Towards Non-Spontaneity in Interpretation of Implicature Serving Implicit Characterization: The Case of Subsidiary Trait Precipitation in Arthur C. Doyle’s ‘A Study in Scarlet’

Hammed Mohammadpanah,Samira Hamzehei,Lale Massiha

doi:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.7p.209

Abstract

Although characterisation is a much-aged matter in literature, certain aspects have yet to be explored, such as how fictional characters implicate in their discourse, what takes influence from this, and what comes to pass in the production and interpretation process of the phenomenon. As the contribution is of subtlety, implicata in characters’ discourse have not exclusively been studies in detail as elements of characterisation. Therefore, in view of the cognitive approach leant towards by leading researchers on the subject of characterization such as Jonathan Culpeper, this research relies on Sperber and Wilson’s ‘relevance theory’ to define cognitive procedures into instances of implicata verbally exchanged between fictional characters to determine a) how authors exploit such instances for trait progression of their characters and upholding character discourse credibility, and b) how readers can achieve what Furlong terms a ‘non-spontaneous’ interpretation of such exchanges. To address the stated issue, we conducted a detailed cognitive-effectual analysis on five instances of implicata made by four flat and round characters within Arthur C. Doyle’s ‘A Study in Scarlet’, the results of which yielded a mechanism wherein writers’ making implications and readers’ calculating and interpreting them hinge on both parties making presuppositions on certain topics to ensure certain pragmatic presuppositional effect for readers. A five-stage bottom-up process was also proposed which links character traits to implications conveyed within inter-character discourse, following through which can lead to readers’ achieving maximal relevance on the made implications and a non-spontaneous interpretation of them.

Highlights

That the language of literature is to be treated differently than are other forms of discourse has been under constant debate for many decades
In view of the cognitive approach leant towards by leading researchers on the subject of characterization such as Jonathan Culpeper, this research relies on Sperber and Wilson’s ‘relevance theory’ to define cognitive procedures into instances of implicata verbally exchanged between fictional characters to determine a) how authors exploit such instances for trait progression of their characters and upholding character discourse credibility, and b) how readers can achieve what Furlong terms a ‘non-spontaneous’ interpretation of such exchanges
A reader may choose towards which end and how far s/he moves by considering what each type offers and at what cost. Even though they act as part of a character’s speech and uphold character credibility, implicatures employed by writers of fiction as part of a fictional character’s verbal discourse cannot merely take the exact same treatment as those occurring in spoken language, as spontaneity is not fully expected of and imposed on readers’ interpretation of them

Summary

Introduction

That the language of literature is to be treated differently than are other forms of discourse has been under constant debate for many decades. It would be literally impractical to deny the singularity in the production and interpretation of literary discourse for reasons such as the non-spontaneity involved in the production On the other, it is impractical, perhaps more convincingly so, to resist analyzing literary discourse in the same light as one does the everyday more spontaneously-exchanged discourse, particular to which are the utterances exchanged in the course of everyday conversations held between interlocutors in countless varying contexts. It is impractical, perhaps more convincingly so, to resist analyzing literary discourse in the same light as one does the everyday more spontaneously-exchanged discourse, particular to which are the utterances exchanged in the course of everyday conversations held between interlocutors in countless varying contexts Such conversations are deemed to be the most authentically-originated forms of language. This very presumption alone does well enough to rouse curiosity towards one curiously interesting question seeking what results might issue were the same scope (literature) subjected to a pragmatically-based analysis

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion