Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:09:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephan Flores <sflores@uidaho.edu>
To: Alli,Clayn,Derek,Jerry,Jim,Iana,Melissa,Mike,Molly,Sean
I may follow up on this message a bit before next Tuesday's class, but I wanted
to repeat and add to what I stated in class today, regarding Thesis Sentence
1, due Tuesday. You may respond through this sentence with a choice of several
options/modes: for example, (1) offer a one-sentence summary of Culler's argument
(2) offer a sentence that responds to Culler with a thesis that could serve
as the basis for a longer argument (3) respond to The Turn of the Screw (early
part of the novella) with some thesis/claim about what you have read thus far
(4) respond as above with Culler to F. de Saussure's chapter (LT 2.2). Some
possible questions, you need not use these as the basis of your response:
On Culler
What enables any particular act or object to have [a cultural] meaning?
How is meaning assigned or determined in relation to rules and to
behavior?
On de Saussure
Is speaking (la parole), as opposed to language (la langue), an individual act,
as Saussure avers?
To what extent does language exist only "by virtue of a sort of contract
signed by members of a community" (76)?
Must language be a "union of meanings[signifieds] and sound-images[signifiers]"
within a system of signs?
Why is "value" an important concept as distinguished from "signification?"
Why don't concepts have positive content?
Enjoy!
Questions/concerns?
Stephan
[Here are your responses/thesis sentences]
Examples, Thesis Sentence 1
One-Sentence Summary of Jonathan Culler's "The Linguistic Foundation":
A sign is an object or event with meaning; meaning, according to the structuralists,
is shunted from an underlying system of relations (much like the distinctions
and conventions shared between people): language (or langue, to use Saussure's
term) is therefore comprehended through a system of interconnections, much like
rules/norms and customs that give a sign shared meaning and function between
members of that culture.
--Mike Smith
In his article "The Linguistic Foundation,"‘ Culler argues that linguistic principles can be rightfully applied to the interpretation of cultural phenomena, because, first, these phenomena function similarly to the linguistic signs, it means they exist within the system of generally accepted rules, and second, similarly to some linguistic phenomena (such as the theory of the langue and parole by Saussure), the deviation of the actual phenomenon from the ideal 'rule' is a potential source for understanding the meaning of this cultural phenomenon. --Iana
The phenomena of cultural meaning, both in terms of texts and social events
and actions which are interpreted in a cultural manner, depends as
much on the linguistical identifications and analysis of the sum parts of the
object being examined as on the sociological background of the events and their
significance on a broader scale. By examing cultural phenomena as an object
comprised of subparts whose functions contribute to the overall identity of
an event or text, linguistical examinations can help to identify, catalog, and
examine the underlying implications of cultural events to a degree impossible
if they are subjected solely to an external study on a socio-political basis.
In essence, studying the "guts" of the event on a linguistic level,
almost like an autopsy, will expose as much information, or at least enhance,
all the information garned from a forensic study of the "crime scene"
- the examination of the sociological aspects of such an experience.--Clayn
[Culler]: Any act or object is able to take on a cultural meaning when it becomes
more
than a set of rules, when it is embraced by a society as a behavior.--Jerry
Culler’s idea of ‘meaning’ cannot always use linguistics to understand other cultural and social phenomena because the ‘meaning’ could possibly derive from something other than institutional conventions; thus the system of constitutional rules is also flawed because we could not derive any cultural meaning from it, hereby understanding that not all culture can be studied from its set of symbolic systems.--Molly
Turn of the Screw's narrator increasingly compromises her legitimacy as an object[ive] observer through hastily made assumptions about the ghosts, her charges, and her relationship/role with each group; this "slight of hand" draws attention to her attempts to control the position/significance of each part of the relational triad.--Sean
Partially because of perceived inadequacies relating to her social status,
the governess in "The Turn of the Screw" overestimates, and
subsequently overstates the importance of her task in caring for the two children,
causing her to make rash judgments and illogical leaps
which serve to discredit her as a reliable narrator.--JiM
James' novella seems very much to be about assumptions and how those assumptions
can lead to misunderstanding, drama, even a completely changed "reality";
thus far, I am not convinced that ghosts truly are appearing, but I am fairly
sure that Mrs. Grose, by playing into the hands of the governess, is supplying,
however unknowingly, just the amount of information that will keep the governess'
imagination going strong--
in fact, it is Mrs. Grose that makes this whole story possible in that if she
wasn't there to confide in, she wouldn't be there to give support to
the governess' claims, and then her claims might not even exist.--Melissa
The governess in The Turn of The Screw appears to identify herself as
the active heroine of her own story, bravely dealing with the
apparitions at Bly; this perception of herself as the active heroine creates
tensions for her character, much as the female viewer of cinema
who identifies with the hero on screen wavers between the psychically allowable
female role and the fantasy of action which leads to an
identification with masculinity.--Alli