "fellow countrymen [who] are suffering [a
lot of] hardship and difficulties.
The Queen ignored the implicature, and was ever gracious.
God save her.
Oddly, most royal commentators failed to quote from Altham´s "Logic of
Plurarity" in dealing with the afore-mentioned implicatural speech by
the Prince of Wales.
Cheers,
Speranza
-- "Terra Spei et Gloriae, Mater Liberorum"
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] A Princely Implicature - jlsperanza
