Todd Oakley English Cognitive Science Per Aage Brandt
Todd Oakley, English & Cognitive Science Per Aage Brandt, Modern Languages & Cognitive Science Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio USA
Meta-Representation, Mind Reading, and Fictive Interaction A Collector’s Conceit
How to Produce a “Fiction”
How to Produce a “Fiction” • Presentation – A present perception resonates as a “remembered present”
How to Produce a “Fiction” • Presentation – A present perception resonates as a “remembered present” • What is
How to Produce a “Fiction” • Presentation – A present perception that resonates as a “remembered present” • What is • Representation – An Imaginative variation that creates hypothetical or counterfactual events, states, or processes
How to Produce a “Fiction” • Presentation – A present perception that resonates as a “remembered present” of the here-and-now • What is • Representation – An Imaginative variation that creates a hypothetical or counterfactual events, states, or processes of there-and-then • What if?
How to Produce a “Fiction” • Presentation – A present perception that resonates as a “remembered present” of the here-and-now • What is • Representation – An Imaginative variation that creates a hypothetical or counterfactual events, states, or processes of there-and-then • What if? • Meta-Representation: – A fictional representation that projects a there-and-then into the perceptual here-and-now
How to Produce a “Fiction” • Presentation – A present perception that resonates as a “remembered present” of the here-and-now • What is • Representation – An Imaginative variation that creates a hypothetical or counterfactual events, states, or processes of there-and-then • What if? • Meta-Representation: – A fictional representation that projects a there-and-then into the perceptual here-and-now • As if
Hypotyposis • Classical rhetorical theorists call this as if phenomenon: hypotyposis or enargia – Aristotle calls is a tactic of visualization: pro ommatōn poiein, or “bringing before the eyes”
Hypotyposis • Classical rhetorical theorists call this as if phenomenon: hypotyposis or enargia – Aristotle calls is a tactic of visualization: pro ommatōn poiein, or “bringing before the eyes” • Cognitive Linguists call these “fictive realities” • Fictive motion – The wainscoting runs along the perimeter of the room • Fictive action – The French doors open onto a terra cotta patio • Fictive reference – The kettle is boiling • Fictive interaction (E Pascual 2002) – We need to avoid creating he-said-situations • Among others
Attention & Intersubjectivity • Claim: meta-representations so defined are necessarily intersubjective.
Intersubjectivity • Claim: meta-representations so defined are necessarily intersubjective. – Cognizers must (at least) tacitly know how to represent the conditions of mutual intelligibility and interaction in order to use them in imaginative variation
Intersubjectivity • Claim: meta-representations so defined are necessarily intersubjective – Cognizer’s must (at least) tacitly know that how to represent the conditions of mutual intelligibility and interaction in order to use them for imaginative variation – This fact is captured most strikingly in instances of hypotyposis in discourse, in pictorial representation, and in curatorship
Cinematic Model • Fictional representations are staged in time and space
Cinematic Model • Fictional representations are staged in time and space • The scene of fictional representations has a complex attentional and intersubjective structure
Cinematic Model • Fictional representations are staged in time and space • The scene of fictional representations has a complex attentional and intersubjective structure • Scenarial integration of fictional representations can be approached by using the cinema as a model
Cinematic Model • Components of the Model – The screen • a focal area within a bounded site
Cinematic Model • Components of the Model – A screen • focal area within a bounded site – A projectionist • presupposed agent doing the screening
Cinematic Model • Components of the Model – A screen • focal area within a bounded site – A projectionist • presupposed agent doing the screening – An audience • perceives the events on the screen as representing something beyond the screen
Attention • One person attends to the “story” the film ‘tells’ through the optical events on the screen. This is called primary (deictic) attention
Attention • One person attends to the “story” the film ‘tells’ through the optical events on the screen. This is called primary (deictic) attention • Another person attends to the first person. This is called secondary (refracted) attention
Attention • One person attends to the “story” the film ‘tells’ through the optical events on the screen. This is called primary (deictic) attention • A second person attends to the first person. This is called secondary (refracted) attention • The second person attends to what the first person is attending to. This is called tertiary (harmonic) attention
From Attention to Intention • The projectionist—the presenter of the fiction—is the agent who intends the audience to attend to the show
From Attention to Intention • The projectionist—the presenter of the fiction—is the agent who intends the audience to attend to the show – This intentional instance requires the strategic use of representational resources for interactivity, both of conversation and mentation
Mental Spaces • These features of the cinematic model can be formally modeled semiotically by a modified version of the Mental Spaces framework developed by Fauconnier & Turner (2002)
Mental Spaces • We adopt the mode of analysis developed by Line Brandt & Per Aage Brandt (2005), and Line Brandt (2006)
Mental Spaces • We adopt the mode of analysis developed by Line Brandt & Per Aage Brandt (2005), and Line Brandt (2006) – To review – Mental spaces are scenes and scenario or facets of scenes and scenarios representing past, present, future, and otherwise imagined events, processes, and states – Meaning arises when scenes and scenarios are activated and sometimes blended – Mental space networks are ontologically grounded in a semiotic “base” space
A Famous Example of Fictive Interaction in Discourse • The Debate With Kant – A philosophy professor leading a seminar on the philosophy of mind is reported as saying the following:
I claim that reason is a self-developing capacity. Kant disagrees with me on this point. He says it’s innate, but I answer that’s begging the question, to which he counters, in Critique of Pure Reason, that only innate ideas have power. But I say to that, What about neuronal group selection? And he gives no answer. – From Fauconnier & Turner (2002: 59 -60)
Semiotic Participants Philosophy Professor Students Situation Setting A university classroom with tables, chairs, chalkboards, etc. Intelligibility Condition Persons unbound of time and space, primarily through modes of written communication Situational relevance
