Language and Literature-2005-Weber-45-63.pdf

8/10/2019 Language and Literature-2005-Weber-45-63.pdf

1/19

From bad to worse: pragmatic scales and the

(de)construction of cultural models

Jean Jacques Weber, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg

Abstract

This article uses a cognitive-pragmatic approach to discourse which is informed by twobasic concepts: cultural models and pragmatic scales. The data consist of an essay by aliterary writer, Jamaica KincaidsA Small Place, as well as editorials and letters to the

editor published in a Luxembourgish newspaper. The analysis reveals how the authorsof the editorials and letters to the editor both rely upon and construct a particular cul-tural model about education in Luxembourg, and how the literary writer deconstructsher readers (at least potentially stereotypical) model of tourism. Rather than attempt todistinguish between different text genres on such a basis, the article focuses on cogni-tive aspects that are common to all discourse processing; in particular, it highlights thekey role played by pragmatic scales in linking and structuring cultural models. Thescales are invoked primarily by evaluative adjective forms such as bad, worse, etc.,and they make possible a high degree of linguistic implicitness in the writers rhetori-cal and argumentative strategies. The article concludes that the consequent processes ofmoving information across evaluative scales and filling in missing values are charac-teristic of the way human beings think, and that they work together with other process-es of reasoning (such as conceptual blending) to produce the full complexity, but alsothe potentially stereotyped nature, of human thinking.

Keywords: A Small Place; cognitive-pragmatic approach; cultural models; Kincaid,Jamaica; pragmatic scales

1 Introduction

The basic premise in cognitive linguistics that there is no direct mapping between

words and the world, that each situation can be construed in different ways

depending on such experiential aspects as perspective, profiling (or

foregrounding), cognitive and cultural models, and conceptual metaphors has

been of great interest to many stylisticians working in these areas. It has led to

the development of a new paradigm, cognitive poetics, which has come of age

with the publication of such books as Stockwells Cognitive Poetics (2002),Gavins and Steens Cognitive Poetics in Practice (2003) and Semino and

Culpepers Cognitive Stylistics (2002).1 After initially focusing almost

exclusively on the study of conceptual metaphors, cognitive poeticians have now

considerably broadened their field of investigation. According to Stockwell,

cognitive poetics is essentially a way of thinking about literature rather than a

framework in itself, which involves the study of literary reading, in both its

individual and social aspects (Stockwell, 2002: 6, 165).

ARTICLE

Language and Literature Copyright 2005 SAGE Publications

(London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi), Vol 14(1): 4563

DOI: 10.1177/0963947005048875 www.sagepublications.com

at Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) on January 7, 2015lal.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://lal.sagepub.com/http://lal.sagepub.com/http://lal.sagepub.com/http://lal.sagepub.com/


2/19

A further impetus has been given to cognitive poetics by recent advances in

conceptual integration of blending theory, which provides insights into the nature

of text processing, and accounts for human thinking and reasoning in terms of

complex cross-domain projection of information (Coulson and Oakley, 2000,

forthcoming; Fauconnier and Turner, 2002). It developed out of Fauconniers

theory of mental spaces combined with Turners notion of conceptual integration.

In a way, the theory is its own illustration: Fauconniers theory of mental spaces

is the first input space, Turners notion of conceptual integration the second one;

these two spaces are then merged or blended, and what emerges is the new

theory of blending.

In this article I examine a related aspect of human thinking which has been

somewhat neglected so far in both cognitive linguistics and cognitive poetics,

namely the important role played by pragmatic scales in structuring and setting

up links between the readers cognitive representations of discourse events and

situations. The article takes a cognitive-pragmatic approach to discourse,

presenting textual analyses which are informed by two major concepts derived

from research in linguistic pragmatics and cognitive science: pragmatic scales

and cultural cognitive models. The texts that I look at include Jamaica Kincaids

A Small Place, a postcolonial essay about Antigua, the West Indian island where

she was born, and editorials and letters to the editor published in the

Luxembourgish newspaperLuxemburger Wortdealing with the topic of

Luxembourgs poor results in the Programme for International Student

Assessment (PISA), tests which are run by the Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development (OECD) (PISA 2000: Kompetenzen von Schlern

im internationalen Vergleich [2000]).

