Question of Jakobson's "Linguistics and Poetics."

[Paul B. Gallagher]

Amanda Ewington wrote:

> Hello SEELANGers,
>
> I have a question for the linguists out there or anyone who knows their
> Jakobson.
>
> I am sitting in on a Semiotics class, taught by a colleague of mine from
> the French department.  When reading Jakobson's "Linguistics and
> Poetics" we had a disagreement over the following passage:
>
> "Language must be investigated in all the variety of its functions.
> Before discussing the poetic function we must define its place among the
> other functions of language. An outline of these functions demands a
> concise survey of the constitutive factors in any speech event, in any
> act of verbal communication. The ADDRESSER sends a MESSAGE to the
> ADDRESSEE. To be operative the message requires a CONTEXT referred to
> (‘referent’ in another, somewhat ambiguous, nomenclature), seizable by
> the addressee, and either verbal or capable of being verbalized; a CODE
> fully, or at least partially, common to the addresser and addressee (or
> in other words, to the encoder and decoder of the message); and,
> finally, a CONTACT, a physical channel and psychological connection
> between the addresser and the addressee, enabling both of them to enter
> and stay in communication."
>
> I thought this passage quite clearly indicated Jakobson's contention
> that ANY speech event must have these six factors (with an explanation,
> later in the essay,  that the emphasis on one particular element in a
> given speech act can make the message, "phatic" or "poetic," etc).  My
> colleague insists that Jakobson is trying to say only that any speech
> act MAY have any of these 6 elements, but need not contain all six.
>
> I am certainly prepared to eat humble pie, but would like some outside
> input on the question.

At first glance, the repetition of "any" in Jakobson's phrase "in any
speech event, in any act of verbal communication" appears decisive, but
then the following sentence restricts the discussion to operative messages.

So presumably an inoperative message can lack one of the following
factors, and this lack would cause the speech act to fail. If it fails,
is it then not a speech act? Or to put it another way, does the
definition of "speech act" require successful communication of some
message or part thereof, or does the effort suffice?

--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher
pbg translations, inc.
"Russian Translations That Read Like Originals"
http://pbg-translations.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------