"Going upstairs"

--- by JLS
------ for the GC

WE ARE CONSIDERING various Gricean analyses for Geo. Carlin's three-liner:

"My grandfather would say: "I'm going upstairs to [delete expetive] your grandmother': He was an honest man and wouldn't bullshit a four year old"

---

Part of the problem, on top, is

"your grandmother".

This is perhaps not an altogether 'apt' description. The term "apt" I borrow (but won't return) J. O. Urmson, "Criteria of intensionality". I LOVE Urmson. In that essay, for the Aristotelian Society, which people won't quote because Grice has monopolised stuff, Urmson (writing in 1968) writes of things like the choice of the right 'conversational dossier' (to use Grice's term in "Vacuous Names", 1969).

---- "Your husband just delivered the mail"

Why did you say 'your husband'. He is the postman. "Yes but he IS your hubby, no?". Adapted from Urmson (should revise HIS example).

His point is that the choice of the right descript is 'directed' by some sort of principle which he calls "Principle of Apositeness", I think. Or "Aptness".

----

I would think that 'your grandmother' may trade on this. Note that out of the blue (in "The General Theory of Context", Grice does suggest that we forget about context, to think clearly philosphically on things):

"I'm going upstairs to (make love to) your grandmother".

seems to provoke some sort of 'disturbing' effect in that he is not saying, "my wife".

He is bringing the four-year old's mother of his father or mother. Since, as D. Spender notes, 'fuck' is like "RAPE", I can get the feeling.

Spender notes that 'fuck' is TOO active a verb. And nobody likes to be raped or to witness a rape or to hear about a rape. So, the grandfather is PROVOKING the child: "I'm raping the mother of your mother". Or something.

----

An honest boy would perhaps be provoked to such an extent that he may go, "You're NOT doing such filth." Or something.

Or not.