2 The social dimension of cognitive representations

Cognitive-pragmatic approaches to discourse see the process of understanding

and interpretation as combining both textual and cognitive aspects, both

data-driven and knowledge-driven information (e.g. Culpeper, 2001; van Dijk,

1998). On the basis of this textual and schematic information, the reader

constructs cognitive representations or mental models of what the discourse is

about. There is a distinction here between schemas and models: schemas contain

more general, socially shared knowledge, and models more personal, subjective

knowledge; schemas are more or less fixed knowledge structures and they arestored in long-term social memory, whereas models are more dynamic

knowledge structures stored in episodic memory (van Dijk, 1988: 13847, 1998:

7981). However, recent psychological research denies the relevance of abstract,

stable conceptual structures in text interpretation, and insists on the ad hoc nature

of the comprehension process which, in this view, relies on temporary and

context-dependent constructions created during dynamic meaning construal (see

in particular Gibbs, 2003).

Language and Literature 2005 14(1)

46 JEANJACQUES WEBER



3/19

As a result, the schema vs model distinction begins to collapse. For this

reason, I have preferred to avoid the term schema with its connotations of

fixedness, and instead use model. This decision is vindicated by the fact that

model is also the most widely used term in cognitive linguistics and cognitive

science. Thus, while Lakoff (1987) uses idealized cognitive model (ICM),

others (e.g. Coulson, 2001: 223; Morgan, 2001: 78) use cultural cognitive

model (CCM) or, for short, cultural model, at least for the more obviously

socially or culturally shared ones. Here I follow Coulson and Morgan in their use

of cultural model as a way of insisting on something that van Dijk, too, has

always emphasized: the unavoidably social dimension of cognitive processes and

representations (see e.g. van Dijk, 1998).

Apart from these terminological issues, a highly relevant point that Lakoff and

Turner (1989) make about cognitive models is that many of them are

hierarchically organized. Lakoff and Turners example is the Great Chain of

Being, and they argue that such a cultural model is a political issue: as a chain

of dominance (of men over women, white over black, upper classes over lower

classes, . . .) it can become a chain of subjugation (Lakoff and Turner, 1989:

213). In other words, hierarchically organized cultural models frequently embody

ethnicity-, gender- and class-based attitudes of superiority, thus corresponding to

what van Dijk (1995: 255) has called biased models. The hierarchical

organization of such a model (e.g. the Great Chain of Being) is realized through

pragmatic scales, which are important building-blocks helping to structure the

model internally, as well as establishing connections between the elements on the

scales and their associated models or submodels (in this case, men, women,

animals, plants, etc.). Before introducing and analysing my data, it will behelpful to comment on some aspects of these pragmatic scales.

3 Presupposed pragmatic scales

There has been a long-standing interest in the study of pragmatic scales within

linguistic pragmatics. Key studies include Horns (1972) work on scalar

implicatures, Fauconnier (1975) on pragmatic scales and logical structure, and

Fillmore et al. (1988) on the meaning of the let alone construction. Recently

there has been a renewed surge of interest on the part of cognitive linguists and

scientists in how humans make use of pragmatic scales in their reasoning

processes. As Sweetser and Fauconnier (1966: 25) put it,

Pragmatic scales are perhaps the ideal example of culturally based semantic

freeloading. Basic precultural experience allows all humans to extract scales

from the physical environment: degrees of variable physical attributes such as

weight, length, and so on, are among obviously scalar phenomena. Scalar

correlations (such as lighterhotter or darkercolder in the physical world) are

extremely useful, since they allow us to reason from the degree of one aspect


FROM BAD TO WORSE 47



4/19

of a situation to the degree of some other aspect of the situation. However,

grammatical constructions which exploit scalar models are by no means

restricted to general experientially based scales. Instead, we construct and

constantly make use of cultural understandings that department stores exist on

a scale of expensiveness, jobs on a scale of authority within an organization

(or on a pay scale), foods on a scale of exoticness, and so forth.

The cognitive scientist who has most directly integrated pragmatic scales into her

analyses is probably Coulson. In chapter 9 of Semantic Leaps (2001), entitled

Frame-Shifting and Scalar Implicatures, she investigates the use of pragmatic

scales in discussions about the morality of abortion and shows what important

roles they play in rhetorical strategies. I mention here only those strategies of

linguistic implicitness that are directly relevant to my analyses in the remainderof this article.

One rhetorical device in which pragmatic scales are used is the double hierar-

chy argument originally described by Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (1969) and

briefly hinted at in the above quotation from Sweetser and Fauconnier. Coulson

(2001: 252) explains this as follows:

In a double hierarchy argument, a speaker uses the ordering principle of a

well-established pragmatic scale to create a second pragmatic scale whose

points are ordered in the same way. Once the two scales are linked, inferences

that hold on the first scale also hold on the second. Linking two scales in this

manner affords the possibility of moving inferences generated on the less

controversial scale to parallel inferences on the more controversial linked scale.

