Now, I must say that I find it odd that a Wittgenstein scholar would not
know where he died, especially since it was the place where he spent much
of his career. But no matter.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Wittgenstein died in Cambridge on April 29th, 1951, three days after
completing his 62nd year. Many false, and some absurd, legends have sprung
up about him, and some of them have been widely circulated. It is therefore
most desirable that there should be a brief biography of him by an
absolutely trustworthy, competent, and scrupulously accurate person, who
knew him well and admired him and his work, and who has set himself to
ascertaining the available facts.
http://www.roangelo.net/logwitt/broadcd.html
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:27 PM, Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Under "L", in the new Fowler, there is an entry for 'literally', whichit
is, to use a phrase by McEvoy, now 'used to mean': "figuratively".>
Joyce foreshadowed this, borrowing from Irish vernacular, in the opening
line of "The Dead": "Lily was literally run off her feet."
Would say more but have my work cut out for me now: I'd asked (twice)
whether JLS' Christmassy example was drawn from Wodehouse, on the offchance
his answer would be a quicker route to truth than reading all of Wodehouse
to check for myself, but now find it will of course be quicker for me to
read all of Wodehouse. In addition, am having to read all the secondary
literature on Wittgenstein, including in foreign languages I've yet to
learn, to find the source for Robert Paul's claim that he died in Oxford.
On top of that I've given myself a year to find at least one original idea
in Heidegger worth discussing - more pages, and probably learning German -
so I can write a post so brilliant it entices all the recently departed
back to the list.
Dnl
On Tuesday, 28 April 2015, 20:45, "dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <
dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Under "L", in the new Fowler, there is an entry for 'literally', which
it
is, to use a phrase by McEvoy, now 'used to mean': "figuratively".
The Fowler concurs with the Oxford English Dictionary to recognise the
figurative use of "literally" to mean "figuratively".
This is what I call the Quintilian Implicature.
Quintilian noted that while 'figure' is used to mean (to use a phrase
that
McEvoy uses) 'figure of speech', 'literality' IS just another figure, or
'schema', if you must use the Greek.
'literally', fig. figuratively -- The Quintilian paradox.
The Quintilian paradox arises from the phenomenon of implicature
(recognised by Sidonius), and it's a paradox that falls under a more
general
category: if you EXPLICITLY communicate what you are implicating, you
kill the
effect.
The Fowler cautions: "Knowing that your [addressee] may have the
screaming
abdabs (dated British slang for ‘have a fit’) if they [encounter]
"literally" prefacing a metaphor [...] you might want to avoid using it
altogether."
Grice's only example of metaphor is
i. You're the cream in my coffee.
Metaphor, like Irony, is a figure of speech. Grice's example of irony
ii. He is a fine friend (+> He is a scoundrel).
After discussion with Albritton (following the second William James
lecture
at Harvard) Grice notes that
iii. Ironically, he is a fine friend.
is VERY otiose.
Similarly,
iv. Metaphorically, you're the cream in my coffee.
Or more technically,
v. Figuratively, you're the cream in my coffee.
What the Fowler criticises is an exchange like
vi. A: Literally, you're the cream in my coffee.
B: Absolutely.
Cheers,
Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
