Literary Fictions as Utterances and Artworks
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20142222 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jukka Mikkonen (0000-0003-0436-8526, Tampere University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2010 |
| Volume | 76 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 68-90 |
| Publication date | 2010-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theoria (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0040-5825 • E-ISSN: 1755-2567 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1755-2567.2009.01051.x |
| OpenAlex | W2068129028 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 71 |
During the last decades, there has been a debate on the question whether literary works are utterances, or have utterance meaning, and whether it is reasonable to approach them as such. Proponents of the utterance model in literary interpretation, whom I will refer to as “utterance theorists”, such as Noël Carroll and especially Robert Stecker, suggest that because of their nature as linguistic products of intentional human action, literary works are utterances similar to those used in everyday discourse. Conversely, those whom I will refer to as “appreciation theorists”, such as Stein Haugom Olsen and Peter Lamarque, argue that literary works are by no means comparable to conversational utterances, and treating them in terms of utterances mistakenly dismisses their literary features. The aim of this article is twofold: to defend a central aspect of the utterance theory and to reconcile the two main positions about central issues in the debate on the meaning of literary works. On the one hand, I shall argue that it is both legitimate and reasonable to discuss the utterance meaning of a literary work on the basis of an interpretative approach interested in the author's “message”. My aim is to show that literary works should be considered utterances in a conversational approach which aims at examining the illocutionary actions conveyed through the work. On the other hand, I attempt both to show that there are various legitimate interpretative approaches which are governed by the interpreter's purposes, and to suggest that the debate between utterance theorists and appreciation theorists is actually about merely different emphases
Epistemology · Interpretation (philosophy) · Interpreter · Linguistics · Meaning (existential) · Utterance · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Ethics, Aesthetics, and Art · Philosophy · Wittgensteinian philosophy and applications
Beyond Aesthetics
Interpretation. An Essay in the Philosophy of Literary Criticism
Only Jerome
The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art
The Structure of Literary Understanding
Philosophy and the Novel
Philosophy and literature
Beyond the Literal Meaning
Critical Pluralism Unmasked
Intentions
Understanding a Work of Art
Authorial Intention
On Unilluminating Criticism
Art and Intention
Between Truth and Triviality
Intention, Supervenience, and Aesthetic Realism
Authors, Intentions and Literary Meaning
The Object of Literary Criticism
Lamarque and Olsen on Literature and Truth
The Logical Status of Fictional Discourse
The "Meaning" of a Literary Work
What Is the Meaning of a Text
On What a Text Is and How It Means
The Aesthetic Experience and the 'Truth' of Art
Contemporary Debates in Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art
In Defence of Critical Pluralism
Art and the domain of the aesthetic
An Epistemic Dilemma For Actual Intentionalism
A Paradox in Intentionalism
Problems of Literary Theory
Validity in Interpretation
The Postulated Author
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,5 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2025 (6) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |