Before we anoint Grice as the Giver of the most influential account of
indirect language, we might need to see a Gricean account of metaphor,
irony, allusion, pun and a few other things. Surely not all indirect uses
of language can be lumped under the heading of 'implicature.'
O.K.
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It turns out after deep investigations that the most influential account
of how indirect language works remains that of Grice, & to an even greater
surprise from the unwashed that Grice was an Oxford philosopher.
One never ceases learning new and astonishing truths
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 06 May 2015 05:04
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Grice's Ludicrous Allusion
In a message dated 5/5/2015 4:29:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT [IM WESTEN NICHTS NEUES]>This is where Beckett got his opening line: [(i)] "The sun shone,
having no choice, on the nothing new." [See "Allusion in Joyce and
Beckett -
and
Popper".]
The most influential account of how indirect language works remains that
of Grice, rather than Popper.
Paul Grice, an Oxford philosopher (it may be argued that Popper hated
Oxford) regarded the processing of indirect language as involving two
steps firstly a recognition phase and secondly an inferencing phase.
Essentially interested in the way conversation functions, Grice made
the
crucial
point that many conversational utterances are potentially ambiguous and
only
disambiguated by an agreed understanding (or etiquette) of
conversational
conduct, which he called the Co-operative Principle. This maintains
that,
unless they have good reason to suppose otherwise, addressees will
assume that
utterers are being helpful or co-operative by observing various
conversational maxims (He's making fun of Kant).
Grice formulates these as maxims following under the four Kantian
categories, adding that there might be other as yet unidentified
maxims.
The four categories are Quantity, Quality, Relation and Modus (He is
using an English translation of Kant).
Utterers assume that utterers will normally provide neither too little
nor too much information for their communicative purpose (Quantity),
will be
truthful and will not make statements for which they have no evidence
(Quality), will be relevant (Relation) and will be sufficiently clear
(Manner).
Unlike the other three maxims, the Maxim of Manner refers not to the
content of the utterance but to its form, the manner of expression.
Grice specifies four sub-categories of the Maxim of Manner: avoidance of
obscurity of expression, avoidance of ambiguity, succinctness and
orderliness.
These desiderata enable conversation to be conducted in an economical
manner and dispense with the need for utterers to explicitly exclude
logical
possibilities of interpretation which are not intended by the utterer and
not assumed by the addressee. In order to cope with the problem of how
addressees understand figurative language, Grice introduced the notion
of ‘ 'conversational implicature’, which is determined by context and has
to be
inferred. Grice did not specifically refer to echoic punning allusion,
but
among
the figures of speech he did refer to are metaphor, hyperbole, litotes
and irony. These will tend to be incompatible with one or more Maxims.
According
to Grice, the Co-operative Principle is so robust that when the hearer
perceives discrepancy between the utterance and a maxim, he will look
for clues which might resolve the discrepancy in terms of non-literal
meaning.
Grice thus distinguished two sorts of non-observance of a maxim, ‘
violation ’
versus ‘flouting’.
Violation of a maxim involves unostentatiously departing from it, as for
instance in lying, which would be a violation of the Maxim of Quality.
Flouting a Maxim, on the other hand, involves ostentatiously breaking
with it and
thereby creating a ‘conversational implicature’. Non-literal language
will flout rather than violate one or more maxims.
It can be argued that echoic allusion may be seen as a two-stage
process of conversational implicature, namely allusive reference and
allusive implication, if an additional maxim to those of Grice is
added,
namely a
Maxim
of Repetition: “Avoid repetition of your own or anyone else’s discourse
or any features thereof.” However, it is probably not necessary to
introduce this new maxim since echoic allusion will flout one or more of
Grice’s original maxims
anyway. In particular, apart from flouting the Maxim of Quality
(truthfulness), allusive language, like other forms of figurative
language, is likely to be stylistically marked (flouting of the Maxim
of Manner), and also perhaps apparently unrelated to the topic at hand
(flouting of the Maxim
of
Relation)
Grice suggests the addressee will use the following sources of evidence
in working out the implicature: (1) the conventional meaning of the words
used, together with the identity
of any references involved (2) the Co-operative Principle and its
maxims (3) the context, linguistic and non-linguistic, of the utterance
(4)
other items of background knowledge (5) the fact (or supposed fact)
that
all the relevant items falling under the previous headings are
available to both participants and both participants know or assume
this to be the case. For punning allusion
the basic two stage model may be expanded and adapted as follows into
a
three stage model, with the third stage optional:
(1) recognition (a) parallel processing of the alluding language and
the source (b) holding of the remembered meaning of the source and the
constructed meaning of the alluding language in consciousness (c)
experience
of productive cognitive dissonance (2) inferencing (a) comparison at the
micro-level of the form and meaning differences between the alluding
language and the source in the manner of metaphor topic and vehicle (b)
macro-comparison of the two contexts or scripts (3) appreciation of the
writer
as alluder (optional level of phatic bonding)
The above model departs from Grice’s model in one important respect,
namely that at 1a it allows for parallel processing. In fact, since
Grice’s
contention that figurative meaning is only understood indirectly via
literal meaning has come under heavy attack from various quarters.
