Due to copyright restrictions, this file is not available for public download
Click here to request a copy from the OU Author.
|DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link:||https://doi.org/10.1215/03335372-074|
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
Literature has at times been theorized in terms of a message passing from author to reader, and this has often been done by reference to general theories of language use: the work is the vehicle of intentions that are realized (or not) in the reader's responses; the work is a “speech act” that operates on the reader and causes his or her responses. Although this article argues that such theorizations mistake the role of communication in literature, it suggests that they nonetheless reflect prevalent ways of talking about literary texts, which should be investigated as tactically useful techniques employed in discourse between readers (and nonreaders) of those texts. Drawing on the work of a range of thinkers, notably Quentin Skinner and Jerome McGann, this article then proposes an alternative application of the concepts of authorial intention and speech act to the genesis of literary works. This is followed by a study of early contributions to the public controversy over The Satanic Verses, in which Lena Jayyusi's analysis of moral action descriptions is used to draw attention to commentators' ideological attempts to structure this novel as a speech like action carried out by its author Salman Rushdie.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Copyright Holders:||2008 Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics|
|Keywords:||criticism; authors and readers; speech acts; linguistics; Quentin Skinner; Salman Rushdie|
|Academic Unit/School:||Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies (WELS)|
|Interdisciplinary Research Centre:||Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology (CREET)|
|Depositing User:||Daniel Allington|
|Date Deposited:||13 Mar 2009 10:12|
|Last Modified:||06 Mar 2017 20:18|
|Share this page:|