View
223
Download
2
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Todd Oakley, English & Cognitive Science
Per Aage Brandt, Modern Languages & Cognitive Science
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland, Ohio
USA
How to Produce a “Fiction”
• Presentation – A present perception resonates as a “remembered present”
How to Produce a “Fiction”
• Presentation – A present perception resonates as a “remembered present”
• What is
How to Produce a “Fiction”
• Presentation – A present perception that resonates as a “remembered present”
• What is• Representation
– An Imaginative variation that creates hypothetical or counterfactual events, states, or processes
How to Produce a “Fiction”
• Presentation – A present perception that resonates as a “remembered present”
of the here-and-now• What is
• Representation– An Imaginative variation that creates a hypothetical or
counterfactual events, states, or processes of the there-and-then• What if?
How to Produce a “Fiction”
• Presentation – A present perception that resonates as a “remembered present”
of the here-and-now• What is
• Representation– An Imaginative variation that creates a hypothetical or
counterfactual events, states, or processes of the there-and-then• What if?
• Meta-Representation:– A fictional representation that projects a there-and-then into the
perceptual here-and-now
How to Produce a “Fiction”
• Presentation – A present perception that resonates as a “remembered present”
of the here-and-now• What is
• Representation– An Imaginative variation that creates a hypothetical or
counterfactual events, states, or processes of the there-and-then• What if?
• Meta-Representation:– A fictional representation that projects a there-and-then into the
perceptual here-and-now• As if
Hypotyposis
• Classical rhetorical theorists call this as if phenomenon: hypotyposis or enargia– Aristotle calls is a tactic of visualization: pro ommatōn poiein, or
“bringing before the eyes”
Hypotyposis
• Classical rhetorical theorists call this as if phenomenon: hypotyposis or enargia– Aristotle calls is a tactic of visualization: pro ommatōn poiein, or
“bringing before the eyes”
• Cognitive Linguists call these “fictive realities”• Fictive motion
– The wainscoting runs along the perimeter of the room
• Fictive action– The French doors open onto a terra cotta patio
• Fictive reference– The kettle is boiling
• Fictive interaction (E Pascual 2002)– We need to avoid creating he-said-she-said-situations
• Among others
Attention & Intersubjectivity
• Claim: meta-representations so defined are necessarily intersubjective.
Intersubjectivity
• Claim: meta-representations so defined are necessarily intersubjective.– Cognizers must (at least) tacitly know how to
represent the conditions of mutual intelligibility and interaction in order to use them in imaginative variation
Intersubjectivity
• Claim: meta-representations so defined are necessarily intersubjective– Cognizer’s must (at least) tacitly know that
how to represent the conditions of mutual intelligibility and interaction in order to use them for imaginative variation
– This fact is captured most strikingly in instances of hypotyposis in discourse, in pictorial representation, and in curatorship
• Fictional representations are staged in time and space
• The scene of fictional representations has a complex attentional and intersubjective structure
Cinematic Model
Cinematic Model
• Fictional representations are staged in time and space
• The scene of fictional representations has a complex attentional and intersubjective structure
• Scenarial integration of fictional representations can be approached by using the cinema as a model
Cinematic Model
• Components of the Model– A screen
• focal area within a bounded site
– A projectionist• presupposed agent doing the screening
Cinematic Model
• Components of the Model– A screen
• focal area within a bounded site
– A projectionist• presupposed agent doing the screening
– An audience• perceives the events on the screen as
representing something beyond the screen
Attention
• One person attends to the “story” the film ‘tells’ through the optical events on the screen. This is called primary (deictic) attention
Attention
• One person attends to the “story” the film ‘tells’ through the optical events on the screen. This is called primary (deictic) attention
• Another person attends to the first person. This is called secondary (refracted) attention
Attention
• One person attends to the “story” the film ‘tells’ through the optical events on the screen. This is called primary (deictic) attention
• A second person attends to the first person. This is called secondary (refracted) attention
• The second person attends to what the first person is attending to. This is called tertiary (harmonic) attention
From Attention to Intention
• The projectionist—the presenter of the fiction—is the agent who intends the audience to attend to the show
From Attention to Intention
• The projectionist—the presenter of the fiction—is the agent who intends the audience to attend to the show– This intentional instance requires the strategic
use of representational resources for interactivity, both of conversation and mentation
Mental Spaces
• These features of the cinematic model can be formally modeled semiotically by a modified version of the Mental Spaces framework developed by Fauconnier & Turner (2002)
Mental Spaces
• We adopt the mode of analysis developed by Line Brandt & Per Aage Brandt (2005), and Line Brandt (2006)
Mental Spaces
• We adopt the mode of analysis developed by Line Brandt & Per Aage Brandt (2005), and Line Brandt (2006)– To review
– Mental spaces are scenes and scenario or facets of scenes and scenarios representing past, present, future, and otherwise imagined events, processes, and states
– Meaning arises when scenes and scenarios are activated and sometimes blended
– Mental space networks are ontologically grounded in a semiotic “base” space
A Famous Example of Fictive Interaction in Discourse
• The Debate With Kant– A philosophy professor leading a seminar on
the philosophy of mind is reported as saying the following:
I claim that reason is a self-developing capacity. Kant disagrees with me on this point. He says it’s innate, but I answer that that’s begging the question, to which he counters, in Critique of Pure Reason, that only innate ideas have power. But I say to that, What about neuronal group selection? And he gives no answer.
