J writes:
"Hitchens tries a pseudo-philosophy, sort of machiavelli-lite, at times. The Hegemonic Implicature! And that works the other way of course. Speak like a bumpkin--or even a Palin--and who cares what you say."
OK -- so I'm using 'hegemonic implicature'.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I thought you'd like that one.
ReplyDeleteWhy, that conditional embodies Oppression itself.
my point was more about what some of the linguistic dweebs call register, or perhaps discourse analysis than "
-->", or the logic of implication. While I am loathe to approve of any ..PoMo's, at times one notes something like register functioning, certainly in...movies, literature, even political speech, pundits--the default 'Merican register tends to be..Limbaughish.
Anything fancy, or Kelsey Grammerish, CHrissy Hitchens, not to say Noel Coward and they change the channel (or rather, the eloquent Brit tends to be the proverbial effete villain...even semi-eloquent such as Anthony Hopkins). you could I suppose (and various eggheads do) point out..the polysyllabic terms, complexity of syntax, etc. Similar for german, most euro tongues. The zeitung or speech of pubs is not the language of Berlin professors, so forth. As you are aware. But the macro point might be...doesn't Grice sort of suggest something like empirical linguistics of a sort, even comparative syntax, and a need for data, so forth? And other PhilOfLang. people in same boat (say late Wittgenstein) Not to ruin the par-tay
Yes. But Grice liked a polysylable, I would think.
ReplyDelete