Hello all,
I am nearly finished my MA in applied linguistics, but am having
trouble with a few details necessary for my thesis. I am trying to
understand what form thoughts have based on RT. Specifically, I am trying
to match Lakoff's (1993) and Reddy's (1993) idea that not all metaphors are
propositionally based because metaphors are so inherent to our understanding
of life that do not need a propositional counterpart to be understood. I
know that S&W say that not all thoughts can be represented semantically
(contra Katz et al and principle of effability), which may or may agree with
Lakoff. In another place they write: "The search for optimal relevance
leads the speaker to adopt, on different occasions, a more or a less
faithful interpretation of her thoughts. The result in some cases is
literalness, in other metaphor." (p. 237) If I understand it correctly, it
seems that both literalness (propositional statements?) and metaphors are a
function of semantic representation. So again, what is the form of a
thought? I am sorry if my question is elementary, but I am not sure what
the RT position is. Thanks.
Bob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 20:47:18 GMT