/Users/andrea/_magisterarbeit/korpus/clean/trainkorpus/17/file_2.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 Nname NP , , narrative NN , , nation NN , , nature NN , , network NN , , nonliterary NN , , norm NN , , notion NN , , noun NN , , nucleusnameDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 7 CD Burke NP 1945 CD Fish NP 1982 CD Booth NP 1974 CD Derrida NP 1986 CD a DT Bathrick NP 1992 CD Foucault NP 1986 CD a DT Jardine NP 1986 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 14 CD Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 214 CD 5 CD All NP told VVD , , throughout IN these DT pages NNS we PP have VHP been VBN considering VVG five CD major JJ aspects NNS of IN science NN . SENT 1 CD high JJ development NN of IN technological JJ specialization NN 2 CD involvement NN with IN rationale NN of IN money NN accountancy NN 3 CD progressive JJ departure NN from IN natural JJ conditions NNS , , usually RB saluted VVD in IN the DT name NN of IN naturalism NN 4 CD reduction NN of IN scenic JJ circumference NN to TO empirical JJ limits NNS the DT reason NN why WRB the DT technological JJ powers NNS that WDT take VVP us PP farthest JJ from IN natural JJ conditions NNS have VHP been VBN called VVN naturalistic JJ 5 CD stress NN upon IN the DT problem NN of IN knowledge NN as IN the DT point NN of IN departure NN for IN philosophic JJ speculation NN . SENT 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 173 CD Justice NN in IN such PDT an DT over IN all DT sense NN would MD obviously RB serve VV the DT ends NNS of IN unification NN . SENT And CC insofar RB as IN the DT law NN courts NNS would MD ideally RB serve VV this DT same JJ role NN , , in IN aiming VVG at IN a DT kind NN of IN justice NN that WDT mediated VVD among IN the DT differing VVG ways NNS of IN differing VVG classes NNS , , we PP can MD see VV how WRB the DT profuse JJ development NN of IN law NN invites VVZ to TO idealistic JJ philosophy NN . SENT Materialist NN debunkers NNS of IN such JJ legal JJ idealism NN can MD then RB interpret VV the DT ideal NN in IN terms NNS of IN its PP$ betrayal NN . SENT for IN unification NN is VBZ not RB unity NN , , but CC a DT compensation NN for IN disunity NN hence RB , , any DT term NN for IN ideal JJ justice NN can MD be VB interpreted VVN as IN a DT rhetorical JJ concealment NN for IN material NN injustice NN , , particularly RB when WRB the DT actual JJ history NN of IN legal JJ decisions NNS over IN a DT long JJ period NN can MD be VB shown VVN to TO have VH favored VVN class NN justice NN in IN the DT name NN of IN ideal JJ justice NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT xv NP We PP shall MD use VV five CD terms NNS as IN generating VVG principle NN of IN our PP$ investigation NN . SENT They PP are VBP . SENT Act NP , , Scene NN , , Agent NP , , Agency NP , , Purpose NN . SENT In IN a DT rounded JJ statement NN about IN motives NNS , , you PP must MD have VH some DT word NN that WDT names VVZ the DT act NN names NNS what WP took VVD place NN , , in IN thought NN or CC deed NN , , and CC another DT that WDT names VVZ the DT scene NN the DT background NN of IN the DT act NN , , the DT situation NN in IN which WDT it PP occurred VVD . SENT also RB , , you PP must MD indicate VV what WP person NN or CC kind NN of IN person NN agent NN performed VVD the DT act NN , , what WDT means VVZ or CC instruments NNS he PP used VVN agency NN , , and CC the DT purpose NN . SENT Men NNS may MD violently RB disagree VV about IN the DT purposes NNS behind IN a DT given VVN act NN , , or CC about IN the DT character NN of IN the DT person NN who WP did VVD it PP , , or CC how WRB he PP did VVD it PP , , or CC in IN what WP kind NN of IN situation NN he PP acted VVD . SENT or CC they PP may MD even RB insist VV upon IN totally RB different JJ words NNS to TO name VV the DT act NN itself PP . SENT But CC be VB that IN as IN it PP may MD , , any DT complete JJ statement NN about IN motives NNS will MD offer VV some DT kind NN of IN answers NNS to TO these DT five CD questions NNS . SENT what WP was VBD done VVN act NN , , when WRB or CC where WRB it PP was VBD done VVN scene NN , , who WP did VVD it PP agent NN , , how WRB he PP did VVD it PP agency NN , , and CC why WRB purpose NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 43 CD 4 CD All DT gods NNS are VBP substances NNS , , and CC as RB such JJ are VBP names NNS for IN motives NNS or CC combinations NNS of IN motives NNS . SENT Polytheistic JJ divinities NNS , , besides IN their PP$ personalistic JJ aspects NNS , , often RB represent VVP decidedly RB geometric JJ , , or CC scenic JJ , , kinds NNS of IN motivation NN . SENT Indeed RB , , we PP may MD even RB think VV of IN local JJ divinities NNS as IN theological JJ prototypes NNS of IN contemporary JJ environmentalist NN , , or CC geographic JJ motives NNS . SENT For IN to TO say VV that IN a DT river NN is VBZ a DT different JJ god NN than IN a DT mountain NN is VBZ to TO say VV , , within IN the DT rules NNS of IN a DT polytheistic JJ nomenclature NN , , that IN a DT river NN calls VVZ for IN a DT different JJ set NN of IN human JJ actions NNS than IN a DT mountain NN . SENT Whereas IN the DT enlightened JJ have VHP too RB often RB been VBN content JJ to TO dismiss VV the DT pagan NN gods NNS merely RB as IN instances NNS of IN animistic JJ superstition NN , , the DT fact NN is VBZ that IN the DT complex NN of IN social JJ behavior NN centering VVG about IN a DT given VVN god NN was VBD often RB quite RB correct JJ , , in IN the DT most RBS realistically RB biological JJ sense NN . SENT Thus RB , , insofar RB as IN adequate JJ modes NNS of IN planting NN and CC harvesting NN and CC distribution NN are VBP connected VVN with IN the DT rites NNS of IN a DT given VVN divinity NN , , its PP$ name NN would MD be VB the DT title NN for IN a DT correct JJ summation NN of IN motives NNS . SENT However RB , , such JJ concepts NNS of IN motivation NN are VBP usually RB developed VVN to TO the DT point NN where WRB their PP$ original JJ reference NN is VBZ obscured VVD , , being VBG replaced VVN by IN motivational JJ concepts NNS peculiar JJ to TO a DT specialized JJ priesthood NN and CC to TO the DT needs NNS of IN class NN domination NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 96 CD Integral NP to TO the DT concept NN of IN scope NN is VBZ the DT concept NN of IN reduction NN . SENT In IN a DT sense NN , , every DT circumference NN , , no DT matter NN how WRB far RB reaching VVG its PP$ reference NN , , is VBZ a DT reduction NN . SENT A DT cosmology NN , , for IN instance NN , , is VBZ a DT reduction NN of IN the DT world NN to TO the DT dimensions NNS of IN words NNS . SENT it PP is VBZ the DT world NN in IN terms NNS of IN words NNS . SENT The DT reductive JJ factor NN becomes VVZ quite RB obvious JJ when WRB we PP pause VVP to TO realize VV that IN any DT terminology NN of IN motives NNS reduces VVZ the DT vast JJ complexity NN of IN life NN by IN reduction NN to TO principles NNS , , laws NNS , , sequences NNS , , classifications NNS , , correlations NNS , , in IN brief NN , , abstractions NNS or CC generalizations NNS of IN one CD sort NN or CC another DT . SENT And CC any DT generalization NN is VBZ necessarily RB a DT reduction NN in IN that WDT it PP selects VVZ a DT group NN of IN things NNS and CC gives VVZ them PP a DT property NN which WDT makes VVZ it PP possible JJ to TO consider VV them PP as IN a DT single JJ entity NN . SENT Thus RB , , the DT general JJ concept NN of IN man NN neglects VVZ an DT infinite JJ number NN of IN particular JJ differences NNS in IN order NN to TO stress VV certain JJ properties NNS which WDT many JJ distinct JJ individual JJ entities NNS have VHP in RB common JJ . SENT Indeed RB , , any DT characterization NN of IN any DT sort NN is VBZ a DT reduction NN . SENT To TO give VV a DT proper JJ name NN to TO one CD person NN , , or CC to TO name VV a DT thing NN , , is VBZ to TO recognize VV some DT principle NN of IN identity NN or CC continuity NN running VVG through IN the DT discontinuities NNS that WDT , , of IN themselves PP , , would MD make VV the DT world NN sheer JJ chaos NN . SENT To TO note VV any DT order NN whatever WDT is VBZ to TO reduce VV . SENT To TO divide VV experience NN into IN hungry JJ and CC sated VVN moments NNS , , into IN the DT pleasant JJ and CC unpleasant JJ , , into IN the DT before IN and CC after IN , , into IN here RB and CC there RB even RB distinctions NNS as IN broad JJ as IN these DT translate VVP the DT world's JJ infinite JJ particulars NNS into IN terms NNS that WDT are VBP a DT reduction NN of IN the DT world NN . SENT in IN fact NN , , as RB per IN the DT equating NN of IN infinity NN and CC zero NN , , terms NNS of IN such JJ broad JJ scope NN are VBP perhaps RB the DT most RBS drastically RB reductive JJ of IN all DT . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 54 CD Such JJ tactics NNS of IN entitling VVG are VBP as RB legitimate JJ as IN any DT other JJ , , once RB the DT irony NN has VHZ been VBN made VVN explicit JJ . SENT Indeed RB , , philosophies NNS are VBP never RB quite RB consistent JJ in IN this DT sense NN . SENT All DT thought NN tends VVZ to TO name VV things NNS not RB because IN they PP are VBP precisely RB as RB named VVN , , but CC because IN they PP are VBP not RB quite RB as RB named VVN , , and CC the DT name NN is VBZ designated VVN as IN a DT somewhat RB hortatory JJ device NN , , to TO take VV up RP the DT slack NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 54 CD From IN such JJ ambiguity NN is VBZ derived VVN that IN irony NN of IN historical JJ development NN whereby WRB the DT very JJ strength NN in IN the DT affirming VVG of IN a DT given VVN term NN may MD the DT better RBR enable VV men NNS to TO make VV a DT world NN that WDT departs VVZ from IN it PP . SENT For IN the DT affirming VVG of IN the DT term NN as IN their PP$ god NN term NN enables VVZ men NNS to TO go VV far RB afield RB without IN sensing VVG a DT loss NN of IN orientation NN . SENT And CC by IN the DT time NN the DT extent NN of IN their PP$ departure NN is VBZ enough JJ to TO become VV generally RB obvious JJ , , the DT stability NN of IN the DT new JJ order NN they PP have VHP built VVN in IN the DT name NN of IN the DT old JJ order NN gives VVZ them PP the DT strength NN to TO abandon VV their PP$ old JJ god NN term NN and CC adopt VV another DT . SENT Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 341 CD Whenever WRB a DT critic NN prefaces VVZ an DT assertion NN with IN a DT phrase NN like IN without IN doubt NN or CC there EX can MD be VB no DT doubt NN , , you PP can MD be VB sure JJ that IN you PP are VBP within IN hailing VVG distance NN of IN the DT interpretive JJ principles NNS which WDT produce VVP the DT facts NNS that IN he PP presents VVZ as RB obvious JJ . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT As IN one CD obvious JJ and CC indisputable JJ interpretation NN supplants VVZ another DT , , it PP brings VVZ with IN it PP a DT new JJ set NN of IN obvious JJ and CC indisputable JJ facts NNS . SENT Of IN course NN each DT new JJ reading NN is VBZ elaborated VVN in IN the DT name NN of IN the DT poem NN itself PP , , but CC the DT poem NN itself PP is VBZ always RB a DT function NN of IN the DT interpretive JJ perspective NN from IN which WDT the DT critic NN discovers VVZ it PP . SENT Booth NN 1974 CD . SENT 31 CD By IN now RB it PP has VHZ almost RB scriptural JJ force NN . SENT in IN the DT beginning NN was VBD not RB the DT word NN but CC the DT causal JJ chain NN , , and CC his PP$ name NN was VBD sometimes RB Chemistry NN and CC sometimes RB Drive NP or CC Desire NP , , but CC never RB Lift VV or CC even RB Pull VV . SENT And CC it PP came VVD to TO pass VV that DT Error NN was VBD born VVN , , and CC his PP$ chosen VVN name NN was VBD Reason NP , , but CC his PP$ real JJ name NN was VBD Rationalization NN . SENT And CC Rationalization NN and CC his PP$ wicked JJ prophets NNS did VVD undertake VV to TO undermine VV Push NN , , claiming VVG that DT reasoning NN about IN values NNS , , about IN purposes NNS , , could MD alter VV Push's NP unalterable JJ path NN . SENT But CC the DT true JJ prophets NNS were VBD able JJ to TO unmask VV the DT wicked JJ prophets NNS , , showing VVG that IN their PP$ vaunted JJ reasonings NNS were VBD themselves PP clearly RB dictated VVD by IN Push NN . SENT And CC , , lo NP , , there EX was VBD nothing NN that IN anyone NN could MD say VV about IN anything NN that WDT could MD not RB be VB unmasked VVN and CC shown VVN to TO be VB truly RB another DT manifestation NN of IN Push's NP eternal JJ power NN . SENT And CC when WRB men NNS did VVD engage VV in IN debate NN about IN their PP$ deepest JJS concerns NNS , , they PP found VVD that IN each DT man NN could MD say VV unto RP his PP$ brother NN , , Racca NP , , thou NN fool NN . SENT Derrida NP 1986 CD a DT . SENT 93 RB There EX are VBP two CD interpretations NNS of IN interpretation NN , , of IN structure NN , , of IN sign NN , , of IN play NN . SENT The DT one NN seeks VVZ to TO decipher VV , , dreams NNS of IN deciphering VVG a DT truth NN or CC an DT origin NN which WDT escapes VVZ play NN and CC the DT order NN of IN the DT sign NN , , and CC which WDT lives VVZ the DT necessity NN of IN interpretation NN as IN an DT exile NN . SENT The DT other JJ , , which WDT is VBZ no DT longer RB turned VVN toward IN the DT origin NN , , affirms VVZ play NN and CC tries VVZ to TO pass VV beyond IN man NN and CC humanism NN , , the DT name NN of IN man NN being VBG the DT name NN of IN that DT being NN who WP , , throughout IN the DT history NN of IN metaphysics NNS or CC of IN ontotheology NN in IN other JJ words NNS , , throughout IN his PP$ entire JJ history NN has VHZ dreamed VVN of IN full JJ presence NN , , the DT reassuring JJ foundation NN , , the DT origin NN and CC the DT end NN of IN play NN . SENT Bathrick NP 1992 CD . SENT 323 CD Given VVN , , then RB , , the DT protean JJ , , anti JJ institutional JJ , , and CC , , finally RB , , heuristic JJ suggestiveness NN of IN the DT term NN cultural JJ studies NNS , , I PP should MD like VV to TO proceed VV by IN focusing VVG precisely RB on IN its PP$ nodal JJ points NNS of IN contradiction NN , , on IN the DT programmatic JJ debates NNS and CC innovations NNS that WDT have VHP emerged VVN under IN its PP$ banner NN to TO challenge VV existing JJ theory NN and CC institutional JJ formations NNS in IN the DT name NN of IN a DT more RBR relevant JJ and CC broadened VVN humanistic JJ study NN . SENT Foucault NP 1986 CD a DT . SENT 142 CD An NP author's NNS name NN is VBZ not RB simply RB an DT element NN of IN speech NN . SENT . SENT . SENT Its PP$ presence NN is VBZ functional JJ in IN that WDT it PP serves VVZ as IN a DT means NN of IN classification NN . SENT A DT name NN can MD group VV together RB a DT number NN of IN texts NNS and CC thus RB differentiate VV them PP from IN others NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT author's NNS name NN characterizes VVZ a DT particular JJ manner NN of IN existence NN of IN discourse NN . SENT The DT culture NN in IN which WDT a DT discourse NN circulates VVZ regulates VVZ its PP$ status NN and CC manner NN of IN reception NN . SENT Jardine NP 1986 CD . SENT 564 CD To TO designate VV that DT process NN , , I PP have VHP suggested VVN a DT new JJ name NN , , what WP I PP hope VVP to TO be VB a DT believable JJ neologism NN . SENT gynesis NN the DT putting VVG into IN discourse NN of IN woman NN as IN that DT process NN beyond IN the DT Cartesian JJ Subject NN , , the DT Dialectics NN of IN Representation NN , , or CC Man's NP Truth NN . SENT The DT object NN produced VVN by IN this DT process NN is VBZ neither RB a DT person NN nor CC a DT thing NN , , but CC a DT horizon NN , , that WDT towards IN which WDT the DT process NN is VBZ tending VVG . SENT a DT gynema NN . SENT This DT gynema NN is VBZ a DT reading NN effect NN , , a DT woman NN in IN effect NN , , never RB stable JJ , , without IN identity NN . SENT narrativeDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 11 CD Burke NP 1945 CD Minsky NP 1980 CD Longacre NP 1983 CD van NN Dijk NN 1977 CD Virtanen NP 1992 CD Ordonez NP 1991 CD Kinneavy NP 1971 CD Bathrick NP 1992 CD Jameson NP 1981 CD A NP . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD White NP 1974 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 16 CD Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 23 RB The DT same JJ structure NN is VBZ present JJ in IN the DT corresponding JJ Greek JJ word NN , , hypostasis NN , , literally RB , , a DT standing NN under IN . SENT hence RB anything NN set VVN under IN , , such JJ as IN stand NN , , base NN bottom NN , , prop VV , , support VV , , stay VV . SENT hence RB metaphorically RB , , that IN which WDT lies VVZ at IN the DT bottom NN of IN a DT thing NN , , as IN the DT groundwork NN , , subject JJ matter NN , , argument NN of IN a DT narrative NN , , speech NN , , poem NN . SENT a DT starting VVG point NN , , a DT beginning NN . SENT And CC then RB come VV the DT metaphysical JJ meanings NNS we PP are VBP consulting VVG Liddell NP and CC Scott NP . SENT subsistence NN , , reality NN , , real RB being VBG as RB applied VVN to TO mere JJ appearance NN , , nature NN , , essence NN . SENT In IN ecclesiastical JJ Greek NP , , the DT word NN corresponds VVZ to TO the DT Latin JJ Persona NN , , a DT Person NP of IN the DT Trinity NN which WDT leads VVZ us PP back RB into IN the DT old JJ argument NN between IN the DT homoousians NNS and CC the DT homoiousians NNS , , as RB to TO whether IN the DT three CD persons NNS were VBD of IN the DT same JJ or CC similar JJ substance NN . SENT Medically RB , , the DT word NN can MD designate VV a DT suppression NN , , as RB of IN humours NNS that WDT ought MD to TO come VV to TO the DT surface NN . SENT also RB matter NN deposited VVN in IN the DT urine NN . SENT and CC of IN liquids NNS generally RB , , the DT sediment NN , , lees NNS , , dregs NNS , , grounds NNS . SENT When WRB we PP are VBP examining VVG , , from IN the DT standpoint NN of IN Symbolic JJ , , metaphysical JJ tracts NNS that WDT would MD deal VV with IN fundamentals NNS and CC get VV to TO the DT bottom NN of IN things NNS , , this DT last JJ set NN of IN meanings NNS can MD admonish VV us PP to TO be VB on IN the DT look NN out RP for IN what WP Freud NP might MD call VV cloacal JJ motives NNS , , furtively RB interwoven VVN with IN speculations NNS that WDT may MD on IN the DT surface NN seem VVP wholly RB abstract JJ . SENT An DT acceptance NN of IN the DT universe NN on IN this DT plane NN may MD also RB be VB a DT roundabout JJ way NN of IN making VVG peace NN with IN the DT faeces NNS . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 6 CD 7 CD From IN the DT motivational JJ point NN of IN view NN , , there EX is VBZ implicit JJ in IN the DT quality NN of IN a DT scene NN the DT quality NN of IN the DT action NN that WDT is VBZ to TO take VV place NN within IN it PP . SENT This DT would MD be VB another DT way NN of IN saying VVG that IN the DT act NN will MD be VB consistent JJ with IN the DT scene NN . SENT Thus RB , , when WRB the DT curtain NN rises VVZ to TO disclose VV a DT given VVN stage NN set NN , , this DT stage NN set NN contains VVZ , , simultaneously RB , , implicitly RB , , all DT that IN the DT narrative NN is VBZ to TO draw VV out RP as IN a DT sequence NN , , explicitly RB . SENT Or CC , , of IN you PP will MD , , the DT stage NN set NN contains VVZ the DT action NN ambiguously RB as RB regards VVZ the DT norms NNS of IN action NN and CC in IN the DT course NN of IN the DT play's NNS development NN this DT ambiguity NN is VBZ converted VVN into IN a DT corresponding JJ articulacy NN . SENT The DT proportion NN would MD be VB . SENT scene NN is VBZ to TO act VV as RB implicit JJ is VBZ to TO explicit JJ . SENT Minsky NP 1980 CD . SENT 16 CD In IN any DT event NN , , the DT individual JJ statements NNS of IN a DT discourse NN lead NN to TO temporary JJ representations NNS which WDT seem VVP to TO correspond VV to TO what WP contemporary JJ linguists NNS call VVP deep JJ structures NNS which WDT are VBP then RB quickly RB rearranged VVN or CC consumed VVN in IN elaboration NN the DT growing VVG scenario NN representation NN . SENT In IN order NN of IN scale NN , , among IN the DT ingredients NNS of IN such PDT a DT structure NN there EX might MD be VB these DT kinds NNS of IN levels NNS . SENT surface VV syntactic JJ frames NNS mainly RB verb NN and CC noun NN structures NNS . SENT prepositional JJ and CC word NN order NN indicator NN conventions NNS . SENT surface VV semantic JJ frames NNS action NN centered VVD meanings NNS of IN words NNS . SENT qualifiers NNS and CC relations NNS concerning VVG participants NNS , , instruments NNS , , trajectories NNS and CC strategies NNS , , goals NNS , , consequences NNS and CC side NN effects NNS . SENT thematic JJ frames NNS scenarios NNS concerned VVN with IN topics NNS , , activities NNS , , portraits NNS , , setting VVG . SENT outstanding JJ problems NNS and CC strategies NNS commonly RB connected VVN with IN topics NNS . SENT narrative JJ frames NNS skeleton NN forms NNS for IN typical JJ stories NNS , , explanations NNS , , and CC arguments NNS . SENT conventions NNS about IN foci NNS , , protagonists NNS , , plot NN forms NNS , , development NN , , etc FW . SENT , , designed VVN to TO help VV a DT listener NN construct VV a DT new JJ , , instantiated VVD thematic JJ frame NN in IN his PP$ own JJ mind NN . SENT Longacre NP 1983 CD . SENT 3 CD To TO begin VV with IN , , we PP can MD classify VV all DT possible JJ discourses NNS according VVG to TO two CD basic JJ parameters NNS . SENT contingent JJ temporal JJ succession NN and CC agent NN orientation NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Narrative JJ discourse NN . SENT . SENT . SENT is VBZ plus RB in IN respect NN to TO both DT parameters NNS . SENT Procedural JJ discourse NN . SENT . SENT . SENT is VBZ plus RB in IN respect NN to TO contingent JJ succession NN . SENT . SENT . SENT but CC minus NN in IN respect NN to TO the DT agent NN orientation NN . SENT . SENT . SENT Behavioral JJ discourse NN is VBZ minus NN in IN regard NN to TO contingent JJ succession NN but CC plus NN in IN regard NN to TO agent NN orientation NN . SENT . SENT . SENT Expository JJ discourse NN is VBZ minus NN in IN respect NN to TO both DT parameters NNS . SENT Longacre NP 1983 CD . SENT 20 CD I PP here RB get VVP to TO the DT main JJ point NN of IN this DT chapter NN . SENT . SENT . SENT Something NN like IN plot NN characterizes VVZ forms NNS of IN discourse NN other JJ than IN narrative NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Plot NN is VBZ the DT notional JJ structure NN of IN narrative JJ discourse NN . 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 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 Virtanen NP 1992 CD . SENT 306 CD Narratives NNS , , for IN example NN , , can MD be VB used VVN for IN argumentation NN , , or CC descriptions NNS for IN instruction NN . SENT Such PDT an DT apparent JJ mismatch NN of IN discourse NN type NN and CC text NN type NN may MD be VB accounted VVN for IN in IN terms NNS of IN the DT suggested VVN two CD levels NNS . SENT Any DT discourse NN type NN may MD surface VV in IN the DT form NN of IN a DT narrative NN . SENT Narratives NNS may MD be VB used VVN to TO instruct VV . SENT . SENT . SENT explain VV things NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT describe VV activities NNS or CC circumstances NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT ease NN of IN the DT indirect JJ or CC secondary JJ usage NN manifested VVN by IN this DT type NN of IN text NN , , and CC its PP$ potential NN to TO realize VV the DT widest JJS array NN of IN discourse NN types NNS may MD , , indeed RB , , be VB regarded VVN as IN arguments NNS for IN the DT basic JJ status NN of IN narrative NN among IN the DT different JJ types NNS of IN text NN . SENT Virtanen NP 1992 CD . SENT 293 CD 4 CD I PP shall MD deal VV with IN some DT of IN the DT criteria NNS that WDT have VHP been VBN used VVN in IN the DT study NN of IN language NN to TO group NN texts NNS for IN various JJ purposes NNS . SENT I PP shall MD then RB briefly RB touch VV upon IN the DT notion NN of IN prototype NN , , before IN proceeding VVG to TO a DT discussion NN of IN a DT two CD level NN typology NN of IN texts NNS . SENT To TO round VV off RP , , I PP shall MD consider VV the DT status NN of IN narrative NN among IN the DT different JJ types NNS of IN text NN . SENT Ordonez NP 1991 CD . SENT 103 CD The DT work NN of IN Annis NP Pratt NP emerges VVZ as IN a DT useful JJ key NN to TO the DT perception NN and CC assessment NN of IN myth NN and CC archetype NN in IN narrative NN by IN women NNS . SENT Kinneavy NP 1971 CD . SENT 36 CD Kinneavy NP postulates NNS categories NNS like VVP . SENT a DT narrative NN , , a DT series NN of IN classifications NNS , , a DT criticism NN or CC evaluation NN , , and CC a DT description NN . SENT Actually RB , , these DT four CD classes NNS of IN kinds NNS of IN referents NNS are VBP the DT modes NNS of IN discourse NN considered VVN here RB . 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 Jameson NP 1981 CD . SENT 115 CD An DT ideologeme NN , , that WDT is VBZ , , a DT historically RB determinate JJ conceptual JJ or CC semic JJ complex NN which WDT can MD project VV itself PP variously RB in IN the DT form NN of IN a DT value NN system NN or CC philosophical JJ concept NN , , or CC in IN the DT form NN of IN a DT protonarrative NN , , a DT private JJ of IN collective JJ narrative JJ fantasy NN . SENT A DT . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD . SENT 25 CD The DT pursuit NN narrative NN in IN mythology NN often RB involved VVD a DT green JJ world NN locale NN , , an DT island NN , , well RB , , or CC grotto NN , , invaded VVD by IN men NNS who WP rape NN the DT beneficent JJ women NNS residents NNS followed VVD by IN an DT account NN of IN the DT destruction NN and CC theft NN of IN the DT area's JJ natural JJ value NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Such JJ traumas NNS characterize VVP the DT plot NN structure NN of IN gothic JJ novels NNS where WRB women NNS heroes NNS experience VVP adventures NNS in IN quest NN of IN true JJ chivalry NN in IN combination NN with IN the DT horror NN of IN pursuit NN and CC victimization NN by IN male JJ villains NNS . SENT White NP 1974 CD . SENT 402 CD Levi NP Strauss NP concludes VVZ . SENT In IN spite NN of IN worthy JJ and CC indispensable JJ efforts NNS to TO bring VV another DT moment NN in IN history NN alive JJ and CC to TO possess VV it PP , , a DT clairvoyant JJ history NN should MD admit VV that IN it PP never RB completely RB escapes VVZ from IN the DT nature NN of IN myth NN . SENT It PP is VBZ this DT mediative JJ function NN that WDT permits VVZ us PP to TO speak VV of IN a DT historical JJ narrative NN as IN an DT extended JJ metaphor NN . SENT White NP 1974 CD . SENT 405 CD The DT fruitfulness NN of IN Jakobson's NP theory NN lies VVZ in IN its PP$ suggestion NN that IN the DT various JJ forms NNS of IN both DT poetry NN and CC prose NN , , all DT of IN which WDT have VHP their PP$ counterparts NNS in IN narrative NN in IN general JJ and CC therefore RB in IN historiography NN too RB , , can MD be VB characterized VVN in IN terms NNS of IN the DT dominant JJ trope NN which WDT serves VVZ as IN the DT paradigm NN , , provided VVN by IN language NN itself PP , , of IN all DT significant JJ relationships NNS conceived VVD to TO exist VV in IN the DT world NN by IN anyone NN wishing VVG to TO represent VV those DT relationships NNS in IN language NN . SENT nationDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 3 CD Burke NP 1945 CD Bakhtin NP 1986 CD Bathrick NP 1992 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 3 CD Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 37 CD In IN theological JJ and CC metaphysical JJ works NNS , , we PP can MD recognize VV the DT paradox NN of IN the DT absolute JJ readily RB enough RB . SENT Often RB , , in IN fact NN , , it PP is VBZ explicitly RB discussed VVN . SENT But CC in IN historicist JJ writings NNS it PP more RB easily RB goes VVZ unnoticed JJ . SENT Yet RB the DT paradox NN may MD be VB implicit JJ in IN any DT term NN for IN a DT collective JJ motivation NN , , such JJ as IN a DT concept NN of IN class NN , , nation NN , , the DT general JJ will NN , , and CC the DT like IN . SENT Technically RB , , it PP becomes VVZ a DT pure JJ motive NN when WRB matched VVN against IN some DT individual JJ locus NN of IN motivation NN . SENT And CC it PP may MD thus RB be VB the DT negation NN of IN an DT individual JJ motive NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT What WP we PP are VBP here RB considering VVG formally RB , , as IN a DT paradox NN of IN substance NN , , can MD be VB illustrated VVN quickly RB enough RB by IN example NN . SENT A DT soldier NN may MD be VB nationally RB motivated VVN to TO kill VV the DT enemies NNS of IN his PP$ country NN , , whereas IN individually RB he PP is VBZ motivated VVN by IN a DT horror NN of IN killing VVG his PP$ own JJ enemies NNS . SENT Or CC conversely RB , , as IN a DT patriot NN he PP may MD act VV by IN the DT motive NN of IN sacrifice NN in IN behalf NN of IN his PP$ country NN , , but CC as IN an DT individual NN he PP may MD want VV to TO profit NN . SENT Bakhtin NP 1986 CD . SENT 668 CD Heteroglossia NP , , as RB organized VVN in IN these DT low JJ genres NNS , , was VBD not RB merely RB heteroglossia NN vis FW vis FW the DT accepted JJ literary JJ language NN in IN all PDT its PP$ various JJ generic JJ expressions NNS , , that WDT is VBZ , , vis FW vis FW the DT linguistic JJ center NN of IN the DT verbal JJ ideological JJ life NN of IN the DT nation NN and CC the DT epoch NN , , but CC was VBD a DT heteroglossia NN consciously RB opposed VVN to TO this DT literary JJ language NN . SENT It PP was VBD parodic JJ , , and CC aimed VVN sharply RB and CC polemically RB against IN the DT official JJ languages NNS of IN its PP$ given VVN time NN . SENT It PP was VBD heteroglossia NN that WDT had VHD been VBN dialogized VVN . 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 natureDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 13 CD Burke NP 1945 CD Booth NP 1974 CD Foucault NP 1986 CD b SYM Spellmeyer NP 1993 CD Booth NP 1979 CD Lanham NP 1993 CD Lanham NP 1976 CD Culler NP 1992 CD Frye NN 1957 CD Enkvist NN 1981 CD A NP . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD Said VVD 1986 CD White NP 1974 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 35 CD Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 319 CD This DT work NN which WDT would MD have VH as IN its PP$ motto NN Ad NN Bellum NP Purificandum NP , , or CC Towards IN the DT Purification NN of IN War NP is VBZ constructed VVN on IN the DT belief NN that WDT , , whereas IN an DT attitude NN of IN humanistic JJ contemplation NN is VBZ in IN itself PP more RBR important JJ by IN far RB than IN any DT method NN , , only RB by IN method NN could MD it PP be VB given VVN the DT body NN necessary JJ for IN its PP$ existence NN even RB as IN an DT attitude NN . SENT We PP would MD thus RB hold VV at IN least JJS that IN an DT elaborate JJ analysis NN of IN linguistic JJ foibles NNS is VBZ justified VVN in IN principle NN . SENT Indeed RB , , the DT study NN of IN linguistic JJ action NN is VBZ but RB beginning VVG . SENT And CC we PP must MD be VB on IN our PP$ guard NN lest IN the DT great JJ need NN for IN an DT attitude NN of IN linguistic JJ skepticism NN allow VV us PP to TO be VB content JJ with IN too RB hasty JJ a DT policy NN as RB regards VVZ the DT nature NN of IN language NN itself PP . SENT This DT is VBZ too RB serious JJ a DT matter NN for IN such JJ dissipatory JJ approaches NNS to TO the DT subject NN as IN we PP find VVP among IN the DT contemporary JJ debunkers NNS . SENT And CC even RB serious JJ approaches NNS are VBP invalidated VVD when WRB formed VVN in IN keeping VVG with IN the DT ideals NNS of IN an DT uncriticized JJ scientism NN , , which WDT is VBZ too RB evasive JJ of IN the DT dramatistic NN to TO make VV even RB an DT adequate JJ preparatory JJ description NN of IN linguistic JJ forms NNS . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 187 CD By IN utilizing VVG a DT function NN of IN our PP$ term NN agent NN , , we PP can MD transform VV this DT problem NN into IN a DT solution NN . SENT Namely RB . SENT we PP can MD say VV that DT people NNS interpret VVP natural JJ sequences NNS in IN terms NNS of IN cause NN and CC effect NN not RB because IN of IN something NN in IN the DT natural JJ scene NN requiring VVG this DT interpretation NN , , but CC because IN they PP are VBP the DT sort NN of IN agents NNS that WDT see VVP things NNS in IN terms NNS of IN necessary JJ relations NNS . SENT In IN this DT view NN we PP do VVP not RB derive VV our PP$ ideas NNS of IN cause NN and CC effect NN from IN experience NN . SENT all DT that IN we PP can MD derive VV from IN experience NN is VBZ the DT observation NN that IN certain JJ happenings NNS seem VVP likely RB to TO follow VV certain JJ happenings NNS . SENT But CC our PP$ ideas NNS of IN cause NN and CC effect NN are VBP derived VVN from IN the DT nature NN of IN the DT mind NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT xv NN What WP is VBZ involved VVN when WRB we PP say VVP what WP people NNS are VBP doing VVG and CC why WRB they PP are VBP doing VVG it PP . SENT An DT answer NN to TO that DT question NN is VBZ the DT subject NN of IN this DT book NN . SENT The DT book NN is VBZ concerned VVN with IN the DT basic JJ forms NNS of IN thought NN which WDT , , in IN accordance NN with IN the DT nature NN of IN the DT world NN as IN all DT men NNS necessarily RB experience VVP it PP , , are VBP exemplified VVN in IN the DT attributing VVG of IN motives NNS . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 77 CD 8 CD Now RB , , it PP seems VVZ undeniable JJ , , by IN the DT very JJ nature NN of IN the DT case NN , , that WDT in IN definition NN , , or CC systematic JJ placement NN , , one PP must MD see VV things NNS in IN terms NNS of IN . SENT . SENT . SENT And CC implicit JJ in IN the DT terms NNS chosen VVN , , there EX are VBP circumferences NNS of IN varying VVG scope NN . SENT Motivationally RB , , they PP involve VVP such JJ relationships NNS as RB are VBP revealed VVN in IN the DT analysis NN of IN the DT scene NN act NN and CC scene NN agent NN ratios NNS whereby WRB the DT quality NN of IN the DT context NN in IN which WDT a DT subject NN is VBZ placed VVN will MD affect VV the DT quality NN of IN the DT subject NN placed VVN in IN that DT context NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 189 CD If IN then RB , , you PP would MD talk VV profoundly RB and CC intelligently RB about IN the DT conditions NNS of IN the DT possibility NN of IN the DT knowledge NN of IN nothing NN , , what WP do VVP you PP have VHP that IN you PP can MD talk VV about RB . SENT You PP have VHP the DT knower NN . SENT You PP can MD say VV , , for IN instance NN , , Whatever WDT an DT object NN in IN general NN may MD or CC may MD not RB look VV like IN , , you PP can MD be VB sure JJ that IN when WRB you PP do VVP come VV across IN one CD you PP are VBP going VVG to TO have VH to TO encounter VV it PP in IN terms NNS of IN space NN and CC or CC time NN . SENT And CC since IN you PP can't VVD here RB be VB talking VVG about IN an DT object NN if IN you PP are VBP , , what WP is VBZ it PP . SENT what WP you PP must MD be VB talking VVG about RB is VBZ the DT nature NN of IN your PP$ own JJ mind NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 23 RB The DT same JJ structure NN is VBZ present JJ in IN the DT corresponding JJ Greek JJ word NN , , hypostasis NN , , literally RB , , a DT standing NN under IN . SENT hence RB anything NN set VVN under IN , , such JJ as IN stand NN , , base NN bottom NN , , prop VV , , support VV , , stay VV . SENT hence RB metaphorically RB , , that IN which WDT lies VVZ at IN the DT bottom NN of IN a DT thing NN , , as IN the DT groundwork NN , , subject JJ matter NN , , argument NN of IN a DT narrative NN , , speech NN , , poem NN . SENT a DT starting VVG point NN , , a DT beginning NN . SENT And CC then RB come VV the DT metaphysical JJ meanings NNS we PP are VBP consulting VVG Liddell NP and CC Scott NP . SENT subsistence NN , , reality NN , , real RB being VBG as RB applied VVN to TO mere JJ appearance NN , , nature NN , , essence NN . SENT In IN ecclesiastical JJ Greek NP , , the DT word NN corresponds VVZ to TO the DT Latin JJ Persona NN , , a DT Person NP of IN the DT Trinity NN which WDT leads VVZ us PP back RB into IN the DT old JJ argument NN between IN the DT homoousians NNS and CC the DT homoiousians NNS , , as RB to TO whether IN the DT three CD persons NNS were VBD of IN the DT same JJ or CC similar JJ substance NN . SENT Medically RB , , the DT word NN can MD designate VV a DT suppression NN , , as RB of IN humours NNS that WDT ought MD to TO come VV to TO the DT surface NN . SENT also RB matter NN deposited VVN in IN the DT urine NN . SENT and CC of IN liquids NNS generally RB , , the DT sediment NN , , lees NNS , , dregs NNS , , grounds NNS . SENT When WRB we PP are VBP examining VVG , , from IN the DT standpoint NN of IN Symbolic JJ , , metaphysical JJ tracts NNS that WDT would MD deal VV with IN fundamentals NNS and CC get VV to TO the DT bottom NN of IN things NNS , , this DT last JJ set NN of IN meanings NNS can MD admonish VV us PP to TO be VB on IN the DT look NN out RP for IN what WP Freud NP might MD call VV cloacal JJ motives NNS , , furtively RB interwoven VVN with IN speculations NNS that WDT may MD on IN the DT surface NN seem VVP wholly RB abstract JJ . SENT An DT acceptance NN of IN the DT universe NN on IN this DT plane NN may MD also RB be VB a DT roundabout JJ way NN of IN making VVG peace NN with IN the DT faeces NNS . 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 Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 90 CD So RB far RB as IN we PP can MD see VV , , this DT matter NN of IN circumference NN is VBZ imbedded VVN in IN the DT very JJ nature NN of IN terms NNS , , and CC men NNS are VBP continually RB performing VVG new JJ acts NNS , , in IN that WDT they PP are VBP continually RB making VVG judgments NNS as RB to TO the DT scope NN of IN the DT context NN which WDT they PP implicitly RB or CC explicitly RB impute VV in IN their PP$ interpretations NNS of IN motives NNS . SENT To TO select VV a DT set NN of IN terms NNS is VBZ , , by IN the DT same JJ token JJ , , to TO select VV a DT circumference NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 58 CD The DT design NN on IN a DT piece NN of IN primitive JJ pottery NN may MD be VB wholly RB symbolic JJ or CC allegorical JJ . SENT But CC a DT drawing NN that WDT accurately RB reproduces VVZ this DT design NN in IN a DT scientific JJ treatise NN would MD be VB not RB symbolic JJ or CC allegorical JJ , , but CC realistic JJ . SENT And CC similarly RB , , even RB when WRB statements NNS about IN the DT nature NN of IN the DT world NN are VBP abstractly RB metaphysical JJ , , statements NNS about IN the DT nature NN of IN these DT statements NNS can MD be VB as RB empirical JJ as IN the DT statement NN , , This DT is VBZ Mr NP . SENT Smith NP , , made VVD when WRB introducing VVG Mr NP . SENT Smith NP in IN the DT accepted JJ manner NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 190 CD But CC look VV where WRB we PP now RB are VBP . SENT We PP have VHP described VVN intellectual JJ synthesis NN as IN active JJ . SENT Yet RB what WP kind NN of IN act NN is VBZ this DT . SENT The DT empirical JJ scene NN has VHZ derived VVN its PP$ character NN from IN the DT nature NN of IN the DT agent NN . SENT but CC though IN we PP have VHP called VVN this DT action NN of IN the DT mind NN spontaneous JJ and CC original JJ , , we PP might MD just RB as RB well RB have VHP called VVN it PP inevitable JJ . SENT It PP is VBZ compulsory JJ , , lacking VVG the DT elements NNS of IN freedom NN necessary JJ for IN action NN . SENT The DT mind NN cannot NN see VVP otherwise RB than IN in IN terms NNS of IN the DT categories NNS . SENT To TO observe VV is VBZ an DT act NN , , in IN that WDT one PP can MD choose VV either RB to TO observe VV it PP or CC not RB to TO observe VV it PP . SENT But CC to TO observe VV in IN terms NNS of IN the DT categories NNS is VBZ not RB an DT act NN in IN this DT sense NN , , since IN we PP must MD consider VV it PP in IN such JJ terms NNS , , whether IN we PP choose VVP to TO observe VV it PP or CC not RB . SENT Conversely RB , , though IN the DT sensibility NN is VBZ passive JJ , , we PP find VVP space NN and CC time NN called VVD the DT forms NNS of IN sensibility NN . SENT And CC in IN the DT tradition NN from IN which WDT Western JJ philosophy NN stems VVZ , , form NN is VBZ the DT act NN word NN par NN excellence NN . SENT So IN the DT passive NN begins VVZ to TO look VV as RB active JJ as IN the DT avowedly RB active JJ . 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 66 CD We PP are VBP reasoning NN as RB follows VVZ . SENT we PP are VBP saying VVG that IN , , to TO study VV the DT nature NN of IN the DT term NN , , act NN , , one PP must MD select VV a DT prototype NN , , or CC paradigm NN of IN action NN . SENT This DT prototype NN we PP find VVP in IN the DT conception NN of IN a DT perfect JJ or CC total JJ act NN , , such JJ as IN the DT act NN of IN the DT Creation NN . SENT Examining VVG this DT concept NN , , we PP find VVP that IN it PP is VBZ magic JJ , , for IN it PP produces VVZ something NN out IN of IN nothing NN . SENT This DT enables VVZ us PP to TO equate VV magic NN with IN novelty NN and CC leads VVZ us PP to TO look VV for IN a DT modicum NN of IN magic NN in IN every DT act NN to TO the DT extent NN that IN the DT act NN possesses VVZ a DT modicum NN of IN novelty NN . SENT This DT consideration NN also RB admonishes VVZ us PP , , however RB , , to TO make VV a DT distinction NN between IN true JJ and CC false JJ magic NN . SENT False JJ magic NN is VBZ a DT quasi NP scientific JJ ideal NN that WDT would MD suspend VV the DT laws NNS of IN motion NN , , as RB in IN the DT attempt NN to TO coerce VV natural JJ forces NNS by IN purely RB ritualistic JJ means NNS . SENT True JJ magic NN is VBZ an DT aspect NN not RB of IN motion NN but CC of IN action NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 15 CD 6 CD Both DT act NN and CC agent NN require VVP scenes NNS that WDT contain VVP them PP . SENT Hence RB the DT scene NN act NN and CC scene NN agent NN ratios NNS are VBP in IN the DT fullest JJS sense NN positive JJ or CC positional JJ . SENT But CC the DT relation NN between IN act NN and CC agent NN is VBZ not RB quite RB the DT same JJ . SENT The DT agent NN does VVZ not RB contain VV the DT act NN , , though IN its PP$ results NNS might MD be VB said VVN to TO pre NP exist VV virtually RB within IN him PP . SENT And CC the DT act NN does VVZ not RB synecdochically RB share NN in IN the DT agent NN , , though IN certain JJ ways NNS of IN acting VVG may MD be VB said