[lit-ideas] Paltrow's Implicatures
- From: "" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "Jlsperanza" for DMARC)
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 20:07:19 -0400
Bring me my chariot of fire
In a message dated 10/25/2015 5:41:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx quotes from R. P.:
"what's offered here as something from 'Perry's hymn,' are in fact the
beginning of Blake's 'Jerusalem,' other lines from which provided the title
of a well-known British film about running."
and comments:
Surprised [Speranza] didn't challenge [R. P.] on this, but it was in fact
a well-known British film about [Griceian] implicature. The screenwriter,
Colin Welland, proved the point with his "The British are coming" acceptance
speech at the Oscars, one of the most implicatural of all such speeches
(despite fierce competition over the years, for example, Paltrow's massive
implicature that there was no one in the whole wide world whom she didn't
wish to tearfully thank)."
Was it a massive implicature, or a, as Geary prefers, "a succession of
tiny little implicatures"?
For the record, below, the speeches in question.
Why does Geary prefer, 'a succession of little tiny implicatures'?
Paltrow uttered: "I would like to thank the Academy from the bottom of my
heart."
Glosses by Geary (adapted), "as opposed to 'fom the heart of my bottom').
Paltrow continues implicating:
"I would like to thank Emily Watson, and Fernanda Montenegro, and my friend
Cate Blanchett, and the greatest one who ever was, Meryl Streep."
Harold Bloom was disagree. For Harold Bloom (Stirling Professor Harold
Bloom if you must), Whitman is the greatest one who ever was", on some account.
(Note incidentally, that both Meryl Streep and Harold Bloom are
Yale-related).
Geary: "Paltrow's calling Streep 'greatest' disimplicates she is 'big'.".
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"I don't feel very deserving of this in your presence."
Geary: "She implicates that in her absence she does." "Which implicates
rather rudely."
Paltrow continues implicating:
"But I would like to thank Harvey Weinstein and everybody at Miramax Films
for their undying support of me."
Geary: "This is a 'but' implicature -- as in Grice, "She was poor BUT she
was honest". Different than [sic] 'And did those feet...?' type of
implicature."
"By 'everybody at Miramax' she doesn't implicate the janitor," Geary
comments. ("There's possibly more than one janitor anyways [sic]").
""Undying support" disimplicates," Geary notes, ""dying support"" -- "what
the Brits call the 'ultimate sacrifice.'"
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"I would like to -- I wouldn't be in this auditorium, let alone up here, if
it wasn't for two incredibly talented men."
Geary: "By uttering 'I would like to...'" she means, THANK, but changes her
'mind', on the spot." "This is common with Griceians, as Paltrow is."
Paltrow goes on:
"Our director John Madden, thank you so much for all that you gave me. You
are so inspiring. And to my soulful partner, Joseph Fiennes, who I share
this with. I wouldn't be here without him."
Geary: "The implicature here is delicate: because Paltrow wouldn't be there
without Paltrow Senior, her father --; the fact that she doesn't implicate
her father possibly refers to his role of a father figure for her. I like
to use father figure literally."
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"I would like to thank the rest of our miraculous cast and crew. Our
producers Donna Gigliotti and David Parfitt -- I didn't forget you this time!"
Geary: "She doesn't implicate the philosopher Parfit, author of "Persons
and Reasons." Odd that."
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"Especially Jim Magill and Sophie Shand and my friend Ben Affleck. I would
like to thank my wonderful agent Rick Kurtzman who is a beautiful man and a
wonderful agent and in his case that is not an oxymoron."
Geary: "By using 'ox-ymoron', Paltrow implicates she is Oxford-educated,
which can be cancelled."
This needs an equation:
i. My wonderful agent Rick Kurtzman who is a ... wonderful agent.
For Quine, an 'oxymoron', or tautology.
This is the philocophical bit of Paltrow's speech -- as when Kripke notes
that we get into the 'seas of language' when analysing oxymorons like that.
Kripke: "Socrates was called 'Socrates'".
By oxymoron, Paltrow implicates tautology? No.
What she means is that the conjunction:
ii. p & q
may be regarded as in terms of logical form
iii. p & ~p
She is implicating that you cannot be a beautiful man and a wonderful
agent. This is not an oxymoron if that man and agent is Rick Kurtzman.
This part of her speech was written, incidentally, by Rick Kurtzman!
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"I would like to thank Harold Brown, Stuart Gelwarg, and Stephen Huvane. I
would not have been able to play this role had I not understood love of a
tremendous magnitude, and for that I thank my family. My mother Blythe
Danner, who I love more than anything, and my brother Jake Paltrow, who is
just
the dearest person in the whole world."
"To love one's mother more than anything," Geary explicates, "implicates a
lot." "In this case it obviously implicates that she loves Jake Paltrow
LESS than Blythe Danner -- but since she only IMPLICATES this, this is polite,
and not rude."
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"My earthly guardian angel, Mary Wigmore. And especially to my father Bruce
Paltrow, who has surmounted insurmountable obstacles this year."
Geary asks: "Is that an oxymoron?"
No. Because 'insurmontable' is a 'modal' term, and as such,
'insurmountable' xs can surely BE surmounted.
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"I love you more than anything in the world."
Geary: "She just said that about her mother. So this is Paltrow's third
oxymoron."
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"And to my grandpa Buster, who almost made it here tonight, but couldn't
quite get here."
Geary: "Paltrow does not seem to realise that 'almost' ALL-READY implicates
the negation of what follows, so she really needs to _EXPLICATE_, via
explicature, that her grandpa didn't QUITE get her." ""Quite" is one of
Paltrow's Britishisms -- her colloquial turns of phrase that Juliet, in
Shakespeare's play, would use."
Paltrow goes on implicating:
"Grandpa, I want you to know that you have created a beautiful family who
loves you and loves each other more than anything, and we thank you for
that."
Geary: "This is the third time she uses the comparative, 'love ... more
than anything'. 'Anything' is difficult to formalise, so I should leave that
to Kripke."
Paltrow concludes implicating:
"I would like to dedicate this to two young men who lost their lives very
early. Harrison Kravis and my cousin Keith Paltrow. We miss you very much."
Geary: "This is no joke of an implicature."
Paltrow concludes implicating hyperbolically:
"And I thank you. Thank you so much, everybody!"
Geary: "Paltrow's 'everybody' can be taken quantificationally --
substitutionally -- as Quine would have it: each member of the class of human
beings, past, present and future. This poses the philosophical question not so
much about thanking a past body, but a future one. The fact that Paltrow
merely IMPLICATES she has the answer shows her star quality. I love her!"
Cheers,
Speranza
(a) PALTROW. I would like to thank the Academy from the bottom of my heart.
I would like to thank Emily Watson, and Fernanda Montenegro, and my friend
Cate Blanchett, and the greatest one who ever was, Meryl Streep. I don't
feel very deserving of this in your presence. But I would like to thank
Harvey Weinstein and everybody at Miramax Films for their undying support of
me. I would like to -- I wouldn't be in this auditorium, let alone up here,
if it wasn't for two incredibly talented men. Our director John Madden,
thank you so much for all that you gave me. You are so inspiring. And to my
soulful partner, Joseph Fiennes, who I share this with. I wouldn't be here
without him. I would like to thank the rest of our miraculous cast and crew.
Our producers Donna Gigliotti and David Parfitt -- I didn't forget you this
time! Especially Jim Magill and Sophie Shand and my friend Ben Affleck. I
would like to thank my wonderful agent Rick Kurtzman who is a beautiful man
and a wonderful agent and in his case that is not an oxymoron. I would like
to thank Harold Brown, Stuart Gelwarg*, and Stephen Huvane. I would not
have been able to play this role had I not understood love of a tremendous
magnitude, and for that I thank my family. My mother Blythe Danner, who I
love more than anything, and my brother Jake Paltrow, who is just the dearest
person in the whole world. My earthly guardian angel, Mary Wigmore*. And
especially to my father Bruce Paltrow, who has surmounted insurmountable
obstacles this year. I love you more than anything in the world. And to my
grandpa Buster, who almost made it here tonight, but couldn't quite get here.
Grandpa, I want you to know that you have created a beautiful family who
loves you and loves each other more than anything, and we thank you for that.
I would like to dedicate this to two young men who lost their lives very
early. Harrison Kravis and my cousin Keith Paltrow. We miss you very much.
And I thank you. Thank you so much, everybody!
(b) CHARIOT OF FIRE: What you've done for the British film industry! I'd
just like to thank David Puttnam for having the wisdom to ask me to write it
in the first place; Hugh Hudson for respecting me and my script, which is a
very hard thing to find in our business as you know; all the actors for
getting fit enough to appear like Olympic athletes; and to British
television, where I learned my craft. I'd like to finish with a word of
warning: You
may have started something. The British are coming.
------------------------------------------------------------------
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] Paltrow's Implicatures
