I understand that 'implicature' now has a rival, 'impliciture,' a term
introduced by one Kent Bach. How do you stand with implicitures ?
Impliciture:
o Not implic-a-ture:
In implicature, one communicates two separate and conceptually
independent propositions.
The first proposition is explicitly stated, while the second is implicated
by the first.
Implicatures are external to the original proposition.
E.g., “It’s after 10 o’clock” implicates “The restaurant is closed.”
o Implic-i-ture:
In impliciture, only one proposition is communicated, though implicitly.
What is said is
completed or expanded into a full and explicit proposition.
-The completed or expanded proposition is the impliciture. They are
implicit in and built
from what is said.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Redacted sender Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx for
DMARC <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