Semiotic Presentation space Participants Philosophy Professor Students Oral debate as format of teaching Situation Setting A university classroom with tables, chairs, chalkboards, etc. Exhibitory Condition Persons unbound of time and space, primarily through modes of written communication Situational relevance Reference space Kant’s philosophical writings on “mind” (as they appear in translation)
Semiotic Presentation space Participants Philosophy Professor Students Reference space Kant’s philosophical writings on “mind” (as they appear in translation) Professor Oral debate as format of teaching Situation Setting A university classroom with tables, chairs, chalkboards, etc. Exhibitory Condition Persons unbound of time and space, primarily through modes of written communication Virtual space 1: Fictive debate 1 st person plural Kant with Professor Situational relevance Virtual space 2: 1 st person plural with 3 rd person viewpoint Pragmatic implication: Contemporary significance of a fictive debate with Kant Students witness Kant’s error against the truth of the professor’s views
Magritte’s Tentative de l’impossible (1928)
Semiotic Presentation space Participants Rene Magritte Model Viewer Reference space Representation of a nude woman on canvas Easel painting Artist working with a nude model. The model posses for the artist. Situation Setting The viewer is looking through a catalogue of the artist’s work Exhibitory Condition Expression and content merge; usual objects in very unusual contexts Situational relevance The artist paints the woman into being Uses paint, brushes & palette to create a 3 D woman Virtual space 1: Fictional 1 st person plural
Semiotic Presentation space Participants Rene Magritte Model Viewer Reference space Representation of a nude woman on canvas Easel painting Artist working with a nude model. The model posses for the artist. Situation Setting The viewer is looking through a catalogue of the artist’s work Expression and content merge The artist paints the woman into being Uses paint, brushes & palette to create a 3 D woman Exhibitory Condition Situational relevance Pragmatic implication: Artists do bring there subjects into being! The artist knows that the viewer knows this is an impossible state of affairs Metarepresentation space Virtual space 1; Fictional 1 st person plural
Henry Clay Frick & Hans Holbein: A Curator’s Conceit
Semiotic space Participants museum patrons security guards Situation Setting The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5 th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others. Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary Situational relevance
Semiotic space Presentation space Participants museum patrons security guards Situation Hans Holbein, the Younger Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position Henry C. Frick =Protagonist Setting The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5 th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others. Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary Situational relevance
Grounding Presentation space Participants museum patrons security guards Situation Hans Holbein, the Younger Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position Henry C. Frick =Protagonist Setting The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5 th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others. Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary Situational relevance Reference space Thomas More (protagonist) Thomas Cromwell (antagonist) Political rivals in the Tudor Court of Henry VIII
Grounding Presentation space Participants museum patrons security guards Situation Hans Holbein, the Younger Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position Henry C. Frick =Protagonist Reference space Thomas More (protagonist) Thomas Cromwell (antagonist) Political rivals in the Tudor Court of Henry VIII Setting The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5 th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others. Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary Situational relevance Virtual space 1: 1 st person singular experience of a fictive 3 rd person viewpoint
Semiotic Space Presentation space Participants Hans Holbein, the Younger museum patrons Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position security guards Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position Situation Henry C. Frick =Protagonist Reference space Thomas More (protagonist) Thomas Cromwell (antagonist) Political rivals in the Tudor Court of Henry VIII Setting The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5 th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others. Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary Virtual space 1: 1 st person singular experience of a fictive 3 rd person viewpoint Situational relevance Illocutionary Force: Look at this! Virtual space 2: 1 st person plural experience of a fictive 3 rd person viewpoint
Grounding Presentation space Participants Reference space Hans Holbein, the Younger museum patrons Portrait of Thomas More (1527) Enface position security guards Portrait of Thomas Cromwell (1532) Profile position Situation Henry C. Frick =Protagonist Thomas More (protagonist) Thomas Cromwell (antagonist) Political rivals in the Tudor Court of Henry VIII Setting The Living Hall at the Frick mansion on 5 th Avenue in NYC; depictions of St. Jerome and St. Paul, among others. Patrons walk through the gallery looking at the collection and listening to commentary Virtual space 1: 1 st person singular experience of a fictive 3 rd person viewpoint Situational relevance Illocutionary Force: Look at this! Pragmatic implication: Frick was a clever collector Virtual space 2: 1 st person plural experience of a fictive 3 rd person viewpoint Metarepresentation space: fictive 3 rd person omnipotent perspective
Discussion • Reconsider representation and metarepresentation in light of a cognitive semiotic analysis
Discussion • Various forms of interaction are fundamental to the formation of fictional representations
Discussion • Shared attention as it relates to intentional meaning needs to be explicitly modeled in these instances
Discussion • We’ve attempted this by integrating mental spaces theory with a ‘cinematic model’ of attention, for understanding a three step process from presentation to representation to metarepresentation
Discussion • this model offers a systematic means of accounting for the richly intesubjective nature of fictional interactions and, we think, offers an important addition to mental spaces framework
Discussion • Our goal was to analyze properly the nature of meaning as it relates to these issues
Discussion • Our goal was to analyze properly the nature of meaning as it relates to these issues • We have said nothing about how these processes evolved or developed. Perhaps this workshop can point us in a fruitful direction
- Slides: 50