/Users/andrea/_magisterarbeit/korpus/clean/testkorpus/17/file1.html NN ----------------------------------------- : Welcome UH to TO this DT section NN of IN the DT Glossary NN of IN the DT Humanities NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT Ggender NP , , genealogy NN , , genre NN , , global JJ , , gloss VV , , government NN , , grammar NN , , groundgenderDefinitionUnder NN constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 6 CD M NP . SENT Pratt NP 1987 CD Culler NP 1992 CD Bathrick NP 1992 CD Coates NP and CC Cameron NP 1988 CD Jehlen NP 1990 CD Ordonez NP 1989 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 8 CD M NP . SENT Pratt NP 1987 CD . SENT 61 CD Pratt NP advocates NNS a DT linguistics NN of IN contact NN , , a DT linguistics NN that WDT placed VVD at IN its PP$ centre NN the DT workings NNS of IN language NN across IN rather RB than IN within IN lines NNS of IN social JJ differentiation NN , , of IN class NN , , race NN , , gender NN , , age NN . SENT As IN my PP$ example NN suggests VVZ , , it PP is VBZ as RB a DT critical JJ project NN that IN I PP am VBP discussing VVG this DT linguistics NN here RB , , that WDT is VBZ , , as IN a DT project NN intended VVD to TO inform VV a DT critical JJ scholarly JJ praxis NN . SENT Culler NP 1992 CD . SENT 203 CD The DT genre NN of IN theory NN includes VVZ works NNS of IN anthropology NN , , art NN history NN , , gender NN studies NNS , , linguistics NNS , , philosophy NN political JJ theory NN , , psychoanalysis NN , , social JJ and CC intellectual JJ history NN , , and CC sociology NN . SENT Its PP$ works NNS are VBP tied VVN to TO argument NN in IN these DT fields NNS , , but CC they PP become VVP theory NN because IN their PP$ visions NNS or CC arguments NNS have VHP been VBN suggestive JJ or CC productive JJ for IN people NNS not RB working VVG primarily RB or CC professionally RB in IN those DT disciplines NNS . SENT Bathrick NP 1992 CD . SENT 337 CD In IN his PP$ anthology NN , , Nation NN and CC Narration NN , , Homi NP K NP . SENT Bhabha NP raises VVZ fundamental JJ issues NNS about IN the DT future NN of IN cultural JJ studies NNS in IN relation NN to TO national JJ identity NN . SENT What WP forms VVZ of IN narrative NN express VVP the DT ideology NN of IN the DT modern JJ nation NN . SENT How WRB do VVP questions NNS of IN race NN and CC gender NN , , class NN and CC colonialism NN change NN the DT boundaries NNS of IN national JJ identity NN . SENT How WRB is VBZ national JJ identity NN itself PP the DT construction NN of IN a DT particular JJ historical JJ imaginary JJ . SENT . SENT Coates NP and CC Cameron NP 1988 CD . SENT 91 CD Gender NN is VBZ not RB the DT only JJ relevant JJ variable NN in IN the DT speech NN styles NNS of IN men NNS and CC women NNS . SENT Jehlen NP 1990 CD . SENT 265 CD In IN proposing VVG gender NN as IN a DT basic JJ problem NN and CC an DT essential JJ category NN in IN cultural JJ and CC historical JJ analysis NN , , feminists NNS have VHP recast VVN the DT issue NN of IN women's NP relative JJ identity NN as IN equally RB an DT issue NN for IN men NNS , , who WP , , upon IN ceasing VVG to TO be VB mankind NN , , become VV , , precisely RB , , men NNS . SENT Thus RB gender NN has VHZ emerged VVN as IN a DT problem NN that WDT is VBZ always RB implicit JJ in IN any DT work NN . SENT It PP is VBZ a DT quality NN of IN the DT literary JJ voice NN hitherto RB masked VVN by IN the DT static JJ of IN common JJ assumptions NNS . SENT And CC as IN a DT critical JJ category NN gender NN is VBZ an DT additional JJ lens NN , , or CC a DT way NN of IN lifting VVG the DT curtain NN to TO an DT unseen JJ recess NN of IN the DT self NN and CC of IN society NN . SENT Simply RB put VVN , , the DT perspective NN of IN gender NN enhances VVZ the DT critical JJ senses NNS . SENT let VV us PP try VV to TO see VV how WRB . SENT Jehlen NP 1990 CD . SENT 273 CD Because IN an DT ideology NN of IN gender NN is VBZ basic JJ to TO virtually RB all RB thought VVD while IN , , by IN most JJS thinkers NNS , , unrecognized JJ as IN such JJ , , gender NN criticism NN often RB has VHZ a DT confrontational JJ edge NN . SENT One PP has VHZ to TO read VV for IN gender NN . SENT unless IN it PP figures VVZ explicitly RB in IN story NN or CC poem NN , , it PP will MD seldom RB read VV for IN itself PP . SENT On IN the DT other JJ hand NN interpretation NN is VBZ an DT ambiguous JJ word NN meaning NN both CC to TO translate VV and CC to TO explain VV . SENT Literary JJ interpretation NN does VVZ both CC inextricably RB . SENT . SENT . SENT They PP also RB interpret VV who WP only RB think VVP to TO explicate VV . SENT Literary JJ criticism NN involves VVZ action NN as RB much RB as IN reflection NN , , and CC reading VVG for IN gender NN makes VVZ the DT deed NN explicit JJ . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT term NN gender NN in IN literary JJ criticism NN refers VVZ to TO a DT set NN of IN concerns NNS and CC also RB to TO a DT vocabulary NN . SENT . SENT . SENT that DT contributes VVZ its PP$ own JJ meanings NNS to TO everything NN that WDT is VBZ said VVN or CC written VVN . SENT Jehlen NP 1990 CD . SENT 272 CD Gender NN is VBZ both CC an DT embedded VVN assumption NN and CC functions NNS as IN a DT touchstone NN for IN others NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT From IN the DT perspective NN of IN gender NN , , . SENT . SENT . SENT a DT critic NN sees VVZ both DT deeper JJR and CC more RBR broadly RB . SENT Both CC the DT views NNS may MD also RB appear VV more RBR obstructed VVN , , exactly RB the DT enhancement NN of IN critical JJ vision NN seeming JJ to TO hinder VV it PP , , or CC to TO interpose VV a DT mew NN obstacle NN between IN critic NN and CC text NN . SENT Ordonez NP 1989 CD . SENT 81 CD Anthropologists NNS looking VVG at IN gender NN relations NNS found VVD that IN in IN every DT human JJ culture NN women NNS are VBP in IN some DT way NN subordinate JJ to TO men NNS . SENT genealogyDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 4 CD Hopper NP 1987 CD Foucault NP 1986 CD b SYM Lanham NP 1976 CD Bove NP 1990 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 5 CD Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 142 CD The DT notion NN of IN emergence NN is VBZ a DT pregnant JJ one NN . SENT It PP is VBZ not RB intended VVN to TO be VB a DT standard JJ sense NN of IN origins NNS or CC genealogy NN , , not RB a DT historical JJ question NN of IN how WRB the DT grammar NN came VVD to TO be VB the DT way NN it PP is VBZ , , but CC instead RB it PP takes VVZ the DT adjective NN emergent JJ seriously RB as IN a DT continual JJ movement NN towards IN structure NN , , a DT postponement NN or CC deferral NN of IN structure NN , , a DT view NN of IN structure NN as IN always RB provisional JJ , , always RB negotiable JJ , , and CC in IN fact NN as IN epiphenomenal JJ , , that WDT is VBZ , , as IN least JJS as IN much RB an DT effect NN as IN a DT cause NN . SENT Foucault NP 1986 CD b SYM . SENT 161 CD Criticism NN analyses NNS the DT processes NNS of IN rarefaction NN , , consolidation NN and CC unification NN in IN discourse NN . SENT genealogy NN studies NNS their PP$ formation NN , , at IN once RB scattered JJ , , discontinuous JJ and CC regular JJ . SENT Lanham NP 1976 CD . SENT 60 CD It PP was VBD not RB that IN Ovid NP was VBD a DT bad JJ plotter NN . SENT The DT rhetorical JJ view NN denies VVZ that DT plot NN is VBZ possible JJ . SENT It PP was VBD not RB that IN Ovid NP had VHD no DT taste NN for IN heroes NNS and CC certainly RB , , no DT capacity NN for IN creating VVG them PP , , as IN Brooks NP Otis NP charges VVZ . SENT He PP did VVD not RB believe VV in IN heroes NNS , , or CC the DT self NN they PP were VBD based VVN on RP . SENT He PP was VBD not RB bad JJ at IN transitions NNS . SENT he PP wanted VVD to TO lose VV the DT reader NN . SENT He PP was VBD not RB incapable JJ of IN tracing VVG a DT coherent JJ genealogy NN for IN Rome NP . SENT he PP did VVD not RB believe VV in IN the DT Virgilian JJ conception NN of IN history NN upon IN which WDT such JJ descent NN was VBD based VVN . SENT He PP was VBD not RB too RB dense JJ to TO master VV a DT suitable JJ repertoire NN of IN Augustan JJ philosophical JJ clich NN s PP . SENT he PP denied VVD the DT theory NN of IN knowledge NN from IN which WDT they PP grew VVD . SENT Too RB skeptical JJ to TO think VV the DT whole JJ truth NN contained VVN in IN a DT single JJ myth NN , , he PP thought VVD the DT epic NN genre NN a DT fraud NN , , an DT obvious JJ pretense NN that IN the DT world NN makes VVZ more JJR sense NN than IN it PP does VVZ . SENT Bove NP 1990 CD . SENT 56 CD Genealogy NN complements VVZ the DT critical JJ dimension NN of IN poststructuralism's JJ radical JJ skepticism NN . SENT It PP aims VVZ to TO grasp VV the DT formative JJ power NN of IN discourses NNS and CC disciplines NNS . SENT Bove NP 1990 CD . SENT 60 CD Genealogy NN separates VVZ itself PP within IN the DT will NN to TO truth NN by IN trying VVG to TO unmask VV discourses NNS associations NNS with IN power NN and CC materialities NNS . SENT also RB , , it PP is VBZ not RB reductive JJ , , that WDT is VBZ , , it PP alone RB allows VVZ for IN a DT full JJ description NN of IN the DT completely RB determined VVN discursive JJ practices NNS it PP studies VVZ and CC , , finally RB , , it PP describes VVZ and CC criticizes VVZ these DT practices NNS with IN an DT eye NN to TO revealing VVG their PP$ subjugating VVG effects NNS in IN the DT present NN it PP means VVZ always RB to TO resist VV discipling VVG and CC speaking VVG for IN others NNS in IN their PP$ own JJ struggles NNS . SENT genreDefinitionUnder NN constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 7 CD Lanham NP 1976 CD Bove NP 1990 CD Culler NP 1992 CD van NN Dijk NN 1977 CD Bakhtin NP 1986 CD Jameson NP 1981 CD A NP . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 10 CD Lanham NP 1976 CD . SENT 60 CD It PP was VBD not RB that IN Ovid NP was VBD a DT bad JJ plotter NN . SENT The DT rhetorical JJ view NN denies VVZ that DT plot NN is VBZ possible JJ . SENT It PP was VBD not RB that IN Ovid NP had VHD no DT taste NN for IN heroes NNS and CC certainly RB , , no DT capacity NN for IN creating VVG them PP , , as IN Brooks NP Otis NP charges VVZ . SENT He PP did VVD not RB believe VV in IN heroes NNS , , or CC the DT self NN they PP were VBD based VVN on RP . SENT He PP was VBD not RB bad JJ at IN transitions NNS . SENT he PP wanted VVD to TO lose VV the DT reader NN . SENT He PP was VBD not RB incapable JJ of IN tracing VVG a DT coherent JJ genealogy NN for IN Rome NP . SENT he PP did VVD not RB believe VV in IN the DT Virgilian JJ conception NN of IN history NN upon IN which WDT such JJ descent NN was VBD based VVN . SENT He PP was VBD not RB too RB dense JJ to TO master VV a DT suitable JJ repertoire NN of IN Augustan JJ philosophical JJ clich NN s PP . SENT he PP denied VVD the DT theory NN of IN knowledge NN from IN which WDT they PP grew VVD . SENT Too RB skeptical JJ to TO think VV the DT whole JJ truth NN contained VVN in IN a DT single JJ myth NN , , he PP thought VVD the DT epic NN genre NN a DT fraud NN , , an DT obvious JJ pretense NN that IN the DT world NN makes VVZ more JJR sense NN than IN it PP does VVZ . SENT Bove NP 1990 CD . SENT 50 CD For IN the DT New NP Critics NNS , , discourse NN marked VVD differences NNS and CC established JJ identities NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Each DT discourse NN , , in IN itself PP , , . SENT . SENT . SENT has VHZ an DT identity NN to TO be VB discovered VVN , , defined VVN , , and CC understood VVN . SENT in IN addition NN , , each DT discourse NN established VVD the DT limits NNS of IN a DT particular JJ genre NN . SENT Culler NP 1992 CD . SENT 203 CD The DT genre NN of IN theory NN includes VVZ works NNS of IN anthropology NN , , art NN history NN , , gender NN studies NNS , , linguistics NNS , , philosophy NN political JJ theory NN , , psychoanalysis NN , , social JJ and CC intellectual JJ history NN , , and CC sociology NN . SENT Its PP$ works NNS are VBP tied VVN to TO argument NN in IN these DT fields NNS , , but CC they PP become VVP theory NN because IN their PP$ visions NNS or CC arguments NNS have VHP been VBN suggestive JJ or CC productive JJ for IN people NNS not RB working VVG primarily RB or CC professionally RB in IN those DT disciplines NNS . SENT van NP Dijk NN 1977 CD . SENT 18 CD Super JJ structures NNS are VBP organizing VVG principles NNS of IN discourse NN . SENT The DT have VHP a DT hierarchical JJ character NN , , roughly RB defining VVG the DT global JJ syntax NN of IN the DT text NN . SENT By IN contrast NN , , the DT macro NN structures NNS define VV the DT content NN of IN the DT text NN . SENT In IN certain JJ kinds NNS of IN narrative NN , , such JJ as IN folktales NNS , , this DT content NN may MD be VB conventional JJ . SENT . SENT . SENT What WP has VHZ been VBN said VVN about IN the DT conventional JJ genre NN of IN narratives NNS also RB holds VVZ . SENT . SENT . SENT for IN other JJ discourse NN types NNS , , e NN . SENT g NN . SENT , , arguments NNS , , advertisements NNS , , newspaper NN reports NNS , , propaganda NN , , and CC psychological JJ papers NNS . SENT In IN all DT cases NNS the DT constraints NNS operate VVP globally RB , , both CC on IN the DT global JJ syntax NN of IN the DT macro NN structures NNS and CC on IN their PP$ specific JJ content NN . SENT Bakhtin NP 1986 CD . SENT 665 CD Stylistics NP and CC the DT philosophy NN of IN discourse NN indeed RB confront VVP a DT dilemma NN . SENT either CC to TO acknowledge VV tha NP novel NN and CC consequently RB all DT artistic JJ prose NN tending VVG in IN that DT direction NN an DT unartistic JJ or CC quasi NP artistic JJ genre NN , , or CC to TO radically RB reconsider VV that DT conception NN of IN poetic JJ discourse NN in IN which WDT traditional JJ stylistics NNS is VBZ grounded VVN and CC which WDT determines VVZ all PDT its PP$ categories NNS . SENT Bakhtin NP 1986 CD . SENT 666 CD The DT novel NN is VBZ an DT artistic JJ genre NN . SENT Novelistic JJ discourse NN is VBZ poetic JJ discourse NN , , but CC one CD that WDT does VVZ not RB fit VV within IN the DT frame NN provided VVN by IN the DT concept NN of IN poetic JJ discourse NN as IN it PP now RB exists VVZ . SENT The DT concept NN has VHZ certain JJ underlying JJ presuppositions NNS that WDT limit VVP it PP . SENT Jameson NP 1981 CD . SENT 140 CD 1 CD To TO limit VV ourselves PP to TO generic JJ problems NNS , , what WP this DT model NN implies VVZ is VBZ that IN in IN its PP$ emergent JJ , , strong JJ form NN a DT genre NN is VBZ essentially RB a DT socio NN symbolic JJ message NN , , or CC in IN other JJ terms NNS , , that DT form NN is VBZ immanently RB and CC intrinsically RB an DT ideology NN in IN its PP$ own JJ right NN . SENT Jameson NP 1981 CD . SENT 105 RB The DT strategic JJ value NN of IN generic JJ concepts NNS for IN Marxism NN clearly RB lies VVZ in IN the DT mediatory JJ function NN of IN the DT notion NN of IN a DT genre NN , , which WDT allows VVZ the DT coordination NN of IN immanent JJ formal JJ analysis NN of IN the DT individual JJ text NN with IN the DT twin JJ diachronic JJ perspective NN of IN the DT history NN of IN forms NNS and CC the DT evolution NN of IN social JJ life NN . SENT A DT . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD . SENT 36 CD In IN the DT women's NP novel NN of IN development NN exclusive JJ of IN the DT science NN fiction NN genre NN . SENT . SENT . SENT the DT hero NN does VVZ not RB choose VV a DT life NN to TO one CD side NN of IN society NN after IN conscious JJ deliberation NN on IN the DT subject NN . SENT rather RB she PP is VBZ radically RB alienated VVN by IN gender NN role NN norms NNS from IN the DT very JJ outset NN . SENT A DT . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD . SENT 14 CD In IN this DT most RBS conservative JJ branch NN of IN the DT woman's JJ bildungsroman NN , , then RB we PP find VVP a DT genre NN that WDT pursues VVZ the DT opposite NN of IN its PP$ generic JJ intent NN it PP provides VVZ models NNS for IN growing VVG down RP rather RB than IN growing VVG up RP . SENT globalDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 2 CD Spellmeyer NP 1993 CD van NN Dijk NN 1977 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 5 CD Spellmeyer NP 1993 CD . SENT 13 CD A NP rhetoric NN divested VVD of IN every DT specific JJ connection NN to TO human JJ purposes NNS and CC experience NN would MD be VB more JJR than IN elusive JJ , , . SENT . SENT . SENT it PP would MD be VB unteachable JJ , , or CC nearly RB so RB , , and CC irrelevant JJ as IN well RB , , since IN it PP would MD help VV not RB at IN all DT in IN resolving VVG the DT issues NNS no DT one NN can MD afford VV to TO neglect NN whether IN the DT Congress NP should MD reduce VV the DT national JJ debt NN by IN cutting VVG social JJ services NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT or CC whether IN the DT global JJ climate NN has VHZ begun VVN warming VVG up RP . SENT van NP Dijk NN 1977 CD . SENT 3 CD In IN linguistics NNS , , macro NN structures NNS have VHP been VBN postulated VVN in IN order NN to TO account VV for IN the DT global JJ meaning NN of IN discourse NN such JJ as IN it PP is VBZ intuitively RB assigned VVN in IN terms NNS of IN the DT topic NN or CC theme NN of IN a DT discourse NN or CC conversation NN . SENT The DT assumption NN is VBZ that IN these DT notions NNS cannot NN be VB accounted VVN for IN in IN terms NNS of IN current JJ logical JJ , , linguistic JJ , , and CC cognitive JJ semantics NNS for IN isolated JJ sentences NNS or CC sequences NNS of IN sentences NNS . SENT In IN disciplines NNS such JJ as IN rhetorics NNS and CC narrative JJ theory NN , , macro NN structures NNS may MD constitute VV the DT semantic JJ basis NN for IN specific JJ categories NNS and CC rules NNS . SENT van NP Dijk NN 1977 CD . SENT 27 CD 30 CD We PP will MD briefly RB state VV a DT number NN of IN hypotheses NNS regarding VVG . SENT . SENT . SENT processing NN implications NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT It PP will MD be VB assumed VVN that IN in IN discourse NN comprehension NN fragments VVZ of IN the DT morpho NN phonological JJ and CC syntactic JJ surface NN structure NN of IN the DT sentence NN sequence NN are VBP stored VVN only RB in IN short JJ term NN memory NN to TO construct VV a DT proposition NN sequence NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT It PP is VBZ assumed VVN that IN beyond IN a DT limited JJ number NN of IN propositions NNS , , the DT proposition NN sequence NN of IN the DT text NN base NN is VBZ not RB fully RB accessible JJ for IN recall NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Given VVN a DT sequence NN of IN assigned JJ propositions NNS , , the DT reader NN will MD make VV hypotheses NNS about IN the DT relevant JJ macro NN structure NN proposition NN covering VVG the DT sequence NN by IN applying VVG the DT macro NN rules NNS to TO the DT sequence NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Macro NN structure NN formation NN takes VVZ place NN in IN the DT course NN of IN reading VVG the DT text NN , , not RB a DT posteriori NN . SENT The DT same JJ holds VVZ true JJ for IN the DT assignment NN of IN conventional JJ categories NNS to TO the DT macro NN propositions NNS . SENT Both CC the DT assignment NN of IN macro NN structures NNS and CC of IN conventional JJ super JJ structures NNS is VBZ recursive JJ . SENT As RB soon RB as IN a DT first JJ level NN becomes VVZ too RB complex JJ . SENT a DT second JJ level NN is VBZ formed VVN , , and CC so RB forth RB . SENT The DT macro NN structure NN is VBZ available JJ when WRB it PP is VBZ necessary JJ to TO explicitly RB summarize VV a DT text NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT macro NN structure NN is VBZ also RB the DT basis NN for IN recall NN of IN the DT discourse NN immediately RB after IN presentation NN . SENT The DT macro NN structure NN is VBZ directly RB available JJ in IN episodic JJ memory NN . SENT It PP then RB yields VVZ , , by IN inverse JJ macro NN rule NN application NN and CC recognition NN , , access NN to TO lower JJR level NN macro NN structures NNS and CC possibly RB to TO some DT text NN base NN propositions NNS if IN the DT discourse NN was VBD not RB too RB long JJ . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Macro NN structures NNS may MD also RB constitute VV plans NNS for IN speaking VVG . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Macro NN structure NN formation NN is VBZ a DT highly RB complex JJ process NN , , so RB it PP can MD hardly RB be VB expected VVN that IN effective JJ comprehension NN exactly RB follows VVZ the DT rules NNS formulated VVN above IN . SENT expedient JJ strategies NNS are VBP used VVN in IN the DT global JJ interpretation NN of IN discourse NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Finally RB , , there EX are VBP strategies NNS based VVN on IN contextual JJ cues NNS and CC knowledge NN of IN the DT general JJ communication NN situation NN . SENT We PP may MD know VV the DT speaker NN so RB well RB that IN we PP may MD easily RB predict VV the DT main JJ themes NNS of IN his PP$ discourse NN , , even RB with IN very RB scanty JJ information NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Familiarity NN with IN the DT relevant JJ macro NN structures NNS will MD certainly RB facilitate VV the DT task NN of IN global JJ comprehension NN . SENT van NP Dijk NN 1977 CD . SENT 22 CD Frames NP and CC macro NN structures NNS are VBP closely RB related VVN but CC entirely RB different JJ notions NNS . SENT Both CC organize VV complex JJ semantic JJ information NN . SENT Frames NNS , , however RB , , are VBP conventional JJ and CC general JJ . SENT Most JJS members NNS of IN a DT society NN or CC culture NN have VHP approximately RB the DT same JJ set NN of IN frames NNS . SENT Macro NN structures NNS do VVP not RB have VH this DT character NN . SENT Instead RB , , they PP are VBP ad NN hoc FW information NN , , i NP . SENT e SYM . SENT , , the DT particular JJ global JJ content NN of IN a DT particular JJ discourse NN . SENT van NP Dijk NN 1977 CD . SENT 18 CD Super JJ structures NNS are VBP organizing VVG principles NNS of IN discourse NN . SENT The DT have VHP a DT hierarchical JJ character NN , , roughly RB defining VVG the DT global JJ syntax NN of IN the DT text NN . SENT By IN contrast NN , , the DT macro NN structures NNS define VV the DT content NN of IN the DT text NN . SENT In IN certain JJ kinds NNS of IN narrative NN , , such JJ as IN folktales NNS , , this DT content NN may MD be VB conventional JJ . SENT . SENT . SENT What WP has VHZ been VBN said VVN about IN the DT conventional JJ genre NN of IN narratives NNS also RB holds VVZ . SENT . SENT . SENT for IN other JJ discourse NN types NNS , , e NN . SENT g NN . SENT , , arguments NNS , , advertisements NNS , , newspaper NN reports NNS , , propaganda NN , , and CC psychological JJ papers NNS . SENT In IN all DT cases NNS the DT constraints NNS operate VVP globally RB , , both CC on IN the DT global JJ syntax NN of IN the DT macro NN structures NNS and CC on IN their PP$ specific JJ content NN . SENT glossDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 0 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 0 CD governmentDefinitionUnder NN constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 0 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 0 CD grammarDefinitionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 8 CD Hopper NP 1987 CD Burke NP 1945 CD Schiffrin NP 1994 CD Sperber NP and CC Wilson NP 1988 CD Booth NP 1979 CD Marshall NP 1992 CD Enkvist NN 1981 CD Foucault NP 1986 CD aQuotes NNS . SENT 26 CD Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 140 CD Critics NNS of IN radical JJ pragmatics NNS , , and CC functional JJ grammar NN , , assume VVP that IN they PP and CC those DT they PP oppose VVP share NN a DT common JJ view NN of IN language NN , , that IN there EX is VBZ a DT pairing VVG of IN autonomous JJ i NP . SENT e SYM . SENT , , decontextualized JJ grammatical JJ forms NNS with IN functions NNS whatever WDT they PP might MD be VB in IN the DT abstract JJ , , and CC that IN the DT only JJ point NN of IN disagreement NN is VBZ whether IN these DT forms NNS might MD be VB eventually RB derivable JJ from IN functions NNS or CC whether IN the DT forms NNS must MD be VB described VVN independently RB of IN functions NNS . SENT I PP find VVP a DT certain JJ irony NN in IN such PDT a DT use NN of IN the DT terms NNS function NN and CC functionalism NN , , since IN the DT very JJ restriction NN of IN the DT investigation NN to TO an DT artificially RB defined VVN level NN of IN sentences NNS seems VVZ to TO me PP to TO be VB quintessentially RB anti JJ functionalist NN . SENT Be VB that IN as IN it PP may MD , , I PP am VBP concerned VVN in IN this DT paper NN with IN the DT more RBR fundamental JJ problem NN of IN the DT assumptions NNS underlying VVG the DT critique NN , , especially RB the DT assumption NN of IN an DT abstract JJ , , mentally RB represented VVN rule NN system NN which WDT is VBZ somehow RB implemented VVN when WRB we PP speak VVP . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 141 CD The DT assumption NN , , in IN other JJ words NNS , , is VBZ that DT grammar NN in IN the DT sense NN of IN the DT rules NNS , , constraints NNS , , and CC categories NNS of IN the DT language NN attributed VVD to TO the DT speaker NN must MD be VB an DT object NN apart RB from IN the DT speaker NN and CC separated VVN from IN the DT uses NNS which WDT the DT speaker NN may MD make VV of IN it PP . SENT That DT kind NN of IN grammar NN is VBZ conventionally RB understood VVN to TO consist VV of IN sets NNS of IN rules NNS which WDT operate VVP on IN fixed JJ categories NNS like IN nouns NNS and CC verbs NNS , , specify VV the DT forms NNS of IN additive JJ categories NNS like IN those DT of IN case NN , , tense JJ , , transitivity NN , , etc FW . SENT , , and CC restrict VV the DT possible JJ orders NNS in IN which WDT words NNS can MD occur VV in IN a DT sentence NN . SENT Discourse NN , , the DT actual JJ use NN of IN language NN , , is VBZ held VVN to TO be VB in IN some DT sense NN an DT implementation NN of IN these DT structures NNS , , or CC the DT way NN in IN which WDT the DT abstract JJ mental JJ system NN possessed VVN in IN its PP$ entirety NN by IN the DT speaker NN is VBZ realized VVN in IN particular JJ utterances NNS . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 141 CD 2 CD This DT is VBZ , , then RB , , roughly RB the DT context NN in IN which WDT the DT term NN Emergent JJ Grammar NN is VBZ being VBG proposed VVN . SENT The DT term NN emergent JJ itself PP I NP take VV from IN an DT essay NN by IN the DT cultural JJ anthropologist NN James NP Clifford NP , , but CC I PP have VHP transferred VVN it PP from IN its PP$ original JJ context NN of IN culture NN to TO that WDT of IN grammar NN . SENT Clifford NP remarks NNS that IN Culture NP is VBZ temporal JJ , , emergent JJ , , and CC disputed VVD Clifford NP 1986 CD . SENT 19 CD . SENT I PP believe VVP the DT same JJ is VBZ true JJ of IN grammar NN , , which WDT like VVP speech NN itself PP must MD be VB viewed VVN as IN a DT real JJ time NN , , social JJ phenomenon NN , , and CC therefore RB is VBZ temporal JJ . SENT its PP$ structure NN is VBZ always RB deferred VVN , , always RB in IN a DT process NN but CC never RB arriving VVG , , and CC therefore RB emergent JJ . SENT and CC since IN I PP can MD only RB choose VV a DT tiny JJ fraction NN of IN data NNS to TO describe VV , , any DT decision NN I PP make VVP about IN limiting VVG my PP$ field NN of IN inquiry NN for IN example NN in IN regard NN to TO the DT selection NN of IN texts NNS , , or CC the DT privileging VVG of IN the DT usage NN of IN a DT particular JJ ethnic JJ , , class NN , , age NN , , or CC gender NN group NN is VBZ very RB likely JJ to TO be VB a DT political JJ decision NN , , to TO be VB against IN someone NN else's NNS interests NNS , , and CC therefore RB disputed VVN . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 142 CD The DT notion NN of IN Emergent JJ Grammar NN is VBZ meant VVN to TO suggest VV that DT structure NN , , or CC regularity NN , , comes VVZ out RP of IN discourse NN and CC is VBZ shaped VVN by IN discourse NN as RB much RB as IN it PP shapes VVZ discourse NN in IN an DT on IN going VVG process NN . SENT Grammar NN is VBZ hence RB not RB to TO be VB understood VVN as IN a DT pre NP requisite JJ for IN discourse NN , , a DT prior JJ possession NN attributable JJ in IN identical JJ form NN to TO both DT speaker NN and CC hearer NN . SENT Its PP$ forms NNS are VBP not RB fixed VVN templates NNS , , but CC are VBP negotiable JJ in IN face NN to TO face VV interaction NN in IN ways NNS that WDT reflect VVP the DT individual JJ speakers NNS past JJ experience NN of IN these DT forms NNS , , and CC their PP$ assessment NN of IN the DT present JJ context NN , , including VVG especially RB their PP$ interlocutors NNS , , whose WP$ experiences NNS and CC assessments NNS may MD be VB quite RB different JJ . SENT Moreover RB , , the DT term NN Emergent JJ Grammar NN points NNS to TO a DT grammar NN which WDT is VBZ not RB abstractly RB formulated VVN and CC abstractly RB represented VVN , , but CC always RB anchored VVN in IN the DT specific JJ concrete JJ form NN of IN an DT utterance NN . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 144 CD The DT point NN about IN the DT retention NN of IN archaisms NNS in IN proverbial JJ language NN has VHZ of IN course NN often RB been VBN made VVN . SENT But CC it PP has VHZ less JJR often RB been VBN noted VVN that IN proverbial JJ language NN is VBZ only RB an DT extreme JJ case NN of IN repetition NN in IN discourse NN , , at IN the DT other JJ end NN of IN which WDT are VBP the DT morphological JJ and CC syntactic JJ repetitions NNS some DT of IN which WDT are VBP called VVN grammar NN . SENT this DT point NN is VBZ made VVN cogently RB by IN Lambrecht NP 1984 CD . SENT In IN other JJ words NNS , , real JJ live JJ discourse NN abounds VVZ in IN all DT sorts NNS of IN repetitions NNS which WDT have VHP nothing NN to TO do VV with IN grammar NN as IN this DT is VBZ usually RB understood VVN . SENT for IN instance NN , , idioms NNS , , proverbs NNS , , clich VVG s PP , , formulas NNS , , specialist NN phrases NNS , , transitions NNS , , openings NNS , , closures NNS , , favored JJ clause NN types NNS , , and CC so RB on IN . SENT There EX is VBZ no DT consistent JJ level NN at IN which WDT these DT regularities NNS are VBP statable JJ . SENT They PP are VBP not RB necessarily RB sentences NNS , , or CC clauses NNS , , with IN recurrent JJ internal JJ structure NN , , but CC they PP are VBP often RB used VVN holistically RB . SENT Their PP$ boundaries NNS may MD or CC may MD not RB coincide VV with IN the DT constituent JJ boundaries NNS of IN our PP$ grammatical JJ descriptions NNS . SENT subject JJ and CC predicate JJ , , noun NN phrase NN , , prepositional JJ phrase NN . SENT Moreover RB , , what WP is VBZ a DT formulaic JJ expression NN in IN one CD context NN may MD not RB be VB in IN another DT . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 144 CD 5 CD It PP has VHZ been VBN noted VVN before IN that IN to TO a DT very RB considerable JJ extent NN everyday JJ language NN is VBZ built VVN up RP out IN of IN combinations NNS of IN such JJ prefabricated VVN parts NNS . SENT Language NN is VBZ , , in IN other JJ words NNS , , to TO be VB viewed VVN as IN a DT kind NN of IN pastiche NN , , pasted VVN together RB in IN an DT improvised VVD way NN out RP of IN ready JJ made VVN elements NNS . SENT Language NN is VBZ thus RB to TO be VB treated VVN , , in IN Wittgenstein's NP words NNS , , from IN outside JJ cf NN . SENT Wittgenstein NP 1958 CD . SENT para NNS . SENT 120 CD not RB as RB governed VVN by IN internalized VVD mentally RB represented VVN rules NNS , , but CC by IN pre NP existent JJ material NN with IN which WDT discourses NNS can MD be VB devised VVN . SENT . SENT . SENT Evidently RB an DT entirely RB parallel JJ way NN of IN viewing VVG language NN is VBZ to TO be VB attributed VVN to TO Jacques NP Derrida NP with IN his PP$ metaphor NN of IN language NN as IN graft NN . SENT new JJ speech NN acts NNS are VBP grafted VVN onto IN old JJ ones NNS and CC of IN course NN serve VVP in IN turn NN as IN the DT stock NN onto IN which WDT further JJR new JJ speech NN acts NNS are VBP grafted VVN . SENT . SENT . SENT Becker's NP idea NN of IN prior JJ texts NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT is VBZ also RB crucial JJ here RB . SENT previous JJ actual JJ utterances NNS form VVP the DT basis NN of IN new JJ utterances NNS . SENT Similar JJ observations NNS have VHP been VBN made VVN by IN Bolinger NP , , by IN Andrew NP Pawley NP , , and CC others NNS . SENT It PP is VBZ this DT pre NP patterned VVN , , pre NP fabricated VVN aspect NN of IN speech NN which WDT accounts VVZ best JJS for IN the DT characteristic NN of IN language NN for IN which WDT no DT dualistic JJ , , double RB tiered VVN theory NN can MD provide VV an DT intuitively RB satisfying JJ explanation NN . SENT in IN natural JJ discourse NN we PP compose VV and CC speak VV simultaneously RB Smith NP 1980 CD . SENT 60 CD . SENT There EX is VBZ no DT room NN no DT need NN for IN mediation NN by IN mental JJ structures NNS . SENT It PP is VBZ in IN this DT sense NN that WDT , , as IN Bolinger NP has VHZ pointed VVN out RP Bolinger NP 1976 CD , , speaking NN is VBZ more RBR similar JJ to TO remembering VVG procedures NNS and CC things NNS than IN it PP is VBZ to TO following VVG rules NNS . SENT It PP is VBZ a DT question NN of IN possessing VVG a DT repertoire NN of IN strategies NNS for IN building NN discourses NNS and CC reaching VVG into IN memory NN in IN order NN to TO improvise VV and CC assemble VV them PP . SENT Grammar NN is VBZ now RB not RB to TO be VB seen VVN as IN the DT only JJ , , or CC even RB the DT major JJ , , source NN of IN regularity NN , , but CC instead RB grammar NN is VBZ what WP results NNS when WRB formulas NNS are VBP re IN arranged VVN , , or CC dismantled VVN and CC re IN assembled VVN , , in IN different JJ ways NNS . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 147 CD The DT systematicity NN which WDT linguists NNS have VHP come VVN to TO expect VV in IN language NN still RB exists VVZ , , of IN course NN , , but CC in IN a DT more RBR complex JJ way NN . SENT The DT linguistic JJ system NN is VBZ now RB not RB to TO be VB seen VVN as IN something NN complete JJ and CC homogeneous JJ , , in IN which WDT , , exceptional JJ phenomena NNS must MD be VB set VVN aside RP as IN inconvenient JJ irregularities NNS , , but CC as IN a DT growing VVG together RB of IN disparate JJ forms NNS . SENT This DT convergence NN takes VVZ place NN through IN lateral JJ associations NNS of IN real JJ utterances NNS . SENT Similarities NNS spread VVD outwards NNS from IN individual JJ formulas NNS , , in IN ways NNS that WDT are VBP motivated VVN by IN a DT variety NN of IN factors NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT They PP do VVP not RB , , however RB , , merge VV into IN the DT kind NN of IN uniform JJ grammar NN which WDT would MD lead VV one PP to TO posit VV a DT uniform JJ mental JJ representation NN to TO subtend VV them PP . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 154 CD It PP will MD be VB seen VVN that IN grammar NN begins VVZ life NN on IN page NN 2 CD of IN Radford NP 1981 CD in IN its PP$ theoretically RB correct JJ style NN , , as IN a DT model NN of IN the DT native JJ speaker's NNS linguistic JJ competence NN . SENT But CC notice NN that IN by IN page NN 3 CD , , grammar NN is VBZ suddenly RB no DT longer JJR a DT linguists NNS construct VV , , a DT formal JJ characterization NN of IN the DT abilities NNS presumed VVN to TO underlie VV the DT speaker's NNS behavior NN , , but CC the DT knowledge NN itself PP . SENT It PP has VHZ gone VVN from IN a DT linguist's JJ theory NN to TO something NN the DT speaker NN possesses VVZ . SENT One PP would MD not RB blame VV Radford NP , , were VBD it PP not RB that IN formal JJ grammarians NNS are VBP quick JJ to TO castigate VV discourse NN linguists NNS for IN alleged JJ confusion NN over IN the DT notion NN of IN grammar NN , , and CC often RB accuse VV them PP of IN not RB understanding VVG this DT supposedly RB elementary JJ concept NN . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 148 CD Any DT decision NN to TO limit VV the DT domain NN of IN grammar NN to TO just RB those DT phenomena NNS which WDT are VBP relatively RB fixed VVN and CC stable NN seems VVZ arbitrary JJ . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 150 CD A NP major JJ pustulate JJ , , or CC working VVG hypothesis NN , , of IN Emergent JJ Grammar NN is VBZ that IN the DT more RBR useful JJ a DT construction NN is VBZ , , the DT more RBR it PP will MD tend VV to TO become VV structuralized JJ , , in IN the DT sense NN of IN achieving VVG cross NN textual JJ consistency NN , , and CC serving VVG as IN a DT basis NN for IN variation NN and CC extension NN . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 147 CD What WDT I've NN been VBN saying VVG up RP to TO now RB has VHZ had VHN the DT purpose NN of IN re NN contextualizing VVG the DT notion NN of IN grammar NN not RB to TO abolish VV it PP , , but CC rather RB to TO suspend VV it PP with IN a DT view NN to TO isolating VVG those DT regularities NNS in IN discourse NN which WDT we PP will MD agree VV to TO call VV emergent JJ grammatical JJ regularities NNS . SENT But CC as IN we PP have VHP seen VVN , , the DT doctrine NN of IN Emergent JJ Grammar NN assignes NNS an DT entirely RB different JJ status NN to TO grammar NN from IN what WP might MD be VB called VVN A DT Priori NN Grammar NN . SENT Hopper NP 1987 CD . SENT 154 CD 5 CD There RB is VBZ no DT question NN that IN grammar NN is VBZ an DT infuriatingly RB elusive JJ notion NN , , and CC that IN it PP is VBZ very RB easy JJ to TO have VH a DT clear JJ idea NN about IN what WP grammar NN is VBZ in IN the DT sense NN of IN being VBG able JJ to TO give VV an DT abstract JJ definition NN of IN it PP , , but CC quite RB another DT to TO apply VV that DT definition NN consistently RB in IN practice NN . SENT This DT asymmetry NN suggests VVZ that IN the DT notion NN of IN grammar NN is VBZ intrinsically RB unstable JJ and CC indeterminate JJ , , relative JJ to TO the DT observer NN , , to TO those DT involved VVN in IN the DT speech NN situation NN , , and CC to TO the DT particular JJ set NN of IN phenomena NNS being VBG focused VVN upon RP . SENT It PP suggests VVZ also RB that IN we PP need VVP to TO question VV the DT supposition NN of IN a DT mentally RB representated JJ set NN of IN rules NNS , , and CC to TO set VV aside RP as IN well RB the DT idea NN in IN Fromkin's NP statement NN which WDT I PP quoted VVD earlier RBR , , that DT speakers NNS possess VVP an DT abstract JJ linguistic JJ system NN ready JJ and CC waiting VVG to TO be VB drawn VVN upon IN accessed VVN . SENT in IN case NN they PP should MD ever RB need VV to TO speak VV . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 45 CD 6 CD The DT socialist JJ revolution NN is VBZ designed VVN first RB to TO reverse VV the DT state NN during IN the DT dictatorship NN of IN the DT proletariat NN and CC next JJ to TO abolish VV it PP , , or CC let VV it PP wither VV away RB . SENT But CC our PP$ grammar NN would MD lead VV us PP to TO doubt VV whether IN a DT state NN can MD ever RB really RB wither VV away RB , , and CC least JJS of IN all DT in IN a DT complex JJ industrial JJ society NN . SENT Though IN it PP may MD take VV strategically RB new JJ forms NNS , , we PP expect VVP the DT logic NN of IN the DT actus NP status NN pair NN to TO continue VV manifesting VVG itself PP . SENT The DT selection NN of IN the DT proletariat NN as IN the DT vessel NN of IN the DT new JJ act NN that WDT transcends VVZ the DT bourgeois JJ state NN may MD or CC may MD not RB be VB correct JJ as IN a DT casuistry NN , , but CC it PP violates VVZ no DT law NN of IN grammar NN . SENT The DT belief NN in IN the DT withering VVG away RB of IN the DT state NN , , however RB , , does VVZ seem VV to TO violate VV a DT law NN of IN grammar NN . SENT For IN no DT continuity NN of IN social JJ act NN is VBZ possible JJ without IN a DT corresponding JJ social JJ status NN . SENT and CC the DT many JJ different JJ kinds NNS of IN act NN required VVN in IN an DT industrial JJ state NN , , with IN its PP$ high JJ degree NN of IN specialization NN , , make VVP for IN corresponding JJ classifications NNS of IN status NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT xvii NNS In IN our PP$ original JJ plans NNS for IN this DT project NN , , we PP had VHD no DT notion NN of IN writing VVG a DT Grammar NN at IN all DT . SENT We PP began VVD with IN a DT theory NN of IN comedy NN , , applies VVZ to TO a DT treatise NN on IN human JJ relations NNS . SENT Feeling VVG that DT competitive JJ ambition NN is VBZ a DT drastically RB over RB developed VVN motive NN in IN the DT modern JJ world NN , , we PP thought VVD this DT motive NN might MD be VB transcended VVN if IN men NNS devoted VVD themselves PP not RB so RB much JJ to TO excoriating VVG it PP as IN to TO appreciating VVG it PP . SENT Accordingly RB , , we PP began VVD taking VVG notes NNS on IN the DT foibles NNS and CC antics NNS of IN what WP we PP tended VVD to TO think VV of IN as IN the DT Human NP Barnyard NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT xvii NP xviii NP We PP had VHD made VVN still RB further JJR observations NNS , , which WDT we PP at IN first JJ strove VVD uneasily RB to TO class NN under IN one CD or CC the DT other JJ of IN these DT two CD heads NNS , , but CC which WDT we PP were VBD eventually RB able JJ to TO distinguish VV as IN the DT makings NN of IN a DT Grammar NN . SENT For IN we PP found VVD in IN the DT course NN of IN writing VVG that IN our PP$ project NN needed VVD a DT grounding NN in IN formal JJ considerations NNS logically RB prior RB to TO both CC the DT rhetorical JJ and CC the DT psychological JJ . SENT And CC as IN we PP proceeded VVD with IN this DT introductory JJ groundwork NN , , it PP kept VVD extending VVG its PP$ claims NNS until IN it PP had VHD spun VVN itself PP from IN an DT intended VVN few JJ hundred CD words NNS into IN nearly RB 200 CD , , 000 CD of IN which WDT the DT present JJ book NN is VBZ revision NN and CC abridgment NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 193 CD We PP have VHP thus RB arrived VVN at IN the DT transcendent JJ realm NN as IN a DT realm NN of IN things NNS in IN themselves PP that WDT is VBZ , , with IN whatever WDT nature NN they PP may MD have VH intrinsically RB , , not RB as IN they PP are VBP determined VVN by IN the DT terms NNS in IN which WDT we PP see VVP them PP . SENT Whereat RB we PP might MD profitable JJ pause NN to TO consider VV the DT grammar NN of IN the DT intrinsic JJ . SENT It PP is VBZ the DT puzzle NN we PP encountered VVD when WRB discussing VVG the DT paradox NN of IN substance NN . SENT As RB soon RB as IN one PP considers VVZ things NNS in IN relation NN to TO other JJ things NNS , , one PP is VBZ uncomfortably RB on IN the DT way NN to TO dissolving VVG them PP into IN their PP$ context NN , , since IN their PP$ relations NNS lead VVP beyond IN them PP . SENT A DT thing NN in IN itself PP for IN instance NN can't NN be VB higher JJR or CC heavier JJR than IN something NN or CC inside JJ or CC outside JJ something NN , , or CC derived VVN from IN something NN , , etc FW . SENT For IN though IN such JJ descriptions NNS may MD apply VV to TO it PP , , they PP do VVP not RB apply VV to TO it PP purely RB as IN a DT thing NN in IN itself PP . SENT rather RB , , they PP are VBP contextual JJ references NNS , , pointing VVG beyond IN the DT thing NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT xviii NP Theological NP , , metaphysical JJ , , and CC juridical JJ doctrines NNS offer VVP the DT best JJS illustration NN of IN the DT concerns NNS we PP place VVP under IN the DT heading VVG of IN Grammar NN . SENT the DT forms NNS and CC methods NNS of IN art NN best RBS illustrate VVP the DT concerns NNS of IN Symbolic JJ . SENT and CC the DT ideal JJ material NN to TO reveal VV the DT nature NN of IN Rhetoric NN comprises VVZ observations NNS on IN parliamentary JJ and CC diplomatic JJ devices NNS , , editorial JJ bias NN , , sales NNS methods NNS and CC incidents NNS of IN social JJ sparring VVG . SENT However RB , , the DT three CD fields NNS overlap VVP considerably RB . SENT And CC we PP shall MD note VV , , in IN passing NN , , how WRB the DT Rhetoric NN and CC the DT Symbolic JJ hover NN about IN the DT edges NNS of IN our PP$ central JJ theme NN , , the DT Grammar NN . SENT Schiffrin NP 1994 CD . SENT 8 CD In IN the DT ethnography NN of IN communication NN approach NN , , Dell NP Hymes NP proposed VVD that DT scholarship NN focus NN on IN communicative JJ competence NN . SENT the DT tacit JJ social JJ , , psychological JJ , , cultural JJ , , and CC linguistic JJ knowledge NN governing VVG appropriate JJ use NN of IN language NN including VVG , , but CC not RB limited JJ to TO , , grammar NN . SENT Communicative JJ competence NN includes VVZ knowledge NN of IN how WRB to TO engage VV in IN everyday JJ conversation NN as IN well RB as RB other JJ culturally RB constructed VVN speech NN events NNS . SENT Sperber NP and CC Wilson NP 1988 CD . SENT 9 CD 10 CD It PP is VBZ not RB legitimate JJ to TO ignore VV the DT differences NNS between IN the DT semantic JJ representations NNS of IN sentences NNS and CC the DT thoughts NNS that IN utterances NNS are VBP used VVN to TO convey VV . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT semantic JJ representation NN of IN a DT sentence NN deals NNS with IN a DT sort NN of IN common JJ core NN of IN meaning NN shared VVN by IN every DT utterance NN of IN it PP . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT grammar NN can MD say VV nothing NN about IN how WRB the DT hearer NN , , using VVG non JJ linguistic JJ information NN , , determines VVZ on IN a DT particular JJ occasion NN what WP the DT time NN of IN utterance NN actually RB is VBZ , , who WP the DT speaker NN is VBZ , , which WDT Bill NP or CC Betsy NP the DT speaker NN has VHZ in IN mind NN , , etc FW . SENT , , and CC hence RB which WDT thought NN is VBZ actually RB being VBG expressed VVN . SENT These DT aspects NNS of IN interpretation NN involve VVP an DT interaction NN between IN linguistic JJ structure NN and CC non JJ linguistic JJ information NN , , only RB the DT former JJ being VBG dealt VVN with IN by IN the DT grammar NN . SENT Booth NN 1979 CD . SENT 107 CD He PP Burke NP in IN fact NN rejects VVZ more RBR than IN conventional JJ norms NNS , , His PP$ dialectic NN of IN similarities NNS and CC differences NNS is VBZ so RB deliberately RB flexible JJ and CC so RB aggressively RB opposed VVN to TO neatly RB fixed VVN meanings NNS that IN in IN a DT sense NN all DT literal JJ proof NN is VBZ made VVN suspect JJ . SENT In IN the DT opening VVG pages NNS of IN A DT Grammar NN of IN Motives NNS we PP find VVP a DT series NN of IN claims NNS that IN any DT action NN or CC statement NN can MD be VB considered VVN as IN evidence NN for IN or CC against IN almost RB any DT concept NN . SENT In IN defining VVG any DT substance NN , , for IN example NN , , we PP necessarily RB place VVP it PP in IN its PP$ context NN , , its PP$ scene NN , , which WDT is VBZ to TO define VV it PP in IN terms NNS of IN what WP it PP is VBZ not RB , , leading VVG to TO the DT paradox NN of IN substance NN . SENT every DT positive NN is VBZ negative JJ . SENT Before IN we PP know VVP it PP , , Burke NP has VHZ moved VVN through IN statements NNS like IN any DT tendency NN to TO do VV something NN is VBZ . SENT . SENT . SENT a DT tendency NN not RB to TO do VV it PP 32 CD to TO a DT series NN of IN paradoxes NNS and CC oxymorons NNS and CC ambiguities NNS of IN substance NN that IN stagger NN the DT literal JJ minded VVD . SENT Booth NN 1979 CD . SENT 108 RB Consider VV more RBR closely RB the DT beginning NN of IN A DT Grammar NN of IN Motives NNS . SENT Like IN Burke's NP other JJ books NNS , , it PP depends VVZ on IN a DT conceptual JJ beginning NN in IN dramatism NN . SENT if IN man NN as IN symbol NN user NN , , then RB action NN in IN the DT sense NN of IN symbolically RB motivated VVN choices NNS between IN various JJ yeses NNS and CC noes NNS the DT opposite NN , , in IN short JJ , , of IN mere JJ motion NN . SENT . SENT if IN action NN , , then RB conflict NN . SENT if IN conflict NN , , then RB drama NN . SENT And CC if IN drama NN , , then RB surely RB you PP must MD want VV to TO find VV a DT critical JJ language NN that WDT deals VVZ dramatically RB with IN the DT great JJ symbolic JJ drama NN of IN the DT whole NN of IN man's JJ life NN . SENT But CC not RB how WRB he PP says VVZ the DT project NN began VVD , , as RB distinct JJ from IN how WRB the DT finished JJ book NN begins VVZ . SENT Booth NN 1979 CD . SENT 109 CD Burke NP found VVD himself PP trying VVG to TO construct VV a DT rhetoric NN , , symbolic JJ , , and CC grammar NN of IN human JJ motives NNS , , a DT three CD in IN one CD inquiry NN that WDT would MD potentially RB accommodate VV all DT particular JJ doctrines NNS and CC provide VV for IN their PP$ meeting NN without IN mutual JJ destruction NN . SENT In IN short JJ , , he PP set VVD out RP , , like IN certain JJ others NNS , , to TO build VV a DT pluralism NN that WDT would MD save VV himself PP and CC the DT world NN by IN reducing VVG meaningless JJ and CC destructive JJ symbolic JJ encounter NN . SENT The DT further JJR one CD goes VVZ in IN Burke NP , , the DT clearer JJR it PP becomes VVZ that IN every DT consideration NN is VBZ subordinated VVN to TO this DT master NN program NN . SENT Marshall NP 1992 CD . SENT 168 CD In IN the DT deconstructive JJ critic NN Paul NP de NP Man's NP terms NNS , , a DT text's JJ grammar NN the DT syntactic JJ structures NNS of IN its PP$ language NN contradicts VVZ its PP$ rhetoric NN , , its PP$ figurality NN and CC the DT metaphoricity NN it PP aims VVZ to TO project VV . SENT Enkvist NP 1981 CD . SENT 97 CD 8 CD Rhetoricians NNS used VVN to TO be VB the DT people NNS who WP worried VVD most RBS about IN the DT complex NN of IN problems NNS which WDT I PP shall MD discuss VV under IN a DT somewhat RB ponderous JJ term NN , , Experiential JJ Iconicism NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT traditional JJ labels NNS under IN which WDT these DT problems NNS used VVN to TO enter VV into IN rhetoric NN and CC grammar NN were VBD ordo NN naturalis NNS and CC ordo NN artificialis NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT In IN natural JJ order NN . SENT . SENT . SENT text NN and CC discourse NN have VHP the DT same JJ arrangement NN as IN things NNS in IN the DT universe NN of IN discourse NN . SENT Foucault NP 1986 CD a DT . SENT 146 CD Chomsky NP in IN his PP$ book NN on IN Cartesian JJ grammar NN rediscovered VVD a DT form NN of IN knowledge NN that WDT had VHD been VBN in IN use NN from IN Cordemoy NP to TO Humboldt NP . SENT It PP could MD only RB be VB understood VVN from IN the DT perspective NN of IN generative JJ grammar NN because IN this DT later JJR manifestation NN held VVD the DT key NN to TO its PP$ construction NN . SENT in IN effect NN , , a DT retrospective JJ codification NN of IN an DT historical JJ position NN . SENT Foucault NP 1986 CD a DT . SENT 146 CD Saussure NP made VVD possible JJ a DT generative JJ grammar NN radically RB different JJ from IN his PP$ own JJ structural JJ analysis NN . SENT groundDefinitionUnder NN constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 7 CD Burke NP 1945 CD Fish NP 1982 CD Booth NP 1974 CD Derrida NP 1986 CD b SYM Bathrick NP 1992 CD Cixous NP 1986 CD Leitch NP n NN . SENT d SYM . SENT Quotes NNS . SENT 9 CD Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 98 CD A NP scientist NN might MD happen VV to TO believe VV in IN a DT personal JJ God NP , , and CC might MD even RB pray VV to TO God NP for IN the DT success NN of IN his PP$ experiments NNS . SENT In IN such PDT an DT act NN of IN prayer NN , , of IN course NN , , he PP would MD be VB treating VVG God NP as IN a DT variable NN . SENT Yet RB , , when WRB his PP$ prayer NN was VBD finished VVN , , and CC he PP began VVD his PP$ experiments NNS , , he PP would MD now RB , , qua IN scientist NN , , treat VV God NP as IN an DT invariant JJ term NN , , as IN being VBG at IN most JJS but CC the DT over IN all DT name NN for IN the DT ultimate JJ ground NN of IN all DT experience NN and CC all DT experiments NNS , , and CC not RB a DT name NN for IN the DT particularities NNS of IN local JJ context NN with IN which WDT the DT scientific JJ study NN of IN conditions NNS , , or CC correlations NNS , , is VBZ concerned VVN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 79 CD We PP cherish VV the DT behaviorist NN experiment NN precisely RB because IN it PP illustrates VVZ the DT relation NN between IN the DT circumference NN and CC the DT circumscribed VVN in IN mechanistic JJ terms NNS . SENT and CC because IN the DT sharpest JJS instance NN of IN the DT way NN in IN which WDT the DT altering VVG of IN the DT scenic JJ scope NN affects VVZ the DT interpretation NN of IN the DT act NN is VBZ to TO be VB found VVN in IN the DT shift NN from IN teleological JJ to TO mechanistic JJ philosophies NNS . SENT Christian JJ theology NN , , in IN stressing VVG the DT rational JJ , , personal JJ , , and CC purposive JJ aspects NNS of IN the DT Creation NN as IN the DT embodiment NN of IN the DT Creator's NP pervasive JJ will NN , , had VHD treated VVN such JJ principles NNS as IN scenic JJ , , That DT is VBZ , , they PP were VBD not RB merely RB traits NNS of IN human JJ beings NNS , , but CC extended VVD to TO the DT outer JJ circumference NN of IN the DT ultimate JJ ground NN . SENT Hence RB , , by IN the DT logic NN of IN the DT scene NN act NN ratio NN , , they PP were VBD taken VVN as RB basic JJ to TO the DT constitution NN of IN human JJ motives NNS , , and CC could MD be VB deduced VVN from IN the DT nature NN of IN God NP as IN an DT objective NN , , extrinsic JJ principle NN defining VVG the DT nature NN of IN human JJ acts NNS . SENT But CC when WRB the DT circumference NN was VBD narrowed VVN to TO naturalistic JJ limits NNS , , the DT Creator NN was VBD left VVN out RP or CC account NN , , and CC only RB the DT Creation NN remained VVD remained VVN not RB as IN an DT act NN , , however RB , , but CC as IN a DT concatenation NN of IN motions NNS . SENT Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 532 CD On IN one CD level NN this DT counterargument NN is VBZ unassailable JJ , , but CC on IN another DT level NN it PP is VBZ finally RB beside IN the DT point NN . SENT It PP is VBZ unassailable JJ as IN a DT general JJ and CC theoretical JJ conclusion NN . SENT the DT positing VVG of IN context NN or CC institution NN specific JJ norms NNS surely RB rules NNS out IN the DT possibility NN of IN a DT norm NN whose WP$ validity NN would MD be VB recognized VVN by IN everyone NN , , no DT matter NN what WP his PP$ situation NN . SENT But CC it PP is VBZ beside RB the DT point NN for IN any DT particular JJ individual NN , , for IN since IN everyone NN is VBZ situated VVN somewhere RB , , there EX is VBZ no DT one NN for IN whom WP the DT absence NN of IN an DT asituational JJ norm NN would MD be VB of IN any DT practical JJ consequence NN , , in IN the DT sense NN that IN his PP$ performance NN or CC his PP$ confidence NN in IN his PP$ ability NN to TO perform VV would MD be VB impaired VVN . SENT So RB that IN while IN it PP is VBZ generally RB true JJ that IN to TO have VH many JJ standards NNS is VBZ to TO have VH none NN at IN all DT , , it PP is VBZ not RB true JJ for IN anyone NN in IN particular JJ . SENT . SENT . SENT In IN other JJ words NNS , , while IN relativism NN is VBZ a DT position NN one PP can MD entertain VV , , it PP is VBZ not RB a DT position NN one PP can MD occupy VV . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT point NN is VBZ that IN there EX is VBZ never RB a DT moment NN when WRB one PP believes VVZ nothing NN , , when WRB consciousness NN is VBZ innocent JJ of IN any DT and CC all DT categories NNS of IN thought NN , , and CC whatever WDT categories NNS of IN thought NN are VBP operative JJ at IN a DT given VVN moment NN will MD serve VV as IN an DT undoubted JJ ground NN . SENT Booth NN 1974 CD . SENT 22 CD The NP dogmas NNS we PP turn VVP to TO now RB tend VV to TO travel VV together RB , , reinforcing VVG each DT other JJ to TO constitute VV the DT almost RB overwhelmingly RB persuasive JJ worldview NN of IN modernism NN . SENT But CC it PP will MD be VB useful JJ to TO think VV of IN them PP as IN falling VVG into IN five CD kinds NNS . SENT There EX are VBP dogmas NNS about IN a DT the DT methods NNS or CC means VVZ for IN producing VVG change NN . SENT b SYM the DT nature NN of IN the DT thing NN being VBG changed VVN the DT mind NN or CC soul NN or CC self NN or CC person NN or CC organism NN though IN I PP have VHP talked VVN only RB of IN changing VVG minds NNS , , I PP intend VVP the DT word NN mind NN in IN the DT broadest JJS possible JJ sense NN . SENT c SYM the DT scene NN of IN change NN the DT world NN in IN which WDT that DT thing NN changed VVD , , the DT mind NN , , finds VVZ itself PP . SENT d SYM the DT principles NNS or CC basic JJ assumptions NNS about IN truth NN and CC its PP$ testing NN the DT ground NN and CC nature NN of IN change NN . SENT and CC e NN the DT purpose NN of IN change NN . SENT Every DT effort NN to TO change VV a DT mind NN will MD appear VV differently RB depending VVG on IN our PP$ view NN of IN what WP does VVZ the DT changing NN , , what WP is VBZ changed VVN , , how WRB it PP relates VVZ to TO the DT whole JJ nature NN of IN things NNS , , whether IN or CC in IN what WP sense VVP the DT change NN is VBZ tested VVN or CC justified VVN in IN basic JJ principles NNS , , and CC the DT purpose NN of IN the DT change NN . SENT Booth NN 1974 CD . SENT 5 CD You PP may MD even RB have VH been VBN taught VVN , , as IN I PP was VBD , , that IN to TO be VB reasonable JJ in IN such PDT a DT situation NN means VVZ taking VVG an DT absolutely RB neutral JJ ground NN until IN solid JJ proof NN is VBZ available JJ which WDT in IN fact NN amounts NNS to TO making VVG the DT negative JJ decision NN , , to TO deny VV credence NN . SENT Since IN nothing NN has VHZ been VBN proved VVN , , an DT educated VVN man NN will MD wait VV for IN real JJ evidence NN . SENT It PP is VBZ part NN of IN my PP$ point NN in IN these DT lectures VVZ that IN we PP were VBD taught VVN wrong JJ . SENT Derrida NP 1986 CD b SYM . SENT 106 CD 7 CD Since IN Derrida NP understands VVZ Peirce NP to TO have VH affirmed VVD that IN signs NNS originate VV from IN other JJ signs NNS , , he PP says VVZ that IN the DT genetic JJ root NN system NN refers VVZ from IN sign NN to TO sign VV . SENT No DT ground NN of IN nonsignification NN understood VVN as IN insignificance NN or CC an DT intuition NN of IN a DT present JJ truth NN stretches VVZ out RP to TO give VV it PP foundation NN under IN the DT play NN and CC the DT coming VVG into IN being VBG of IN signs NNS . SENT Bathrick NP 1992 CD . SENT 324 CD Central NP to TO the DT strategic JJ evolution NN of IN cultural JJ criticism NN has VHZ been VBN a DT programmatic JJ effort NN to TO challenge VV what WP it PP sees VVZ as IN the DT claim NN to TO universalism NN at IN the DT heart NN . SENT . SENT . SENT of IN existing VVG literary JJ theory NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Although IN the DT emergence NN of IN cultural JJ studies NNS clearly RB results NNS from IN a DT breakdown NN of IN one CD kind NN of IN theoretical JJ generality NN , , the DT proposed VVN countermodel NN while IN accepting VVG , , and CC sometimes RB welcoming VVG , , the DT impossibility NN of IN theoretical JJ unanimity NN has VHZ sought VVN to TO establish VV common JJ ground NN around IN expanded JJ notions NNS of IN literature NN , , rhetoric NN , , textuality NN , , theory NN , , culture NN , , discursive JJ practice NN , , or CC interdisciplinarity NN . SENT And CC it PP is VBZ at IN this DT point NN , , of IN course NN , , that IN the DT fireworks NNS begin VVP . SENT Cixous NP 1986 CD . SENT 309 CD I PP shall MD speak VV about IN women's NNS writing VVG . SENT about RB what WP it PP will MD do VV . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT as IN there EX are VBP no DT grounds NNS for IN establishing VVG a DT discourse NN , , but CC rather RB an DT arid JJ millennial JJ ground NN to TO break VV , , what WP I PP say VVP has VHZ at IN least JJS two CD sides NNS and CC two CD aims NNS . SENT to TO break VV up RP , , to TO destroy VV . SENT and CC to TO foresee VV the DT unforeseeable JJ , , to TO project VV . SENT Leitch NP n NN . SENT d SYM . SENT . SENT 152 CD Deploying VVG discontinuity NN as IN a DT methodological JJ wedge NN , , archaeology NN shows VVZ one CD aspect NN of IN its PP$ negative JJ operation NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT In IN short JJ , , it PP begets VVZ excessive JJ fragmentation NN in IN both CC the DT object NN and CC method NN of IN analysis NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Archaeology NN regards VVZ discontinuity NN as IN a DT positive JJ element NN rather RB than IN some DT external JJ threat NN or CC failure NN requiring VVG reduction NN or CC erasure NN . SENT Thus RB archaeology NN actively RB courts VVZ discontinuity NN . SENT . SENT . SENT As IN archaeologist NN , , Foucault NP attempts VVZ to TO restore VV to TO the DT stable JJ ground NN of IN Western JJ culture NN its PP$ rifts NNS , , instabilities NNS , , and CC flaws NNS . SENT Last RB Modified VVN . SENT July NP 12 CD 96 CD 16 CD . SENT 29 CD . SENT 33 CD Reply NN to TO randy JJ radney NP sil NP . SENT org NP A DT Lexicon NN of IN the DT Humanities NNS SIL NP Home NP Page NP Contributions NNS