Utterer's Trust

---- By J. L. S.
--------- for the GC.

---- THIS WILL BE A FIRST IN A SERIES I hope, in this case it's trust on the part of the utterer that his addressee (who some utterers by default think is clumsy) won't MAKE the right thing. In this particular case, echoing, or strictly quoting from Geary, it's "mak[ing] the right pronoun-antecedent connection[s].

The epitome of the mistrusted (?) utterer, or rather the utterer who thinks his addressee is the most mistrusted one, would be something like as per below -- adapted from Geary's novel, in "Buckley and Co.", this blog.

Geary -- or his 'fictional narrator' -- writes:


Meanwhile, Tom sat down and explained
to JL that he (Tom) had been hired by
someone to track down and return him (JL)
to Oxford for a meeting with someone whom he
(Tom) didn't know. He (Tom) was told to
wait here with JL, and he ((the one whom he (Tom) didn't know))
would meet them (JL and Tom) there
((where they (Tom and JL) were)). Why
had Tom been hired? You (the reader) ask.
Because he (Tom) was not only a security-agent
for the MGM Grand Illusion Casino; he (Tom)
was also an undercover agent for the FBI,
on loan from the NSA. He had joined
the NSA fresh out of college because he
(Tom) wanted to kill people. What better
ruse than national security, he (Tom)
reckoned. JL thought he (Tom) shouldn't
be telling him (JL) this stuff and
covered his (JL's own) ears. This
also reminded JL of a thought
he had once had, namely, that
reading a writer who doesn't trust
his readers to make the right pronoun-antecedent
connections can be very tiresome indeed.

With apologies to Torgeir Fjeld for having replaced his lovely "Phatic" for "Tom" but which is shorter and makes for an easier, I find, recovery of the 'mistrust' problem. In an even more simplified version. I'll now replace JL for "Jerry"


Meanwhile, Tom sat down and explained
to Jerry that he (Tom) had been hired
to track down and return him (JL)
to "The Den". He (Tom) was told to
wait here with Jerry. He (Tom) liked
this sort of things. He (Tom) had
always wanted to kill people. What
better ruse than national security?
he (Tom) reckoned. Jerry thought
he (Tom) shouldn't be telling
him (Jerry) this stuff and covered
his (Jerry's own) ears.

--- Now suppose we just drop the bracketed material, getting:


Tom sat down and explained
to Jerry that he had been hired
to track him down, even if he
had to kill someone in the
proceedings. He had
always wanted to kill people, anyway.
So what gives? he reckoned.
Jerry thought he shouldn't
be telling him this stuff and covered
his ears.

Now Geary seems to be suggesting that the "Ideal" Narrator would find ways to edit the thing to avoid parentheticals. He teaches you just that in

Gr 04
--- M W F Lab Prof. Geary

Syllabus "Grice Studies"

Gr 04. The seminar is intended to examine
"stupid Griceans". "Stupid Griceans" are
Griceans who don't know what they are doing.
They have either forgotten the cooperative
principle or _will_ forget it. The course
is structured in three subunits.

--- Right Pronoun-Antecedent Connection:
Getting It Wrong.

Geary examines the four categories of
Grice's Cooperative Principle as it will
confuse you into start doubting all

--- Sentence Adverbials.

Grice will misuse on purpose from the oevure
of Emily Dickinson her sentence adverbials,
"Honestly, I love you", to see how it clashes
with all that Grice says (on a clear day)

(MIDTERM -- Spring Break -- and Thanks giving --
class cancelled SNOW STORM -- etc.)

-- Lab: "We're having a party"

Subunit III:

"We propose to re-write Grice's cooperative
principle in uncooperative ways. We follow
Grice's charming wit in having 'be clear'
miswritten as 'be perspicuous', and 'be brief'
as "avoid unnecessary prolixity". We also
venture that his two maxims of
informativeness are more informative than
is enough."

"Needless to say..."