http://lal.sagepub.com/

Language and Literature

http://lal.sagepub.com/content/5/3/157

The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/096394709600500301

1996 5: 157

Language and Literature

Adrian Pilkington

Introduction: relevance theory and literary style

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Poetics and Linguistics Association

can be found at:

Language and Literature

Additional services and information for

http://lal.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Email Alerts:

http://lal.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Reprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Permissions:

http://lal.sagepub.com/content/5/3/157.refs.html

Citations:

What is This?

- Jan 1, 1996

Version of Record

>>

by guest on July 5, 2012

lal.sagepub.com

Downloaded from

ARTICLE

Introduction: relevance

theory

and

literary

style

1

Adrian

Pilkington,

Royal Holloway

University

of

London,

UK

Relevance

theory

is

a

theory

of

verbal

communication

grounded

in

a

theory

of

cognition

and,

as

such,

has

influenced

and

contributed

to

research in

a

number of

related

disciplines,

most

notably

linguistics,

psychology

and

philosophy. 2

It also

offers

a

new

theoretical

perspective

on

the

study

of rhetoric and

style,

a

perspective

that

should

encourage

new

lines of research for those

working

at

the

’interface*

of

language

studies and

literary

criticism.

In this introduction I wish

to

suggest

some

ways in which relevance

theory

may

contribute

to

a

better

understanding

of

literary style,

and,

more

particularly,

to

the

understanding

of

poetic

effects.

Before I do that

I

will make

a

few

general

remarks about relevance

theory

as a

pragmatic theory.

It

should be

recognised

that the

account

I

offer here is very

simplified

and

incomplete.

Clark,

in

this

issue,

provides

his

own

brief summary and

more

comprehensive

accounts

of the

theory

are

given

by

works cited in

the

reference.

3

Relevance

theory rejects

both code models of verbal communication and

purely

inferential

accounts.

Utterance

interpretation,

it is

claimed,

involves

two

distinct

phases.

A

context-independent decoding phase yields

semantic

representations

which

provide

a

schematic but

radically incomplete

representation

of the

thoughts

that

are

communicated.

An

inferential

phase

brings

non-linguistic

contextual

information

to

bear upon the

output

of

decoding

to

arrive

at

the

fully-fledged thoughts

that

are

communicated. This inferential

phase

involves

fleshing

out

the semantic

representation

by

resolving ambiguities,

assigning

reference and

enriching

the

content

of

concepts

that contribute

to

the

proposition expressed.

It

also determines the addresser’s attitude

to

the

proposition

expressed

and

leads

to

the derivation of

implicatures.

In

this view

thoughts

are

considerably

richer in

meaning

than the

meanings

of the

linguistic

expressions

that

are

used

to

communicate them.

A

pragmatic theory

has

to

explain

how

context, in the form of

particular

concepts

and contextual

assumptions,

is

accessed

or

constructed,

before it

can

play a

role in

inferencing.

It

should be noted that for relevance

theory

context

construction

is

a

dynamic

part

of

utterance

interpretation:

context

is

not

static

and

pre-given,

as

it is in earlier

code

model

accounts.

The

concepts

that

contribute

to

the

thoughts

communicated

are

also

addresses

at

which

lexical,

logical

and

encyclopaedic

information

are

stored. The

encyclopaedic

entry

attached

to

a

conceptual

address

contains

assumptions carrying

information

about the extension of the

concept

and

culturally

shared information

relating

to

the

concept.

These

assumptions

become available for

use as

contextual

assumptions

in the

inferencing

stage

of

utterance

interpretation,

together

with

assumptions

constructed

on

the

basis

of

perceptual information

derived from the

physical

environment. In the

case

of

literary

communication

they, together

with

by guest on July 5, 2012

lal.sagepub.com

Downloaded from

158

assumptions

derived

from earlier

parts

of

the text,

are

the

exclusive

source

of

contextual

assumptions.

Utterance

interpretation

is

guided

by

the

search

for

an

interpretation

that is

consistent

with the

principle

of

relevance.

According

to

the

principle

of

relevance every

utterance

carries the

presumption

that its

interpretation

will

provide

a

satisfactory

range of contextual effects for

no

unjustifiable processing

effort.4

Contextual effects

are

achieved

when

new

information interacts with

a

context

of

existing assumptions

in

one

of three ways:

by causing

a

relatively

weakly

held

existing

assumption

to

be

strengthened,

by

contradicting

and

eliminating

an

existing

assumption,

or

by combining

with

an

existing assumption

to

yield

a

contextual

implication.