Nerlich and Clarke (2001: 5) challenged the Gricean assumption that
communication is necessarily aimed at reducing the potential ambiguities
in words. They argued that activation of apparently irrelevant senses
of
a
word at the referentiallevel has important pragmatic functions in
language generally, especially
in jocular language where the interpersonal, phatic function is
important.
They called this ‘conspicuous’ or ‘purposive’ ambiguity and would want
to counterbalance Grice’s Maxim of Manner (“Be perspicuous”) by a Maxim
of Conspicuity,
which would have two sub-maxims: “Make your conversation as interesting
/
witty / surprising as possible” and “Make your utterance / text as
expressive as possible, but still accessible”
In punning echoic allusions a stored holistic meaning of a piece of
composed language competes in processing with a meaning arrived at by
lexical and
syntactic analysis (top-down versus bottom-up processing). It has been
suggested
that native utterers may have as many as 80,000 fixed
expressions stored in memory, including quotations, proverbs, idioms and
so forth.
In cases where a stored holistic meaning is held in consciousness,
rather
than losing out to
an epistemic meaning before it reaches consciousness, the reader (or
listener) will assume in accordance with the Co-operative Principle,
the principle of effort after meaning that the secondary
meaning is relevant at the pragmatic and affective levels in the manner
of a pun.
The addressee will be alerted to the possibility of an intended
allusion
by experiencing a stumbling block or check in language processing as
the
meaning of the piece of composed language in its original context
intrudes
on
consciousness
alongside a meaning being constructed epistemically.
This is the first stage of recognising a conversational
implicature. There then follows the inferencing stage. The echoic
allusion
works first
by means of metonymy at the recognition stage as the piece of alluding
language triggers a larger text or context of use and then in the manner
of a covert metaphor or simile at the interpretation stage as an
implicit
comparison between the two scripts or texts is perceived. It is a
characteristic
of allusion, however, that the intertextual reference may be missed by
some readers or, even if it is taken, that the implied meaning may not
be understood in exactly the same way by all addressees.
It is legitimate to ask why writers use echoic punning allusions at all.
There are various reasons. As stylistically marked language, echoic
punning
allusions may function first of all to attract reader attention. In this
respect they work according
to the foregrounding principle, which depends on ‘linguistic
deviation’
As an example we can mention an advertisement for cheese which used the
phrase “the smell which launched a thousand
barbecues”.
This alludes to “the face that launched a thousand ships” (Christopher
Marlowe, Dr. Faustus, 1604, Act V, scene 1), where the reference is to
Helen
of Troy. The effect achieved by replacing ‘face’ with ‘cheese’ and ‘
ships’
with ‘barbecues’ is one of grotesque incongruity and nothing more. The
allusion functions solely as an attention catcher. However some
allusions
may also contribute to the meaning of the text in praesentia. For
example, “
The sound and the fury” (The Times, 26.07.1996: 19,
headline) is a verbatim quotation from Macbeth, which functions
firstly to
attract the addressee’s attention by re-using a familiar Shakespearean
phrase. The accompanying article is about the infuriatingly poor
quality
of
the sound track to some
films, and the reader who recalls that the phrase occurs in Macbeth’s
nihilistic expression of despair, “Life’s but a walking shadow ... a
tale / Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, / Signifying nothing”
(Macbeth
Act V, scene v, lines 16–18),
will be prompted to reinterpret the semantics of the quotation to
suit its new context. The phrase may be seen as elliptical for
something like “ the
fury the cinema-goer experiences when confronted with a poor sound
track
”
. The allusion also contributes affective meaning since the implied
comparison with the text in absentia is humorously incongruous. This
example
illustrates the way in which allusions may, on the one hand, ease the
cognitive
processing load for the reader, because the well-known quotation is
quickly
recognised, and, on the other hand, present a cognitive challenge for
the
reader, who has to reinterpret the meaning of the quotation in its new
context. In headline allusions, as in ‘the sound and
fury’ example, this involves reading on. In other cases it may involve
retracing and reflecting. Recognising and interpreting allusions also
involves
a measure of aesthetic pleasure. It is
important for writers to impart aesthetic
pleasure to their readers. This is one way of establishing rapport with
the reader. Not only is stylistic embellishment involved, but, more
importantly, the writer is given the chance to display wit and
linguistic ingenuity. In this way common ground can be established with
the
reader against the background of shared cultural knowledge.