VVN to TO induce VV corresponding JJ moods NNS or CC traits NNS of IN character NN . SENT To TO this DT writer NN , , at IN least JJS , , the DT act NN agent NN ratio NN more RBR strongly RB suggests VVZ a DT temporal JJ or CC sequential JJ relationship NN than IN a DT purely RB positional JJ or CC geometric JJ one NN . SENT The DT agent NN is VBZ an DT author NN of IN his PP$ actis NP , , which WDT are VBP descended VVN from IN him PP , , being JJ good JJ progeny NN of IN he PP is VBZ good JJ , , or CC bad JJ progeny NN if IN he PP is VBZ bad JJ , , wise JJ progeny NN if IN he PP is VBZ wise JJ , , silly JJ progeny NN of IN he PP is VBZ silly JJ . SENT And CC , , conversely RB , , his PP$ acts NNS can MD make VV him PP or CC remake VV him PP in IN accordance NN with IN their PP$ nature NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 140 CD Whenever WRB in IN philosophy NN I PP see VVP two CD terms NNS , , of IN opposite JJ and CC equal JJ importance NN , , being VBG merged VVN into IN a DT third JJ term NN that WDT will MD somehow RB contain VV the DT nature NN of IN both DT , , I PP always RB ask VV myself PP . SENT Which WDT of IN the DT two CD equal JJ terms NNS was VBD foremost JJ . SENT For IN I PP will MD expect VV the DT genius NN of IN this DT term NN to TO weight VV the DT third JJ term NN as IN Schelling's NP third JJ term NN , , subject JJ object NN , , supposedly RB indifferent JJ to TO the DT two CD terms NNS subject JJ and CC object VV which WDT it PP combines VVZ , , is VBZ more RBR subjective JJ than IN objective NN , , even RB though IN he PP would MD further RBR complicate VV matters NNS by IN distinguishing VVG between IN a DT subjective JJ subject JJ object NN and CC an DT objective JJ subject JJ object 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 Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 44 CD 5 CD But CC we PP would MD also RB recognize VV that IN monotheisms NNS in IN which WDT we PP would MD include VV any DT secular JJ title NN for IN a DT universal JJ spring NN of IN action NN , , such JJ as IN nature NN or CC the DT profit NN motive NN can MD prevail VV only RB insofar RB as IN they PP are VBP incipiently RB polytheistic JJ , , containing VVG motivational JJ terms NNS saints NNS that WDT break VVP down RP the DT universality NN of IN the DT motive NN into IN narrower JJR reference NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 76 CD 7 CD We PP might MD sum VV up RP the DT matter NN thus RB . SENT Theologically RB , , nature NN has VHZ attributes NNS derived VVN from IN its PP$ origin NN in IN an DT act NN of IN God NP the DT Creation NN , , but CC God NP is VBZ more RBR than IN nature NN . SENT Dramatistically RB , , motion NN involves VVZ action NN , , but CC action NN is VBZ more JJR than IN motion NN . SENT Hence RB theologically RB and CC or CC dramatistically RB , , nature NN in IN the DT sense NN of IN God's NP Creation NN is VBZ to TO nature NN in IN the DT sense NN of IN naturalistic JJ science NN as IN action NN is VBZ to TO motion NN , , since IN God's NP Creation NN is VBZ an DT enactment NN , , whereas IN nature NN as IN conceived VVN in IN terms NNS of IN naturalistic JJ science NN is VBZ a DT sheer JJ concatenation NN of IN motions NNS . SENT But CC inasmuch RB as IN the DT theological JJ ration NN between IN God NP Creator NN and CC Nature NN Creation NN is VBZ the DT same JJ as IN the DT dramatistic JJ ration NN between IN action NN and CC motion NN , , the DT pantheistic JJ equating NN of IN God NP and CC Nature NP would MD be VB paralleled VVN by IN the DT equating NN of IN action NN and CC motion NN . SENT And CC since IN action NN is VBZ a DT personal JJ principle NN while IN motion NN is VBZ an DT impersonal JJ principle NN , , the DT pantheistic JJ equation NN leads VVZ into IN the DT naturalistic JJ position NN which WDT reduces VVZ personalistic JJ concepts NNS to TO depersonalized VVN terms NNS . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 3 CD It PP is VBZ a DT principle NN of IN drama NN that IN the DT nature NN of IN acts NNS and CC agents NNS should MD be VB consistent JJ with IN the DT nature NN of IN the DT scene NN . SENT Burke NP 1945 CD . SENT 74 CD 5 CD There RB are VBP two CD primary JJ generalizations NNS that WDT characterize VVP the DT quality NN of IN motives NNS . SENT freedom NN and CC necessity NN . SENT And CC whenever WRB they PP appear VVP , , we PP may MD know VV that IN we PP are VBP in IN the DT presence NN of IN God NP terms NNS , , or CC names NNS for IN the DT ultimates NNS of IN motivation NN . SENT Doctrines NNS wherein RB Creator NN and CC Creation NN are VBP not RB ontologically RB collapsed VVN into IN a DT unity NN give VV us PP a DT kind NN of IN double JJ genesis NN for IN motives NNS . SENT Consideration NN in IN terms NNS of IN the DT Creation NN leads VVZ to TO necessity NN when WRB , , in IN accordance NN with IN the DT logic NN of IN geometric JJ substance NN , , all PDT the DT parts NNS of IN nature NN are VBP treated VVN as IN necessarily RB related VVN to TO one CD another DT in IN their PP$ necessary JJ relationship NN to TO the DT whole NN . SENT For IN necessity NN names NNS the DT extrinsic JJ conditions NNS that WDT determine VVP a DT motion NN and CC must MD be VB taken VVN into IN account NN when WRB one PP is VBZ planning VVG an DT action NN . SENT And CC consideration NN in IN terms NNS of IN the DT Creator NN leads VVZ to TO freedom NN when WRB , , in IN accordance NN with IN the DT logic NN of IN tribal JJ substance NN , , men NNS substantially RB derive VV freedom NN or CC self NN movement NN from IN God NP as IN its PP$ ancestral JJ source NN . SENT This DT double JJ genesis NN allows VVZ for IN free JJ will NN and CC determinism NN simultaneously RB , , rather RB than IN requiring VVG a DT flat JJ choice NN between IN them PP . 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 Foucault NP 1986 CD b SYM . SENT 151 CD True JJ discourse NN , , liberated VVD by IN the DT nature NN of IN its PP$ form NN from IN desire NN and CC power NN , , is VBZ incapable JJ of IN recognising VVG the DT will NN to TO truth NN which WDT pervades VVZ it PP . SENT and CC the DT will NN to TO truth NN , , having VHG imposed VVN itself PP upon IN us PP for IN so RB long JJ , , is VBZ such JJ that IN the DT truth NN it PP seeks VVZ to TO reveal VV cannot NN fail VVP to TO mask VV it PP . SENT Spellmeyer NP 1993 CD . SENT 22 CD According VVG to TO Spellmeyer NP , , constructionists NNS would MD have VH us PP believe VV . SENT Each DT community NN has VHZ its PP$ own JJ distinctive JJ mode NN of IN cognition NN , , its PP$ own JJ characteristic JJ flow NN chart NN for IN problem NN solving VVG . SENT Psychologists NNS do VVP not RB think VV first RB and CC then RB practice NN psychology NN . SENT strictly RB speaking VVG , , the DT discipline NN of IN psychology NN preordains VVZ the DT nature NN of IN thought NN for IN its PP$ practitioners NNS . SENT Whatever WDT we PP perceive VVP , , then RB , , is VBZ a DT construct NN , , something NN constructed VVN by IN communities NNS , , and CC whatever WDT we PP have VHP learned VVN derives VVZ not RB from IN experience NN but CC from IN a DT process NN of IN initiation NN into IN those DT rituals NNS of IN community NN life NN that WDT create VVP both DT selves NNS and CC worlds NNS . SENT Booth NN 1979 CD . SENT 107 CD If IN Burke NP is VBZ right RB here RB an DT I PP think VVP he PP is VBZ , , provided VVD we PP understand VVP that IN to TO track VV down RP the DT variant NN is VBZ in IN his PP$ view NN never RB easy JJ we PP have VHP the DT basis NN for IN a DT special JJ kind NN of IN free JJ wheeling VVG inquiry NN into IN other JJ critics NNS views NNS . SENT Instead RB of IN thinking VVG that IN we PP can MD refute VV a DT given VVN position NN by IN showing VVG that IN it PP cannot NN be VB experimentally RB or CC logically RB falsified VVN , , we PP are VBP invited VVN by IN it PP to TO one CD perspective NN on IN the DT world NN , , a DT perspective NN that WDT is VBZ likely JJ , , by IN the DT very JJ nature NN of IN perspectives NNS , , to TO be VB self NN demonstrating VVG . SENT Every DT perspective NN expressed VVD in IN a DT symbolic JJ language NN becomes VVZ a DT terministic JJ screen NN which WDT both DT reveals VVZ some DT truths NNS obviously RB demonstrated VVN to TO anyone NN employing VVG the DT language NN and CC conceals VVZ others NNS . SENT Lanham NP 1993 CD . SENT x SYM We PP failed VVN to TO notice VV that IN the DT personal JJ computer NN had VHD presented VVN itself PP as IN an DT alternative NN to TO the DT printed JJ book NN , , and CC the DT electronic JJ screen NN as IN an DT alternative NN to TO the DT printed JJ page NN . SENT Furthermore RB , , in IN the DT last JJ three CD of IN four CD years NNS , , that DT alternative JJ page NN has VHZ been VBN enhanced VVN so RB that IN it PP can MD present VV and CC manipulate VV images NNS and CC sounds VVZ almost RB as RB easily RB as IN words NNS . SENT And CC it PP can MD do VV all PDT this DT in IN 16 CD . SENT 7 CD million CD colors NNS . SENT The DT long JJ reign NN of IN black JJ and CC white JJ textual JJ truth NN has VHZ ended VVN . SENT The DT nature NN and CC status NN of IN textual JJ discourse NN have VHP been VBN altered VVN . SENT This DT movement NN from IN book NN to TO screen NN promises VVZ a DT metamorphosis NN comparable JJ in IN magnitude NN , , if IN not RB in IN hype NN , , to TO broadcast VV TV NN . SENT Lanham NP 1976 CD . SENT 58 CD Anthropological JJ understanding NN of IN myth NN began VVD when WRB scholars NNS ceased VVD to TO force VV scientific JJ coordinates VVZ on IN it PP , , stopped VVD trying VVG to TO make VV sense NN of IN it PP and CC let VV it PP make VV its PP$ own JJ kind NN of IN sense NN . SENT Ovid's NP Metamorphoses NNS could MD not RB be VB plainer JJR about IN the DT kind NN of IN invitation NN it PP extends VVZ . SENT a DT poem NN about IN changes NNS , , it PP insists VVZ on IN dynamic JJ rhetorical JJ premises NNS , , not RB static JJ serious JJ ones NNS . SENT Identity NN is VBZ , , by IN nature NN in IN this DT poem NN , , as IN fluid NN as IN the DT other JJ categories NNS of IN life NN . SENT The DT underlying JJ assumption NN here RB is VBZ unity NN of IN life NN , , not RB aristocratic JJ domination NN of IN one CD species NNS by IN another DT . SENT Culler NP 1992 CD . SENT 218 CD A NP third JJ major JJ issue NN in IN critical JJ and CC theoretical JJ discussions NNS has VHZ been VBN the DT nature NN of IN representation NN . SENT Culler NP 1992 CD . SENT 223 CD Finally RB , , an DT issue NN in IN recent JJ theory NN is VBZ the DT nature NN and CC function NN of IN the DT aesthetic NN . SENT Frye NP 1957 CD . SENT 203 CD One CD important JJ detail NN in IN poetic JJ symbolism NN remains VVZ to TO be VB considered VVN . SENT This DT is VBZ the DT symbolic JJ presentation NN of IN the DT point NN at IN which WDT the DT undisplaced JJ apocalyptic JJ world NN and CC the DT cyclical JJ world NN of IN nature NN come VVN into IN alignment NN , , and CC which WDT we PP propose VVP to TO call VV the DT point NN of IN epiphany NN . SENT Frye NP 1957 CD . SENT 196 CD The NP characters NNS who WP elude VV the DT moral JJ antithesis NN of IN heroism NN and CC villainy NN generally RB are VBP or CC suggest VV spirits NNS of IN nature NN . SENT Enkvist NP 1981 CD . SENT 110 CD So RB far RB I PP have VHP concentrated VVN on IN empirically RB verifiable JJ patterns NNS of IN order NN in IN the DT worlds NNS of IN nature NN and CC of IN society NN . SENT But CC iconicism NN can MD be VB used VVN to TO evoke VV orders NNS of IN a DT less RBR readily RB verifiable JJ kind NN processes NNS of IN association NN in IN an DT individual's JJ mind NN . SENT . SENT . SENT , , and CC imaginary JJ patterns NNS in IN imaginary JJ universes NNS and CC fantasies NNS . SENT Thus RB the DT very RB ordering VVG of IN a DT text NN can MD turn VV into IN a DT semiotic JJ subsystem NN , , or CC perhaps RB rather RB into IN a DT potential JJ hierarchy NN of IN such JJ subsystems NNS because IN there EX can MD be VB simultaneous JJ iconicism NN at IN various JJ macro NN and CC microlevels NNS of IN text NN structure NN . SENT Indeed RB iconicism NN is VBZ potentially RB conceivable JJ at IN every DT level NN where WRB the DT structure NN of IN the DT text NN and CC of IN language NN allows VVZ a DT choice NN between IN different JJ patterns NNS of IN linearization NN . SENT A DT . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD . SENT 21 CD Women NNS find VVP solace NN , , companionship NN , , and CC independence NN in IN nature NN . SENT A DT . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD . SENT 18 CD In IN regional JJ , , or CC local JJ color NN , , fiction NN . SENT . SENT . SENT women NNS often RB master VV the DT green JJ world NN , , even RB to TO the DT extent NN that IN some DT farm NN it PP for IN produce NN . SENT . SENT . SENT The DT regionalist JJ writers NNS of IN the DT nineteenth JJ and CC early JJ twentieth JJ centuries NNS , , in IN both DT England NP and CC America NP , , are VBP thus RB apt JJ to TO make VV the DT hero's JJ lifelong JJ devotion NN to TO nature NN the DT center NN , , rather RB than IN merely RB an DT initiatory JJ phase NN , , of IN development NN . SENT A DT . SENT Pratt NP 1981 CD . SENT 16 CD 7 CD The DT adolescent NN girl NN , , writes VVZ Simone NP de NP Beauvoir NP , , will MD devote VV a DT special JJ love NN to TO Nature NP . SENT . SENT . SENT she PP worships VVZ it PP . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Later RBR , , the DT mature JJ woman NN hero NN tends VVZ to TO look VV back RB to TO moments NNS of IN naturistic JJ epiphany NN as IN touchstones NNS in IN a DT quest NN for IN her PP$ lost VVN selfhood NN so RB that IN when WRB she PP readies VVZ herself PP for IN her PP$ midlife NN rebirth NN journey NN , , images NNS of IN the DT green JJ world NN remembered VVD once RB more RBR come VV to TO the DT fore NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Although IN most JJS authors NNS depict VVP the DT green JJ world NN of IN the DT woman NN hero NN as IN a DT place NN from IN which WDT she PP sets VVZ forth RB and CC a DT memory NN to TO which WDT she PP returns VVZ for IN renewal NN , , there EX are VBP a DT significant JJ number NN of IN novels NNS in IN which WDT nature NN is VBZ the DT protagonist's JJ entire JJ world NN . SENT Said VVD 1986 CD . SENT 616 CD If IN a DT filial JJ relationship NN was VBD held VVN together RB by IN natural JJ bonds NNS and CC natural JJ forms NNS of IN authority NN involving VVG obedience NN , , fear NN , , love NN , , respect NN , , and CC instinctual JJ conflict NN the DT new JJ affiliative JJ relationship NN changes VVZ these DT bonds NNS into IN what WP seem VVP to TO be VB transpersonal NP forms NNS such JJ as IN guild NN consciousness NN , , consensus NN , , collegiality NN , , professional JJ respect NN , , class NN , , and CC the DT hegemony NN of IN a DT dominant JJ culture NN . SENT The DT filiative JJ scheme NN belongs VVZ to TO the DT realms NNS of IN nature NN and CC of IN life NN , , whereas IN affiliation NN belongs VVZ exclusively RB to TO culture NN and CC society NN . SENT White NP 1974 CD . SENT 402 CD Levi NP Strauss NP concludes VVZ . SENT In IN spite NN of IN worthy JJ and CC indispensable JJ efforts NNS to TO bring VV another DT moment NN in IN history NN alive JJ and CC to TO possess VV it PP , , a DT clairvoyant JJ history NN should MD admit VV that IN it PP never RB completely RB escapes VVZ from IN the DT nature NN of IN myth NN . SENT It PP is VBZ this DT mediative JJ function NN that WDT permits VVZ us PP to TO speak VV of IN a DT historical JJ narrative NN as IN an DT extended JJ metaphor NN . SENT networkDefinitionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 4 CD Harris NP 1990 CD Enkvist NN 1981 CD Ijsseling NN 1976 CD Schor NP 1992 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 5 CD Harris NP 1990 CD . SENT 49 CD For IN purposes NNS of IN an DT integrational JJ analysis NN , , however RB , , the DT concept NN of IN meaning NN may MD be VB dispensed VVD with IN and CC replaced VVN by IN that DT of IN communicational JJ function NN . SENT The DT crucial JJ difference NN is VBZ that IN the DT communicational JJ function NN of IN a DT sign NN is VBZ always RB contextually RB determined VVN and CC derives VVZ from IN the DT network NN of IN integrational JJ relations NNS which WDT obtain VVP in IN a DT particular JJ situation NN . SENT Enkvist NP 1981 CD . SENT 103 CD If IN we PP want VVP to TO derive VV predications NNS out RP of IN the DT model NN too RB , , instead RB of IN accepting VVG them PP as IN part NN of IN the DT input NN , , we PP must MD adopt VV a DT device NN of IN the DT third JJ , , cognitive JJ , , type NN . SENT In IN such JJ cognitive JJ models NNS the DT predications NNS are VBP usually RB derived VVN out RP of IN a DT cognitive JJ network NN , , again RB under IN the DT control NN of IN a DT text NN strategy NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT But CC in IN addition NN to TO all DT this NN we PP may MD also RB wish VV to TO look VV into IN the DT motives NNS and CC reasons NNS why WRB a DT certain JJ speaker NN writer NN has VHZ opted VVN for IN one CD particular JJ text NN strategy NN in IN his PP$ particular JJ context NN of IN situation NN . SENT If IN so RB , , we PP must MD once RB again RB enlarge VV our PP$ perspective NN and CC adopt VV a DT model NN of IN a DT fourth JJ type NN which WDT is VBZ sensitive JJ not RB only RB to TO strategies NNS of IN text NN composition NN but CC also RB to TO principles NNS of IN human JJ interaction NN . SENT Such JJ models NNS try VVP to TO explain VV how WRB human JJ beings NNS communicate VV as IN part NN of IN their PP$ attempts NNS at IN social JJ cooperation NN . SENT Ijsseling NP 1976 CD . SENT 133 CD Intertextuality NN . SENT . SENT . SENT conceives VVZ all PDT that DT one NN says VVZ as IN a DT fabric NN woven VVN into IN a DT much RB wider JJR network NN of IN interrelated VVN texts NNS with IN references NNS to TO each DT other JJ . SENT The DT speaker NN or CC writer NN is VBZ also RB woven VVN into IN this DT fabric NN . SENT He PP is VBZ not RB the DT origin NN or CC centre NN , , but CC is VBZ entirely RB carried VVN along RP by IN the DT network NN of IN words NNS in IN circulation NN . SENT Ijsseling NP 1976 CD . SENT 5 CD 6 CD Today NN one NN can MD still RB speak VV of IN a DT conflict NN between IN rhetoric NN and CC philosophy NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT To TO gain VV some DT insight NN into IN this DT topical JJ conflict NN , , we PP will MD undertake VV an DT historical JJ and CC systematic JJ survey NN of IN the DT various JJ facets NNS of IN this DT already RB ancient JJ conflict NN . SENT In IN each DT chapter NN we PP shall MD concentrate VV on IN the DT past NN , , thus RB enabling VVG us PP , , in IN a DT constant JJ circular JJ movement NN , , to TO shed VV light NN on IN the DT network NN of IN problems NNS confrinting VVG contemporary JJ thought NN . SENT The DT question NN continually RB before IN us PP in IN such PDT a DT circular JJ movement NN is VBZ . SENT what WP is VBZ actually RB happening VVG whenever WRB something NN is VBZ said VVN or CC written VVN . SENT . SENT Schor NP 1992 CD . SENT 263 CD Two CD chief JJ axioms NNS of IN feminist JJ criticism NN state NN that IN all DT acts NNS of IN language NN area NN grounded VVN in IN the DT dense JJ network NN of IN partial JJ positions NNS e NN . SENT g NN . SENT , , sexual JJ , , class NN , , racial JJ occupied VVD by IN speaking VVG subjects NNS and CC that IN to TO claim VV to TO speak VV for IN all DT women NNS , , feminists NNS , , literary JJ critics NNS is VBZ to TO speak VV from IN a DT position NN of IN assumed VVN mastery NN and CC false JJ universality NN . SENT This DT position NN is VBZ precisely RB the DT one CD we PP as IN feminists NNS seek VVP to TO interrogate VV and CC dismantle VV , , even RB though RB , , as RB many JJ of IN us PP have VHP discovered VVN , , assumed VVN mastery NN and CC false JJ universality NN constantly RB reassert VV themselves PP . SENT nonliteraryDefinitionUnder NN constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 3 CD Fish NP 1982 CD Lanham NP 1993 CD Culler NP 1992 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 3 CD Fish NP 1982 CD . SENT 99 CD The DT linguist NN says VVZ , , I PP have VHP done VVN the DT job NN of IN describing VVG the DT language NN . SENT you PP take VVP it PP from IN here RB . SENT The DT critic NN replies VVZ , , I PP have VHP no DT use NN for IN what WP you PP have VHP done VVN . SENT you've NN given VVN me PP at IN once RB too RB little JJ and CC too RB much RB . SENT Superficially RB , , then RB , , the DT two CD positions NNS are VBP firmly RB opposed VVN , , but CC only RB slightly RB beneath IN the DT surface NN one NN finds VVZ a DT crucial JJ area NN of IN agreement NN . SENT in IN their PP$ concern NN to TO characterize VV the DT properties NNS of IN literary JJ language NN , , Schwartz NP a DT critic NN and CC Saporta NP a DT linguist NN simply RB assume VV a DT characterization NN of IN nonliterary JJ or CC ordinary JJ language NN , , and CC that DT characterization NN is VBZ also RB a DT judgment NN . SENT Lanham NP 1993 CD . SENT 56 RB The DT most RBS obvious JJ area NN of IN rhetoric's JJ revival NN literary JJ theory NN is VBZ so RB familiar JJ as IN hardly RB to TO need VV elaboration NN . SENT The DT architectonic JJ view NN of IN rhetoric NN that IN Kenneth NP Burke NP developed VVD from IN the DT 1930 CD s PP onward RB has VHZ underwritten VVN the DT Derridean JJ explosion NN there EX is VBZ no DT other JJ word NN for IN it PP of IN literary JJ theory NN since IN the DT Hopkins NP symposium NN in IN 1966 CD put VVD it PP on IN the DT map NN . SENT Although IN , , incredibly RB , , Derrida NP appears VVZ not RB to TO have VH known VVN Burke's NP work NN , , deconstruction's NNS enfranchising VVG hypothesis NN that IN rhetorical JJ analysis NN can MD be VB used VVN on IN nonliterary JJ texts NNS and CC on IN the DT conventions NNS of IN social JJ life NN itself PP is VBZ the DT pivotal JJ insight NN of IN Burkean NP dramatism NN . SENT And CC if IN Burke's NP work NN does VVZ not RB fall VV in IN our PP$ period NN , , certainly RB the DT realization NN of IN its PP$ importance NN does VVZ . SENT Culler NP 1992 CD . SENT 222 CD Fifth NP , , a DT good JJ deal NN of IN the DT most RBS interesting JJ work NN in IN theory NN has VHZ focused VVN on IN structures NNS common JJ to TO literary JJ and CC nonliterary JJ discourses NNS . SENT normDefinitionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 3 CD Fish NP 1982 CD Lanham NP 1993 CD Bove NP 1990 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 8 CD Fish NP 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 Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 108 CD If IN deviation NN theories NNS trivialize VV the DT norm NN and CC therefore RB trivialize VV everything NN else RB , , a DT theory NN which WDT restores VVZ human JJ content NN to TO language NN also RB restores VVZ legitimate JJ status NN to TO literature NN by IN reuniting VVG it PP with IN a DT norm NN that WDT is VBZ no DT longer RB trivialized VVN . SENT Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 109 CD Literary JJ language NN may MD be VB the DT norm NN , , and CC message NN bearing NN language NN a DT device NN we PP carve VVP out RP to TO perform VV the DT special JJ , , but CC certainly RB not RB normative JJ , , task NN of IN imparting VVG information NN . SENT Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 101 CD 2 CD The DT trivialization NN of IN ordinary JJ language NN is VBZ accomplished VVN as RB soon RB as IN one PP excludes VVZ from IN its PP$ precincts NNS matters NNS of IN purpose NN , , value NN , , intention NN , , obligation NN , , and CC so RB on IN everything NN that WDT can MD be VB characterized VVN as RB human JJ . SENT What WP , , then RB , , is VBZ left VVN to TO it PP . SENT The DT answers NNS to TO this DT question NN are VBP various JJ . SENT For IN some DT , , the DT defining VVG constituent NN of IN ordinary JJ language NN , , or CC language NN , , is VBZ its PP$ capacity NN to TO carry VV messages NNS . SENT for IN others NNS , , the DT structure NN of IN language NN is VBZ more JJR or CC less RBR equated VVN with IN the DT structure NN of IN logic NN . SENT . SENT . SENT Still RB others NNS hold VVP instrumental JJ views NNS . SENT language NN is VBZ used VVN to TO refer VV either RB to TO objects NNS in IN the DT real JJ world NN or CC to TO ideas NNS in IN the DT mind NN . SENT . SENT . SENT But CC whatever WDT the DT definition NN , , two CD things NNS remain VVP constant JJ . SENT 1 LS the DT content NN of IN language NN is VBZ an DT entity NN that WDT can MD be VB specified VVN independently RB of IN human JJ values NNS . SENT . SENT . SENT and CC 2 CD a DT need NN is VBZ therefore RB created VVN for IN another DT entity NN or CC system NN in IN the DT context NN of IN which WDT human JJ values NNS can MD claim VV pride NN of IN place NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Once IN you've NN taken VVN the DT human JJ values NNS out IN of IN the DT language NN , , and CC yet RB designated VVN what WP remains VVZ as IN the DT norm NN , , the DT separated JJ values NNS become VVP valueless JJ , , because IN they PP have VHP been VBN removed VVN from IN the DT normative JJ center NN . SENT Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 531 CD The DT point NN of IN my PP$ analysis NN has VHZ been VBN to TO show VV that DT while NN Is VBZ there RB a DT text NN in IN this DT class NN . SENT does VVZ not RB have VH a DT determinate JJ meaning NN , , a DT meaning NN that WDT survives VVZ the DT sea NN change NN of IN situations NNS , , in IN any DT situation NN we PP might MD imagine VV the DT meaning NN of IN the DT utterance NN is VBZ either RB perfectly RB clear JJ or CC capable JJ , , in IN the DT course NN of IN time NN , , of IN being VBG clarified VVN . SENT What WP is VBZ it PP that RB makes VVZ this DT possible JJ , , if IN it PP is VBZ not RB the DT possibilities NNS and CC norms NNS already RB encoded VVD in IN the DT language NN . SENT How WRB does VVZ communication NN ever RB occur VVP if IN not RB by IN reference NN to TO a DT public JJ and CC stable JJ norm NN . SENT The DT answer NN , , implicit JJ in IN everything NN I PP have VHP already RB said VVD , , is VBZ that DT communication NN occurs VVZ within IN situations NNS and CC that IN to TO be VB in IN a DT situation NN is VBZ already RB to TO be VB in IN possession NN of IN or CC to TO be VB possessed VVN by IN a DT structure NN of IN assumptions NNS , , of IN practices NNS understood VVN to TO be VB relevant JJ in IN relation NN to TO purposes NNS and CC goals NNS that WDT are VBP already RB in IN place NN . SENT and CC it PP is VBZ within IN the DT assumption NN of IN these DT purposes NNS and CC goals NNS that IN any DT utterance NN is VBZ immediately RB heard VVN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT What WP I PP have VHP been VBN arguing VVG is VBZ that IN meanings NNS come VVP already RB calculated VVN , , not RB because IN of IN norms NNS embedded VVN in IN the DT language NN but CC because IN language NN is VBZ always RB perceived VVN , , from IN the DT very RB first JJ , , within IN a DT structure NN of IN norms NNS . SENT That DT structure NN , , however RB , , is VBZ not RB abstract JJ and CC independent JJ but CC social JJ . SENT and CC there RB fore NN it PP is VBZ not RB a DT single JJ structure NN with IN a DT privileged JJ relationship NN to TO the DT process NN of IN communication NN as IN it PP occurs VVZ in IN any DT situation NN but CC a DT structure NN that IN changes NNS when WRB one CD situation NN , , with IN its PP$ assumed JJ background NN of IN practices NNS , , purposes NNS , , and CC goals NNS , , has VHZ given VVN way NN to TO another DT . SENT Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 104 CD Here RB again RB we PP see VVP the DT moral JJ force NN of IN the DT norm NN of IN ordinary JJ language NN , , its PP$ inevitable JJ legislation NN of IN the DT ideal NN of IN logical JJ clarity NN , , even RB in IN context NN which WDT are VBP defined VVN in IN opposition NN to TO that DT ideal NN . SENT Lanham NP 1993 CD . SENT 9 CD We PP have VHP become VVN , , I PP might MD parenthetically RB remark VV , , more JJR self NN conscious JJ about IN prose NN itself PP . SENT So RB used VVN are VBP we PP to TO thinking VVG black JJ and CC white JJ , , continuous JJ printed JJ prose NN the DT norm NN of IN conceptual JJ utterance NN , , that WDT it PP has VHZ taken VVN a DT series NN of IN theoretical JJ attacks NNS and CC technological JJ metamorphoses NNS to TO make VV us PP see VV it PP for IN what WP it PP is VBZ . SENT an DT act NN of IN extraordinary JJ stylization NN , , of IN remarkable JJ , , expressive JJ self NN denial NN . SENT The DT lesson NN has VHZ been VBN taught VVN from IN Marinetti NP to TO Burke NP and CC Derrida NP , , and CC by IN personal JJ computers NNS which WDT restore VV to TO the DT reader NN ranges VVZ of IN expressivity NN graphics NNS , , fonts NNS , , typography NN , , layout NN , , color NN that IN the DT prose NN stylist NN has VHZ abjured VVN . SENT Obviously RB these DT pressures NNS will MD not RB destroy VV prose NN , , but CC they PP may MD change VV its PP$ underlying JJ decorum NN . SENT And CC perhaps RB engender VV , , at IN long RB last JJ , , a DT theory NN of IN prose NN style NN as IN radical JJ artifice NN rather RB than IN native JJ transparency NN . SENT Bove NP 1990 CD . SENT 53 CD Bove NP asserts VVZ that IN the DT questions NNS posed VVN above IN are VBP commonsense NN , , that WDT they PP imply VVP a DT norm NN of IN judgment NN . SENT meaning NN and CC essence NN are VBP better JJR and CC more RBR important JJ that IN a DT discussion NN of IN how WRB things NNS work VVP or CC where WRB they PP come VVP from IN . SENT notionDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 12 CD Burke NP 1945 CD Fish NP 1982 CD Booth NP 1974 CD Sperber NP and CC Wilson NP 1988 CD Derrida NP 1986 CD b SYM Haberlandt NP and CC Bingham NP 1982 CD Winograd NP 1977 CD Virtanen NP 1992 CD Bathrick NP 1992 CD Coates NP and CC Cameron NP 1988 CD Geertz NP 1973 CD Jameson NP 1981 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 19 CD 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 118 CD According VVG to TO Aristotle NP , , Thales NP believed VVD that IN all DT things NNS are VBP full JJ of IN Gods NPS . SENT For IN our PP$ purposes NNS this DT could MD be VB interpreted VVN as IN a DT recognition NN of IN the DT fact NN that IN in IN everything NN there EX is VBZ a DT power NN , , or CC motive NN , , of IN some DT sort NN . SENT That DT is VBZ , , we PP would MD interpret VV it PP in IN a DT broader JJR sense NN than IN the DT notion NN that IN soul NN is VBZ intermingled VVN in IN the DT whole JJ universe NN , , though IN Aristotle NN in IN his PP$ De NP Anima NP says VVZ this DT is VBZ what WP Thales NP probably RB meant VVD . SENT Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 101 CD By IN accepting VVG the DT positivist JJ assumption NN that IN ordinary JJ language NN is VBZ available JJ to TO a DT purely RB formal JJ description NN , , both DT sides NNS assure VV that IN their PP$ investigations NNS of IN literary JJ language NN will MD be VB fruitless JJ and CC arid JJ . SENT for IN if IN one PP begins VVZ with IN an DT impoverished JJ notion NN of IN ordinary JJ language NN , , something NN that WDT is VBZ then RB defined VVN as IN a DT deviation NN from IN ordinary JJ language NN will MD be VB doubly RB impoverished VVN . SENT Indeed RB , , it PP is VBZ my PP$ contention NN that IN the DT very JJ act NN of IN distinguishing VVG between IN ordinary JJ and CC literary JJ language NN , , because RB of IN what WP it PP assumes VVZ , , leads VVZ necessarily RB to TO an DT inadequate JJ account NN of IN both DT . SENT Fish NN 1982 CD . SENT 529 CD Speaking NN of IN a DT colleague's NNS figuring VVG out RP a DT puzzling JJ reference NN by IN one CD of IN Fish's NP students NNS , , Fish NP remarks NNS that IN by IN a DT route NN that WDT is VBZ neither DT entirely RB unmarked JJ nor CC wholly RB determined VVN , , he PP comes VVZ to TO me PP and CC to TO the DT notion NN one NN of IN Fish's NP victims NNS and CC to TO a DT new JJ construing VVG of IN what WP his PP$ student NN has VHZ been VBN saying VVG . SENT Booth NN 1974 CD . SENT 66 CD The DT notion NN that IN we PP have VHP reason NN to TO believe VV only RB what WP has VHZ been VBN proved VVN , , in IN the DT sense NN of IN withstanding VVG all DT possible JJ doubts NNS , , cannot NN be VB lived VVN with IN by IN most JJS of IN us PP for IN even RB a DT moment NN . SENT There EX is VBZ nothing NN shameful JJ in IN this DT , , unless IN logic NN , , mathematics NNS , , and CC physical JJ science NN , , which WDT are VBP also RB based VVN on IN unprovable JJ assumptions NNS , , are VBP shameful JJ . SENT Life NN would MD be VB impossible JJ if IN it PP were VBD not RB so RB . SENT Booth NN 1974 CD . SENT 13 CD What WP is VBZ most RBS interesting JJ here RB is VBZ the DT automatic JJ reliance NN on IN the DT distinction NN between IN facts NNS and CC values NNS , , and CC the DT quality NN of IN the DT reply NN one NN often RB receives VVZ if IN he PP questions VVZ that DT distinction NN . SENT If IN the DT word NN dogma NN is VBZ applicable JJ to TO any DT general JJ notion NN that IN cannot NN , , for IN the DT believer NN , , be VB brought VVN into IN question NN , , the DT belief NN that IN you PP cannot NN and CC indeed RB should MD not RB allow VV your PP$ values NNS to TO intrude VV upon RP your PP$ cognitive JJ life NN that IN thought NN and CC knowledge NN and CC fact NN are VBP on IN one CD side NN and CC affirmations NNS of IN value NN on IN the DT other JJ has VHZ been VBN until IN recently RB a DT dogma NN for IN all DT right JJ thinking NN moderns NNS . SENT Booth NN 1974 CD . SENT 33 CD Every DT idea NN unless IN of IN course NN it PP is VBZ scientific JJ expresses VVZ a DT need NN or CC a DT secret JJ wish NN . SENT nothing NN need MD be VB taken VVN seriously RB as IN a DT possible JJ contribution NN to TO the DT truth NN . SENT The DT very JJ word NN truth NN has VHZ for IN many RB been VBN ruled VVN out RP of IN court NN , , and CC with IN it PP the DT notion NN that IN one CD determinant NN of IN what WP is VBZ said VVN can MD be VB a DT respect NN for IN reasons NNS . SENT Sperber NP and CC Wilson NP 1988 CD . SENT 40 CD Our NP notion NN of IN what WP is VBZ manifest JJ to TO an DT individual NN is VBZ clearly RB weaker JJR than IN the DT notion NN of IN what WP is VBZ actually RB known VVN or CC assumed VVN . SENT A DT fact NN can MD be VB manifest JJ without IN being VBG known VVN . SENT Sperber NP and CC Wilson NP 1988 CD . SENT 41 CD Because IN manifest JJ is VBZ weaker JJR than IN known VVN or CC assumed VVN , , a DT notion NN of IN mutual JJ manifestness NN can MD be VB developed VVN which WDT does VVZ not RB suffer VV from IN the DT same JJ psychological JJ implausibility NN as IN mutual JJ knowledge NN or CC mutual JJ assumptions NNS . SENT Derrida NP 1986 CD b SYM . SENT 108 CD From IN the DT moment NN that IN there EX is VBZ meaning NN there EX are VBP nothing NN but CC signs NNS . SENT We PP think VVP only RB in IN signs NNS . SENT Which WDT amounts VVZ to TO ruining VVG the DT notion NN of IN the DT sign NN at IN the DT very JJ moment NN when WRB , , as RB in IN Nietzsche NP , , its PP$ exigency NN is VBZ recognized VVN in IN the DT absoluteness NN of IN its PP$ right NN . SENT Haberlandt NP and CC Bingham NP 1982 CD . SENT 31 CD Haberlandt NP and CC Bingham NP say VVP that IN Schank NP developed VVD the DT notion NN of IN script NN as IN a DT predetermined VVN , , stereotyped JJ sequence NN of IN actions NNS that WDT defines VVZ a DT well RB known VVN situation NN Schank NP and CC Abelson NP 1977 CD . SENT Winograd NP 1977 CD . SENT 63 CD While IN the DT field NN is VBZ not RB yet RB at IN a DT stage NN where WRB it PP is VBZ possible JJ to TO lay VV out RP a DT precise JJ unifying JJ theory NN , , this DT paper NN attempts VVZ to TO provide VV a DT beginning VVG framework NN for IN studying VVG discourse NN . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Its PP$ four CD sections NNS attempt VVP to TO . SENT 1 LS . SENT Delimit VV the DT range NN of IN problems NNS covered VVN by IN the DT term NN discourse NN . SENT 2 LS . SENT Characterize VV the DT basic JJ structure NN of IN natural JJ language NN based VVN on IN a DT notion NN of IN communication NN . SENT 3 LS . SENT Propose VV a DT general JJ approach NN to TO formalisms NNS for IN describing VVG the DT phenomena NNS and CC building NN theories NNS about IN them PP . SENT 4 LS . SENT Lay VV out RP an DT outline NN of IN the DT different JJ schemas NNS involved VVN in IN generating VVG and CC comprehending VVG language NN . SENT Virtanen NP 1992 CD . SENT 293 CD 4 CD I PP shall MD deal VV with IN some DT of IN the DT criteria NNS that WDT have VHP been VBN used VVN in IN the DT study NN of IN language NN to TO group NN texts NNS for IN various JJ purposes NNS . SENT I PP shall MD then RB briefly RB touch VV upon IN the DT notion NN of IN prototype NN , , before IN proceeding VVG to TO a DT discussion NN of IN a DT two CD level NN typology NN of IN texts NNS . SENT To TO round VV off RP , , I PP shall MD consider VV the DT status NN of IN narrative NN among IN the DT different JJ types NNS of IN text NN . SENT Bathrick NP 1992 CD . SENT 323 CD Cultural JJ studies NNS has VHZ pushed VVN generally RB toward IN a DT multiperspectivism NN that WDT would MD challenge VV the DT notion NN of IN one CD dominant JJ theoretical JJ model NN as IN a DT master NN discourse NN at IN the DT center NN of IN the DT profession NN . SENT . SENT . SENT that IN there EX is VBZ one NN , , scientific JJ interpretive JJ model NN valid JJ for IN all DT texts NNS and CC contexts NNS . SENT Bathrick NP 1992 CD . SENT 322 CD The DT notion NN of IN literature NN today NN is VBZ not RB an DT ontological JJ category NN but CC one CD whose WP$ historical JJ and CC institutional JJ evolution NN will MD continue VV to TO be VB a DT legitimizing VVG and CC transforming VVG dimension NN of IN the DT critical JJ enterprise NN . SENT Coates NP and CC Cameron NP 1988 CD . SENT 17 CD Women NNS use VVP fewer JJR stygmatised JJ forms NNS and CC more JJR prestige NN forms NNS in IN every DT class NN . SENT it PP is VBZ no DT more RBR justified JJ to TO class NN this DT pattern NN of IN female JJ usage NN hypercorrect JJ than IN it PP would MD be VB to TO call VV the DT usage NN of IN the DT middle JJ class NN hypercorrect JJ in IN relation NN to TO that DT of IN the DT working VVG class NN . SENT The DT notion NN of IN women's NP sensitivity NN to TO prestige NN norms NNS is VBZ an DT explanation NN that WDT arises VVZ from IN the DT intrinsic JJ maleness NN of IN the DT norms NNS . SENT Men's NP behaviour NN is VBZ seen VVN as IN normal JJ . SENT when WRB women's NP differs VVZ , , it PP has VHZ to TO be VB explained VVN . SENT Coates NP and CC Cameron NP 1988 CD . SENT 29 CD Brown NP and CC Levinson NP . SENT . SENT . SENT define VV the DT notion NN of IN face NN as IN the DT public JJ self NN image NN that IN every DT member NN wants VVZ to TO claim VV for IN himself PP . SENT . SENT . SENT . SENT Negative JJ face NN involves VVZ the DT desire NN for IN freedom NN of IN action NN and CC freedom NN from IN imposition NN , , while IN positive JJ face NN involves VVZ the DT desire NN for IN approval NN . SENT Power NN . SENT . SENT . SENT means NNS that IN in IN an DT interaction NN , , the DT speaker NN can MD be VB characterised VVN as IN relatively RB more JJR or CC less RBR powerful JJ than IN the DT addressee NN . SENT Geertz NP 1973 CD . SENT 5 CD 6 CD In IN understanding VVG what WP ethnography NN is VBZ , , or CC more RBR exactly RB what WP doing NN ethnography NN is VBZ , , that IN a DT start NN can MD be VB made VVN toward IN grasping VVG what WP anthropological JJ analysis NN amounts NNS to TO as IN a DT form NN of IN knowledge NN . SENT This DT , , it PP must MD immediately RB be VB said VVN , , is VBZ not RB a DT matter NN of IN methods NNS . SENT From IN one CD point NN of IN view NN , , that WDT of IN the DT textbook NN , , doing VVG ethnography NN is VBZ establishing VVG rapport NN , , selecting VVG informants NNS , , transcribing VVG texts NNS , , taking VVG genealogies NNS , , mapping VVG fields NNS , , keeping VVG a DT diary NN , , and CC so RB on IN . SENT But CC it PP is VBZ not RB these DT things NNS , , techniques NNS and CC received VVN procedures NNS , , that WDT define VV the DT enterprise NN . SENT What WP defines VVZ it PP is VBZ the DT kind NN of IN intellectual JJ effort NN it PP is VBZ . SENT an DT elaborate JJ venture NN in IN , , to TO borrow VV a DT notion NN from IN Gilbert NP Ryle NP , , thick JJ description 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 nounDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 2 CD Hopper NP 1987 CD Minsky NP 1980 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 2 CD 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 Minsky NP 1980 CD . SENT 16 CD In IN any DT event NN , , the DT individual JJ statements NNS of IN a DT discourse NN lead NN to TO temporary JJ representations NNS which WDT seem VVP to TO correspond VV to TO what WP contemporary JJ linguists NNS call VVP deep JJ structures NNS which WDT are VBP then RB quickly RB rearranged VVN or CC consumed VVN in IN elaboration NN the DT growing VVG scenario NN representation NN . SENT In IN order NN of IN scale NN , , among IN the DT ingredients NNS of IN such PDT a DT structure NN there EX might MD be VB these DT kinds NNS of IN levels NNS . SENT surface VV syntactic JJ frames NNS mainly RB verb NN and CC noun NN structures NNS . SENT prepositional JJ and CC word NN order NN indicator NN conventions NNS . SENT surface VV semantic JJ frames NNS action NN centered VVD meanings NNS of IN words NNS . SENT qualifiers NNS and CC relations NNS concerning VVG participants NNS , , instruments NNS , , trajectories NNS and CC strategies NNS , , goals NNS , , consequences NNS and CC side NN effects NNS . SENT thematic JJ frames NNS scenarios NNS concerned VVN with IN topics NNS , , activities NNS , , portraits NNS , , setting VVG . SENT outstanding JJ problems NNS and CC strategies NNS commonly RB connected VVN with IN topics NNS . SENT narrative JJ frames NNS skeleton NN forms NNS for IN typical JJ stories NNS , , explanations NNS , , and CC arguments NNS . SENT conventions NNS about IN foci NNS , , protagonists NNS , , plot NN forms NNS , , development NN , , etc FW . SENT , , designed VVN to TO help VV a DT listener NN construct VV a DT new JJ , , instantiated VVD thematic JJ frame NN in IN his PP$ own JJ mind NN . SENT nucleusDefinitionUnder JJR constructionSee NN alsoReferences NNS . SENT 0 CD Quotes NNS . SENT 0 CD Last JJ Modified VVN . SENT July NP 12 CD 96 CD 16 CD . SENT 45 CD . SENT 30 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