In the latter

case

the

contextual

assumption

is

a

logical

implication

that is derivable neither from the

new

information

alone,

nor

from

the

context

alone,

but from the

new

information

and

the

context

combined.

New

information

is relevant when it achieves contextual effects in that

context;

its relevance

is

relatively

greater,

the

greater

the contextual effects. The

other

factor

affecting

relevance is the

processing

effort

required

to

decode

an

utterance,

to

access

context

and

to

compute

contextual

effects

in that

context.

In

this

case

the smaller the

processing

effort involved in

interpretation

the

greater

the

relevance.

According

to

this view

one

of the

main

factors

guiding interpretation

is

the

relative

accessibility

of

assumptions:

the

more

accessible

they

are

the easier

they

are

to

process.

The addresser in

fashioning

his

or

her

utterance

takes

into

account

what he

or

she considers

to

be the

concepts

and

assumptions

that

are

most

accessible

to

the addressee. The addressee follows

a

route

of least effort in

using

the

most

accessible

concepts

and

assumptions

until

a

range of contextual

effects

that

the addresser

could

rationally

have

intended is derived. Context is

extended until

such effects

are

achieved.

These

effects

then

constitute

the

interpretation.

An

addresser

might

achieve

particular stylistic

effects

by creating

special

kinds

of

processing

difficulties

for

the addressee. He

or

she

might,

for

example,

encourage the construction of

a

certain context,

which,

once

constructed,

has

to

be

rejected

and

replaced

with

another. Such is the

case

with

jokes,

or

with

humorous

utterances

more

generally.

(See

Jodlowiec

1991 and

Curc6

1995 for

more

detailed

accounts.)

The

pragmatic garden-pathing

involved here is linked

to

a

special

kind of

physiological

response,

culminating

perhaps

in

laughter,

and

to

a

special

kind of

qualitative

response

or

experience -

what it

feels like for

something

to

be

funny.

An addresser may

cause

the addressee

to

engage in

a

more

extensive search

through

context

than is

normally

the

case.

Metaphorical

utterances

typically

communicate

a

range of

assumptions

simultaneously.~ This

set

of

assumptions

constitutes

a

complex thought

that

the addresser wishes

to

communicate.

The

contextual

assumptions

used

to

interpret

a

standard

or

conventional

metaphor

are

relatively easily

accessible. Because the

addressee

is

fairly

confident that the

by guest on July 5, 2012

lal.sagepub.com

Downloaded from

159

implicatures

these

give

rise

to

are

intended

by

the addresser

they

are

said

to

be

strongly

communicated. Even

so,

it is

usually

not

possible

to

find

adequate

paraphrases

for

such

metaphors

in

terms

of

a

list

of

what

might

be

taken

as

implicatures.

The

metaphor

seems to

lose

some

of

its

expressive

power in the

paraphrase.

This

suggests

that

a

further range of

implicatures

are

more

weakly

communicated.

Where

the addressee is

reasonably

certain that the addresser

wishes

to

communicate

a

certain

implicature,

then it is

said

to

be

a

strong

implicolllre.

Where the

addressee is

given

some

encouragement

to

explore

context

further,

but is less certain

as

to

whether the addresser wishes

to

communicate

the

resulting implicatures,

then these

are

said

to

be wean

iniplicatitres.

The notion of weak

implicature,

developed

within

relevance

theory,

is

crucially important

for

explaining

poetic

effects. Poetic

metaphors,

for

example,

are

characterised in

terms

of

the communication of

a

wide array of

weak

implicatures.

This notion of weak

implicature helps

to

explain

the

indeterminacy

of

poetic

effects

(the

problem

of

saying exactly

what range of

implicatures

are

communicated).

It also

helps

to

explain why

poetic

metaphors

and

other

sources

of

poetic

effects

are

difficult,

if

not

impossible,

to

translate.

As

in

the

case

for

humour,

in the

communication

of

poetic

effects

a

special

kind of

pragmatic

processing

is

encouraged,

in

this

case

involving

a

wide-ranging

search

through

the

encyclopaedic

entries of certain

concepts

for

assumptions

that

might

be used

in

the

interpretation

process. This kind

of

pragmatic

processing might

similarly

be linked

to

a

special

kind of

physiological

response, and

to

a

special

kind

of

qualitative

response

or

experience -

an

aesthetic response

or

experience.

It

should

be noted that

stylistic

effects,

as

described

here,

refer

to

assumptions

communicated

(in

various combinations and

with

varying

degrees

of

strength).

