[lit-ideas] Re: "No pun intended" -- whose copyright? -- and different 'implicatures'
- From: "Julie Krueger" <juliereneb@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 22:45:13 -0500
<<There is no pragmatic contradiction involved, as far as I can see. The
speaker
means that at the time of the utterance no pun was intended. If she did
intend
the pun and claimed otherwise, she is a liar, or perhaps a comedian. But why
not extend a principle of charity or cooperation to the speaker and give her
the benefit of the doubt? Imagine what communication would be like if we
didn't
trust others to be speaking the truth most of the time. Similarly, if one
claims to be willing to wager his Volvo .... why not assume - "out of a love
of
mankind" - that he actually has a Volvo.>>
Doesn't that rather depend on whether it is spoken or written? If I am
speaking spontaneously and suddenly realize toward the end of the sentence
that there was a pun in it, I might kind of sheepishly say, 'no pun
intended'. If, however, I write a statement and post the disclaimer "no pun
intended" onto the end of the sentence, in print, where it could otherwise
be erased, crossed through, edited, then it of course carries as certain
disingenuity, I think. In a similar way, I suspect that whether the "no
offense intended" precedes the offending statement or follows it is that on
which its genuineness relies -- "No offense intended, but those cat-eye
glasses are hideous" is merely a so very thin veneer covering one's
backside. However, if I am talking to you and mention that I find the
cat-eye glasses look hideous, and as the final words in that sentence exit
my mouth you happen to pull out of you handbag or pocket a pair of <gasp>
cat-eye glasses, or I suddenly recall that I saw you wearing a pair the
other day, and I say with a bit of an embarrassed wince, "no offense
intended" ....
Julie Krueger
On 10/25/07, Paul Stone <pastone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> JLS:
> > > For Grice (or Griceans), this is a pragmatic contradiction. Because,
> by pointing the
> > > addressee's attention to the pun, it _is_ somehow intended; yet it is
> a
> > > sneaky act of communication.
> >
>
> Yes, and in some cases this kind of construction is underhanded and
> the implicature is insulting. In your case, the utterer is making sure
> that his pun doesn't go un-noticed, in my case (to follow) the speaker
> thinks he's actually sneaking something by me by pointing it out?
>
> I have a friend who likes to preface his 'advice' with "no offence,
> but..."
>
> I hypothesize that he knows what he is about to say has a potential to
> cause offense, but instead of reconstructing his writing/speaking to
> be more diplomatic and less [since he is aware of its potential,
> deliberately] offensive, he just blurts it out. I guess I should
> appreciate him for his candor.
>
> p
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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:
