2001 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
Study of the Basic Property of the Literary Fiction
| Project/Area Number |
12610568
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
文学一般(含文学論・比較文学)・西洋古典
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Tohoku University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
MORIMOTO Koichi Tohoku University, Graduate School of Arts and Letters, Associate Professor, 大学院・文学研究科, 助教授 (20182264)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2000 – 2001
|
| Keywords | fiction / Relevance Theory / communication / philosophy of language / ontology / interpretation / narrative / rhetoric |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
This research is not oriented to stylistic features or social characteristics of literary fiction but to questioning what and how it occurs in essence, if a fiction is accepted as a fiction. Here this theme is discussed from three points of view: semantic, cognitivist, and ontological.
With a literary fiction we assume first the discourse resulted from using language which does not mention to reality, and moreover the whole process of action to create and enjoy it Consequently, considerations to characteristics of language use itself are required as the philosophy of language have developed. However, there is no determinant feature in language itself, which sort out fiction from non-fiction. Such a difference corresponds to the attitude to the depicted characters and events in the course of decoding and interpreting the language. Also the maim issue of analysis is to elucidate the semantic features of "fictive stance" (Peter Lamarque and Stein Haugom Olsen) during enjoying the fiction.
But this leads us to inquire about the more general human cognitive competence through which we can have various derivative representations and assumptions from the "non-literal" information. Relevance Theory (Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson) give us a very explicative theoretical frame for this inquiry. Comparing with "metaphor", we can explain the cognitive processing of fictive utterance as a part of the general communicative mechanism of decoding and inference of explicature and implicature.
Inquiry of a fiction is inevitably bound to the ontological problem. Both semantic and cognitive theory "presuppose" the prior discrimination between the fictive and the real But they don't explain what this difference is in nature. By referring to the ontology of Martin Heidegger and reinterpreting the category of "mimesis", we try a modest approach to this essential question.
|