In

terms

used

by

Leech

and

Short

(1981,

Chapter

1),

stylistic

choices

are,

in this

view,

choices

of

matter

or

content

rather

than choices of

manner or

expression.

The

assumptions

communicated

also affect the reader in

specific

ways. A

certain

kind

of

pragmatic processing

is

encouraged,

leading

to

a

certain

kind of

qualitative

response.

This is because the addresser has

a

certain

kind of

complex

thought,

linked

to

certain

qualitative

properties,

that

he

or

she

wishes

to

communicate.

It

should

also be noted that

no

special literary reading strategies,

conventions

or

maxims

are

needed

to

explain

how

poetic

effects

are

communicated,

or

how

literary

communication

works

more

generally.

There

is the

same

on-line

search

for

intepretations

consistent with the

principle

of relevance. What

distinguishes

poetic

effects

is that

extra

processing

effort is

required

because

of

the

lack

of

readily

accessible contextual

assumptions

that

might

lead

to

a

range of

satisfactory

contextual

effects. A

more

extensive

search

through

context

is

encouraged.

Where

addressees find

such

context

rich

enough,

the

extra

processing

effort is

compensated

for

by

a

wider range of contextual effects

than

would

normally

be the

case.

Addressees may find

contexts

rich in different

ways,

of

course,

or

they

may

not

find them rich

at

all.

by guest on July 5, 2012

lal.sagepub.com

Downloaded from

160

Poets

(and

novelists and

playwrights)

may

spend

a

considerable

amount

of

time

making

sure

that the

right

words

are

placed

in the

right

order.

They

take

this trouble because the

thoughts

that

they

wish

to

communicate

are

extremely

rich and subtle.

Only by adopting

a

theoretical

approach

of the kind that

relevance

theory

offers,

concentrating

on

thoughts

as

complex

sets

of

assumptions

of

varying degrees

of

strength

and

weakness,

interacting

dynamically

on-line with other

sets

of

assumptions,

can

justice

be done

to

the

complexity

of the

thoughts

that may be communicated. As I have

argued

elsewhere

(Pilkington

1992)

the notion of literariness

might

more

satisfactorily

be defined in

terms

of mental

representations

and mental processes, of the

specific

kind described

here,

than in

terms

of the

linguistic

properties

of

texts.

Linguistic foregrounding

does

not

necessarily,

of

itself,

lead

to

poetic

effects.

This

special

issue of

Language

and Literature

is

devoted

to

articles

which

explore

the

implications

of relevance

theory

for the

study

of rhetoric and

literary

style.

In the

case

of rhetoric relevance

theory

has

reanalysed

tropes

and offered

new

accounts

of how

they

are

interpreted

in

the

light

of

the

more

general theory

of communication and in

a

way that is consistent with

current

psycholinguistic

research. This

reanalysis rejects

the Gricean view that

tropes

deviate from

a

literal

norm.6

Relevance

theory

uses a

number

of

new

concepts

to

explain

them,

most

importantly

the notions of

irrterpretative

use

and,

in

the

case

of

irony,

echoic

rrse.

These

concepts

are

explained

and

illustrated in the articles that follow.

Papafragou

and Vicente tackle theoretical issues

relating

to

metonymy

and

metaphor

respectively. They

are

both

concerned

with

a

cognitive

explanation

of

how these

tropes

are

interpreted. Papafragou

shows

that

there

is

a

stylistic

continuum from conventional

through

to

creative

uses

of

metonymy.

She

develops

an

account

of creative

uses

of

metonymy

using

the

notion of

interpretive

use.

She also discusses the process of semanticisation that

metonymy

may

undergo.

In

particular

this article raises

interesting

theoretical issues

for the

field of lexical semantics and for the notion of

interpretative

use

within

relevance

theory.

One incidental feature of

Papafragou’s

article,

which I would like

to

draw

attention

to

here,

is her criticism of Lakoff and Johnson’s

(1980)

account

of

metonymy.

Lakoff and associates

are

mainly

famous for their

account

of

metaphor.

Lakoff and Turner

(1989),

in

particular,

is

a

key

text

that has been

extremely

influential for research into

poetic metaphor.

Given the influence of

Lakoff’s

work,

it is

important

to

point

out

the differences between the

two

approaches,

as

Papafragou

does

(indicating problems

that the Lakoff

account

has

in

explaining

some

of the

data),

and

to

develop

a

debate between the

two

accounts.