Comic effects of incongruity may function to
achieve phatic bonding
between reader and writer. Humorous allusions may also serve as a
vehicle
for indirect criticism or ridicule by means of grotesque implicit
comparison. Often multiple functions of a given allusion can be
identified, some major and some minor. The weightings of these
different functions may vary
for different addressees according to how fully they understand the
allusion,
as is illustrated bythe following example:
Soufflé and up she rises (Daily Express, 24.2.1996: 38, headline) This
was a headline to an article about baking. It alludes to “Hooray and
up she rises”, the chorus line to the sea-shanty ‘What shall we do with
the drunken sailor?’ By the use of this allusive headline the writer
(1)
attracts the reader’s attention, the main function. The reader also
experiences (2) the pleasure of recognition and the writer has the
chance to (3)
display some wit. However, the borrowed stylistic effects of rhythm
and inverted word order (4) embellish the text in praesentia, the
productive ambiguity of the word ‘rise’ (of pastry versus of a ship) is
exploited so that
(5)
physical economy of expression is assured and the implication is that,
if
you read on, you will learn how to make a successful soufflé (more is
meant
than is said). At the interpersonal, phatic level, (6) there is a touch
of grotesque humour evoked by the juxtaposition of the two contexts. At
the
processing level, (7) initially comprehension is eased by the
recognition
of the familiar refrain, but then the reader is (8) cognitively
challenged
to infer the relevance of the refrain for an article about cooking.
This
will (9) encourage the reader to read on. From the writer’s perspective
the
echoic punning allusion functions to (10) establish common ground with
the
reader (the song is shown ro be part of their mutual stored cultural
knowledge).
Nevertheless, there is also (11) an element of the facetious in “Souffé
and up she rises”. This links the allusion to the genre of corny jokes
involving play with hackneyed quotations to raise a groan response. In
other cases
an allusion may function to (12) debunk a famous quotation from a
revered
source. Famous quotations from Shakespeare (such as “to be or not to
be”
)
are a frequent source for such ‘groan response’ allusions.This
debunking
of famous quotations may also be seen as part of the ‘low’ irreverent
tradition, which also delights in using language to confuse and
confound.
We have focussed on the form and function of punning echoic allusion.
The
form is that of cryptic quotation. Typically, a short phrase from a
well-known source text is incorporated into the text in praesentia,
either verbatim
or, more usually, deliberately manipulated so as to achieve maximum
semantic contrast with the original at the expense of minimal
phonological change
in the manner of a pun. The distance between the contexts of the source
in absentia and the unfolding text in praesentia makes for strong
contrasts
in terms of pragmatic meaning at the sentence level. This in turn
results
in interplay in meaning between the two different meanings in their two
different contexts, so that the secondary allusive
meaning may be taken as a sotto voce gloss or commentary on the primary
meanng. In this way, the allusion may contribute to the meaning of the
unfolding text in important ways.
However, punning echoic allusions also function at the language
processing
level and at the socio-affective level. They both ease processing loads
for readers (and listeners) by providing familiar language chunks while
simultaneously presenting a cognitive challenge to the reader who has to
solve the riddle of the allusion. In this way the responsibility for
meaning construction is transferred to the reader. The writer, for his
or her
part, is challenged to so engineer the allusion that the reader will
both
recognise it and understand it in the way intended. This in turn
requires that the writer
correctly estimate not only the reader’s linguistic, but also his or her
cultural knowledge. It is necessary that reader and writer understand
each
other at each move in the ludic process. In this way allusions also
contribute
to phatic bonding between reader and writer. In this connection, as a
variety
of indirect language, they are an important means of bringing humour,
but also censure, into texts and of expressing certain attitudes
indirectly which it would be inappropriate to express directly.
Cheers,
Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