– From Fauconnier & Turner (2002: 59-60)
Situation
Setting
Semiotic
Intelligibility Condition
Participants
Philosophy Professor
Students
Persons unbound of time and space, primarily through modes of written communication
A university classroom with tables, chairs, chalkboards, etc.
Situational relevance
Situation
Setting
Semiotic
Presentation space Reference space
Exhibitory Condition
Oral debate as format of teaching
Kant’s philosophical writings on “mind” (as they appear in translation)
Participants
Philosophy Professor
Students
Persons unbound of time and space, primarily through modes of written communication
A university classroom with tables, chairs, chalkboards, etc.
Situational relevance
Situation
Setting
Semiotic
Presentation space Reference space
Exhibitory Condition
Virtual space 1: Fictive debate1st person plural
Virtual space 2:1st person plural with 3rd person viewpoint
Pragmatic implication: Contemporary significance of a fictive debate with Kant
Professor
Oral debate as format of teaching
Kant’s philosophical writings on “mind” (as they appear in translation)
Participants
Philosophy Professor
Students
Persons unbound of time and space, primarily through modes of written communication
A university classroom with tables, chairs, chalkboards, etc.
Kant with Professor
Students witness Kant’s error against the truth of the professor’s views
Situational relevance
Situation
Setting
Semiotic
Presentation space Reference space
Exhibitory Condition
Virtual space 1: Fictional 1st person plural
Easel painting
Artist working with a nude model.
The model posses for the artist.
Representation of a nude woman on canvas
Participants
Rene Magritte
Model Viewer
Expression and content merge; usual objects in very unusual contexts
The viewer is looking through a catalogue of the artist’s work
The artist paints the woman into being
Uses paint, brushes & palette to create a 3D woman
Situational relevance
Situation
Setting
Semiotic
Presentation space Reference space
Exhibitory Condition
Metarepresentation space
Pragmatic implication: Artists do bring there subjects into being!
Easel painting
Artist working with a nude model.
The model posses for the artist.
Representation of a nude woman on canvas
Participants
Rene Magritte
Model Viewer
Expression and content merge
The viewer is looking through a catalogue of the artist’s work
The artist paints the woman into being
Uses paint, brushes & palette to create a 3D woman
The artist knows that the viewer knows this is an impossible state of affairs
Situational relevance
Virtual space 1; Fictional 1st person plural
Henry Clay Frick & Hans Holbein: A Curator’s Conceit
<htttp://www.euroweb.hu/art/h/holbein/hans_y/1528/4more.jpg><htttp://www.euroweb.hu/art/h/holbein/hans_y/15235/*ccromwell.jpg>
Situation
Setting
Semiotic space
Situational relevance
Participants
museum patrons
security guards
Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary
The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others.
Situation
Setting
Semiotic space
Presentation space
Situational relevance
Hans Holbein, the Younger
Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position
Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position
Henry C. Frick =Protagonist
Participants
museum patrons
security guards
Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary
The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others.
Situation
Setting
Grounding
Presentation space Reference space
Situational relevance
Hans Holbein, the Younger
Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position
Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position
Henry C. Frick =Protagonist
Thomas More
(protagonist)
Thomas Cromwell(antagonist)
Political rivals in the Tudor Court of Henry VIII
Participants
museum patrons
security guards
Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary
The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others.
Situation
Setting
Grounding
Presentation space Reference space
Situational relevance
Virtual space 1: 1st person singular experience of a fictive 3rd person viewpoint
Hans Holbein, the Younger
Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position
Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position
Henry C. Frick =Protagonist
Thomas More
(protagonist)
Thomas Cromwell
(antagonist)
Political rivals in the Tudor Court of Henry VIII
Participants
museum patrons
security guards
Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary
The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others.
Situation
Setting
Semiotic Space
Presentation space Reference space
Situational relevance
Virtual space 1: 1st person singular experience of a fictive 3rd person viewpoint
Illocutionary Force: Look at this!
Hans Holbein, the Younger
Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position
Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position
Henry C. Frick =Protagonist
Thomas More
(protagonist)
Thomas Cromwell
(antagonist)
Political rivals in the Tudor Court of Henry VIII
Participants
museum patrons
security guards
Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary
The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others.
Virtual space 2: 1st person plural experience of a fictive 3rd person viewpoint
Situation
Setting
Grounding
Presentation space Reference space
Situational relevance
Virtual space 1: 1st person singular experience of a fictive 3rd person viewpoint
Metarepresentation space: fictive 3rd person omnipotent perspective
Illocutionary Force: Look at this!
Pragmatic implication: Frick was a clever collector
Hans Holbein, the Younger
Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position
Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position
Henry C. Frick =Protagonist
Thomas More
(protagonist)
Thomas Cromwell
(antagonist)
Political rivals in the Tudor Court of Henry VIII
Participants
museum patrons
security guards
Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary
The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others.
Virtual space 2: 1st person plural experience of a fictive 3rd person viewpoint
Discussion
• Reconsider representation and metarepresentation in light of a cognitive semiotic analysis
Discussion
• Various forms of interaction are fundamental to the formation of fictional representations
Discussion
• Shared attention as it relates to intentional meaning needs to be explicitly modeled in these instances
Discussion
• We’ve attempted this by integrating mental spaces theory with a ‘cinematic model’ of attention, for understanding a three step process from presentation to representation to metarepresentation
Discussion
• this model offers a systematic means of accounting for the richly intesubjective nature of fictional interactions and, we think, offers an important addition to mental spaces framework
Recommended