One of the main differences would appear

to

be that Lakoff and

associates

are

concerned with structural

questions

about how

conceptual

domains

map

onto

each other rather than with the process of

interpretation.

Vicente’s article

contrasts

a

relevance-theoretic

account

of

metaphor

with

semantic and Gricean

accounts.

The

main interest of this article is the

consideration it

gives

to

alternative

accounts

of

metaphor

that may be

consistent

by guest on July 5, 2012

lal.sagepub.com

Downloaded from

161

with

the

general

relevance

theory

account

of

verbal communication. In

particular,

arguments

are

considered for the view that

metaphors

contribute ad

hoc

concepts

directly

to

the

proposition

expressed.

Both of these articles

are

concerned with

general

accounts

of

metonymy

and

metaphor.

But both take

note

of the

stylistic

differences between standard and

creative

uses

of these

tropes

and offer

some

explanation

for these differences.

These

discussions,

although they

do

not

focus

directly

on

literary style,

are

of

fundamental

importance

to

an

understanding

of how these

tropes

are

used

to

achieve

poetic

effects.

The

articles

by

MacMahon

and Clark

are more

directly

concerned with the

application

of

relevance

theory

to

literary

texts.

MacMahon

discusses the

use

of

voice

in

literature

in

terms

of the relevance-theoretic notion

of echoic

interpretation.

The

article

stresses

that

the

flow

of

ideas

and

insights

between

pragmatic theory (specifically

relevance

theory)

and

literary

studies

is

potentially

a

highly productive

one.

Clark’s

article discusses

one

way in which relevance

theory

may

suggest

ideas

for

the

teaching

of

literary stylistics,

as

well

as

for the

teaching

of

semantics and

pragmatics.

He also

presents

an

argument

in favour of

developing

an

’interface’

between

relevance

theory

pragmatics

and

literary

studies and

suggests,

in

particular,

that the

study

of

literary

texts

should

raise useful

questions

and

be

a

good testing ground

for

relevance

theory.

There

is

clearly

room

for

disagreement

with

regard

to

the theoretical

accounts

developed

for

tropes

and for ideas

concerning

the

possible applications

of

relevance

theory

to

literary

studies.

The

articles

here

(including

this

introduction)

in

no

way

represent

an

orthodoxy.

While the contributors

to

this issue

might

want to

question

various

points argued

for in the other articles

presented

here,

there is nevertheless

a

basic

agreement

that relevance

theory

does

present

a

radically

new

theoretical

perspective

on

the

study

of rhetoric and

style

that

not

only

offers

extremely

rich

insights,

but also allows

questions

to

be asked which

were

previously

either

impossible

or

difficult

to

pursue.

Notes

1.

I

am

very

grateful

to

Robyn

Carston,

Billy

Clark and Katie

Wales for discussion

and

comments.

2.

For

a

good

bibliography

see

Sperber

and

Wilson

(1995).

3.

The

key

text

is

Sperber

and Wilson

(1995).

This

second

edition,

to

quote

the

blurb

on

the back

cover,

includes

a

new

Postface

outlining developments

in

Relevance

Theory

since

1986,

discussing

the

more

serious

criticisms

of the

theory,

and

envisaging

possible

revisions

or

extensions’.

It also

provides

a

comprehensive

bibliography

of work

in relevance

theory. Sperber

and

Wilson

(1987)

provides

a

useful

precis

of

relevance

theory, prior

to

the

envisaged

’possible

revisions

or

extensions’. This is followed

by

peer commentaries and

a

response

to

the

commentaries. Wilson

(1994)

provides

another useful

summary of the

theory

and Blakemore

(1992)

provides

a

textbook

account.

A

special

issue

of the

journal

Lingua

(1992)

contains

articles

on a

variety

of

aspects

of relevance

theory,

including

several

on

rhetoric and

style.

For work

more

specifically

in the

areas

of

rhetoric

and

style

see

in

particular Sperber

and

Wilson

(1985/6)

on

metaphor,

Wilson and

Sperber

(1992)

on

irony,

and

Sperber

and

Wilson

by guest on July 5, 2012

lal.sagepub.com

Downloaded from

162

(1990)

on

rhetoric in

general.

Blakemore

(1989)

and

(1993)

discuss

general

aspects

of style.

Forceville

(1994)

discusses

pictorial

metaphor

in

advertising.

Reboul

(1992)

uses

relevance

theory

to

discuss

aspects

of

literary

style.

Fabb

(forthcoming)

makes

use

of relevance

theory

in

chapters

on

metaphor

and

irony

in literature.

4.

What

is

now

referred

to

as

the second

principle

of relevance

applies

to

all

acts

of

ostensive-inferential

communication.

5.

See

Sperber

and

Wilson

(1985/6)

for

a

much

fuller

account

than

can

be

given

here.

Vicente

in

this issue deals in greater

detail

with

metaphor.

6.

An

example

of

psycholinguistic

research that

focuses

on

tropes

and

rejects

’the literal

meaning

hypothesis’

can

be

found,

for

example,

in Gibbs

(1994).

7.

See Carston

(forthcoming)

for

a more

detailed discussion

of

the

view

that ’loose uses’

(including

metaphor)

contribute

to

the

proposition

expressed

by

an

utterance.

References

Blakemore,

D.

(1989)

Linguistic

form

and

pragmatic interpretation:

the

explicit

and the

implicit,

in

L.

Hickey

(ed.)

The

Pragmatics

of Style,

Routledge, London,

pp. 28-51

Blakemore,

D.

(1992) Understanding

Utterances: An Introduction

to

Pragmatics,

Biackwell,

Oxford

Blakemore,

D.

(1993)

The relevance

of

reformulations,

Language

and Literature

2.(2):

101-20

Carston,

R.

(forthcoming)

Enrichment

and

loosening:

complementary

processes in

deriving

the

proposition expressed,

UCL

Working Papers

in

Linguistics,

London

Curcó,

C.

(1995)

Some

observations

on

the

pragmatics

of

humorous

interpretations:

a

relevance

theory

approach,

UCL

Working Papers

in

Linguistics,

7:

27-47

Fabb,

N.

(forthcoming)

Linguistics

and

Literature, Blackwell,

Oxford

Forceville,

C.

(1994)

Pictorial

Metaphor

in

Advertising, Vrije

Universiteit,

Amsterdam

Gibbs,

R.

(1994)

The Poetics

of Mind: Figurative

Thought, Language

and

Understanding,

Cambridge University

Press,

Cambridge

Jodtowiec,

M.

(1991)

What makes

jokes

tick,

UCL

Working Papers

in

Linguistics

3: 241-53

Lakoff,

G. and

Johnson,

M.

(1980)

Metaphors

We

Live

By, Chicago University

Press,

Chicago

Lakoff,

G. and

Turner, M. (1989)

More

than Cool

Reason: A

Field

Guide

to

Poetic

Metaphor,

Chicago University

Press,

Chicago

Leech,

G.

and

Short,

M.

(1981)

Style

in

Fiction:

A

Linguistic

Introduction

to

English

Fictional

Prose,

Longman,

London

Pilkington,

A.

(1992)

Poetic

effects, Lingua

87: 29-51

Reboul,

A.

(1992)

Rhetorique

et

Stylistique

de

la

Fiction,

Presses

Universitaires

de

Nancy,

Nancy

Sperber,

D. and

Wilson,

D.

(1985/86)

Loose talk,

Proceedings of

the Aristotelian

Society

LXXXVI:

153-71.

Reprinted

in S. Davis

(ed.)

(1991) Pragmatics:

A

Reader,

Oxford

University

Press,

Oxford,

pp.

540-9

Sperber,

D. and

Wilson,

D.

(1986)

Relevance:

Communication

and

Cognition,

Blackwell,

Oxford

iSperber,

D.

and

Wilson,

D.

(1987) Presumptions

of

relevance,

The

Behavioural

and Brain Sciences

3(1):

179-84

Sperber,

D.

and

Wilson,

D.

(1990)

Rhetoric

and

relevance,

in J. Bender and D.

Wellbery

(eds)

The

Ends

of Rhetoric:

History, Theory,

Practice,

Stanford

University

Press,

Stanford, CA,

pp.

140-56

Sperber,

D.

and

Wilson,

D.

(1995) (2nd edn)

Relevance:

Communication

and

Cognition,

Blackwell,

Oxford

Wilson,

D.

(1994)

Relevance and

understanding,

in

G. Brown et

al.

(eds) Language

and

Understanding,

Oxford

University

Press,

Oxford,

pp.

35-58

Wilson,

D,

and

Sperber,

D.

(1992)

On verbal

irony,

Lingua

87: 53-76.

Reprinted

in J.J. Weber

(ed.)

(1996)

The

Stylistics

Reader: From

Roman Jakobson

to

the

Present,

pp.

260-79

by guest on July 5, 2012

lal.sagepub.com

Downloaded from