In this work by
Richards he explains that words do not necessarily communicate a meaning, or a
message; they cannot stand alone or else they mean nothing at all because there
is no context. He also mentions symbols, thoughts, and relations in his philosophy
of rhetoric.
In the first
excerpt about words, and intonation in writing I believe Richards is arguing
that everything depends on the literary context in which it was stated because
it could mean all sorts of things that cause verbal misunderstanding. In the
second excerpt about symbols, I believe Richards is arguing that symbols in
language record events and communicate facts. Between the communicated facts
and the recorded events, there is an indirect or direct relation.
Some parts in this
reading were very puzzling. When Richards was talking about science and recent
revolutions in physics I was very confused because I did not see why it was
relevant, and I really did not understand what he meant by it in general. Is he
trying to say how the idea of symbolism has been question and rejected and
compare that to other theories and their rejections in science? I have no idea.
Richards stated
“…the people Wordsworth was thinking of when he wrote his preface, confused the
poetic product with the poetic process and thought a poem good because it used
poetic diction… and used them in the same ways”. Richards basically explained
how poets are an assemblage. He goes on to say that we take fixed factors built
up in meaning through sentences of mosaic and put it together in discrete independent
tesserae; Richards basically summarizes an assemblage, or remix.
No comments:
Post a Comment