Standard of intentionality
В общем, я тут пишу все по лекции, НО
это все водааа, наитупейшая лекция, поверьте, тут в общем-то можно сформулировать суть в нескольких предложениях, важно только начало и конец.
Своими словами, о чем собсна это дерьмо:
-термин пришел из философии
-очень долго его не хотели учитывать в лингвистике, потом решили что ну ок, в устной речи в принципе важно, ну а сейчас и в письменной, и в устной речи замысел автора, что у него там вертится в голове, ЗАЧЕМ он это говорит\пишет – это главный вопрос, тут дан миллиард цитат о том, что интеншэнс это важно для понимания и интерпретации текста
-Бывают эти намерения информативными и коммуникативными
-Если со стороны автора это intentions (намерения), то со стороны читателя assumptions (онли предположения) ибо хз что на самом деле у человека в голове
-Намерения автора передаются прямо и косвенно (explicature – implicature), так что учитывать важно не только само выражение, но и контекст
-Intention базируется на желаниях говорящего, но не сводится к ним
-Ну и собсна намерение автора определяет, как именно он строит текст, что использует,все дела, так что (в очередной раз) это ВАааааааааажно блаблабла
Intentionality – a medieval term which appeared in philosophy
It was reintroduced into contemporary sciences by philosopher France Brentanner to refer to the aboutness property of mental state
Intentionality is related to mental property and is considered to be one of the properties
I-y is regarded as one very important characteristics about objects, state of affairs and mental activities
Since then there has been continued debate about the concept: philosophers put forward their own old interpretations while linguists look at it from different point of view
Early 20 c. – Many literary critics argued that author’s intentions place significant constraints on how we should interpret the meaning of any literary text
1940-50s Intentionalism and those who supported it suffered the 1st blow with the rise of criticism and influential doctrine (fallacy)
According to that theory interpretation of text should be freed from historical and biographical influences
Anti-intentionalist theories stated: textual meaning can be determined by conducting close analysis of the meanings IN the text and we don’t need any hidden historical, political, cultural forces that shape the text.
Many scholars maintain that we should ground our interpretation in authorial intentions which is fruitless
From the 1960s – 1990s often philosophers declared their own beliefs in the intentional fallacy (fallacy – софизм; ошибочность; ложный вывод)
Poststructuralists announced the death of writer (=u don’t need to know anything about them)
Later some of them changed their minds
In linguistics ‘Intentionality’ was produced by Baugrand:
“Intentionality subsumes (=means, includes) what text produces (результат, продукт, производство) intend to mean, to achieve; in a wider sense the term designates all the ways in which text produces utilezes this or that text to persue and fulfil their intentions”
For intentionality we should respect the intended implications (through inference)
Recent observation on speech point directly that understanding many aspects of textual meaning crucially depends on recognizing speaker’s \author’s intentions on inferring smth about that person’s communicative intention
We may not necessarily recover the specific intentions though much is guided by the assumptions that the writer\speaker created
Intentionality is the most important aspect when we want to understand and interpret any text
There are 2 kinds of intentions:
1)communicative
2)informative
Much of the evidence from cognitive science states that understanding what an author\speaker means depends critically on inferring smth about this person-s communicative intentions
Gyps argues: it is impossible to ignore fundamental cognitive processes by which people construct their interpretations.
Although intentions seem more at play in face-to-face communication they also shape our interpretation of a written text where the writer is not physically present.
“Recognition of intentionality plays a role in the creation of both intentional and non-intentional meanings.”
“Making assumptions about authorial intentions plays a critical role in the meaningful experience of interpreting written text.”
Locke:
“The function of language is to express preexisting thoughts. Thoughts are correlated with sentences through intentions. So, intentions are glue (клей) by binding the thoughts to words”
American linguist Kate Wales:
If the author’s intentions are not seen to be of critical importance, we still assume that text was consciously intended and is not the product of automatic writing
We also assume that text is written for a particular purpose.
Int-y plays an important role in relevance theory and in speech act theory as well
Here interest is based on the communicative intentions of the speaker and the hearer’s recognition of these intentions
Now some scholars have worked out 4 ways (about intentions?)
- Expression of intentions (I’m going to do)
- Ascription of intentions
- Description of the intentions with which some action is done
- Classification of actions as intended
This outline makes it clear that the concept of intention covers a wide range of mental activities and physical actions
On the author’s part – intentions => on the reader’s part – assumptions
In case of metonymy or irony the idea is implication - > idea is expressed but not explicated
The content of explicature has 2 distinct sources:
the linguistic expression AND the context
It is derived in 2 distinct ways:
1) linguistic decoding
2) pragmatic inference
Implicature is derived purely inferentially
Intentions are psychological states that represent what smn actually plans to do -> based on desires
Some people even think that intention = desire
In reality desires are transformed into intentions before action is taken
Intentions – purposeful mental state representing what a person wants to do
People attribute intentions to other people
Intentions play an important role in the mental processes by which people produce meaningful interpretations of spoken and written language.
The notion of modality
Modality denotes the linguistic means for qualifying any claim\commitment we male in language
The parameters :
probability, obligation, willingness, visuality
May be qualified in terms of their strength and weakness
Modality – the way information is produced
Oral modality for speaking
Visual
(Sign language is a natural language)
From the stylistic perspective Modality means the appearance of certain stylistic connotations (not only stylistic devices, but also a neutral word, or even a preposition repeated several times)