She analyses a brief passage in which an informant describes rape as a

traumatizing case that warrants the acceptability of abortion. Asked about incest,

the informant replied that this would be an even more traumatizing case. Coulson

argues that the informant here links two scales, a relatively uncontroversial scale

of traumatic pregnancies and a more controversial one of acceptable abortions

(Figure 1).

The informants inference from the first scale (that incest is higher on the

trauma scale) is then transferred to the second linked scale, so that incest is seen

as an even stronger warrant for the acceptability of abortion than rape. To

highlight the fact that this latter inference is the product of movement of

information across scales, I have inserted it in propositional form between square

brackets in the representation of Scale 2.

But of course, instead of being linked, scales can also be severed. Coulsonshows how another informant, an advocate for the Pro-Life movement, shifts the

focus to what he sees as the most relevant: the termination of the fetus. Rather

than admit that abortion can be more or less acceptable, he presents life as

something that cannot be placed on the scale (Coulson, 2001: 2578). Though

he acknowledges Scale 1 he rejects Scale 2 and deliberately breaks all the links

between them.





5/19

In this way, pragmatic scales are important elements that help to internally

structure cultural models (such as abortion) and set up links with other models or

submodels (such as rape and incest), thus making possible a high degree of

linguistic implicitness in argumentative as well as other discourse genres. They

are evoked by presuppositional triggers: for instance, Coulsons first informant

argues that it would be more traumatizing to be raped by a member of your

family (Coulson, 2001: 254). It is the comparative construction more

traumatizing that activates a scale of highlow traumatization. In my analysesbelow, similar scales will be found to be activated by change of state verbs such

as go down and, mostly, by other evaluative adjectives. The most frequently

encountered evaluative adjectives in my data are goodand bad(and their

comparative or superlative forms), with bad and worse being the most common

forms. As Hunston and Sinclair (2000: 91) point out, such adjectives have a

feature of gradedness, [which] is associated with comparison against a norm

or scale, and so all the writers can be seen to rely upon implicit scales of

evaluation in their arguments, which they expect their readers to (re)construct as

part of their processing of the text.

Indeed, once constructed, the scales guide further interpretation and allow

inferences to be drawn on the basis of prior knowledge associated with the

different elements on the scales. Thus pragmatic scales and cultural models

together provide, to use Lakoffs (1987: 321) term, the conceptual scaffolding

for these discourses about education in Luxembourg and tourism in Antigua. In

the remainder of this article I will show how the authors of the editorial and of

the letters to the editor rely upon evaluative scales in order to construct a

particular cultural model about education in Luxembourg, and how Kincaid uses

similar techniques to undermine her readersmodel of tourism.



Figure 1

incest [incest is an even more acceptable

reason for abortion than rape]

rape rape

Scale 1: traumatic causes of pregnancy Scale 2: acceptable reasons for abortion



6/19


7/19

These two scales need to be causally linked in order to become valid: the

young in the present have a lower level of intelligence because they got very bad

results in the PISA test; the young in the past, on the other hand, had a higher

level of intelligence, presumably because they achieved much better international

test results. However, here is the catch: the young in the past never achieved such

positive results; in fact, they never participated in any such international tests,

except once in the 1970s, when Luxembourgs results were highly similar to the

2000 PISA results (see Chambre des Dputs, 2003: 80 on the MAGRIP test).

Thus we can see how linguistic implicitness and pragmatic scales are drawn

upon to construct two related myths: the myth of the golden past and the myth ofdeclining standards, a combination of which we found to be ubiquitous in the

post-PISA educational discourses (see Horner and Weber, forthcoming; and

Milroy, 1998 for a general discussion of how deep-rooted and persistent these

myths are). In the words of Fairclough (2003: 82), the protasis of the above-

quoted if-sentence can be said to be doing ideological work: i.e. the work of

making contentious, positioned and interested representations a matter of general

common sense, and indeed by May 2003 this representation of todays youth

as dumb has been naturalized to such an extent that the writer of the following

letter to the editor can present it as a matter of community-wide agreement:

Todays youth is in part damn fresh/insolent [rotzfresch] . . . agreed; they are

also see the PISA-study not too bright . . . also agreed (21.5.2003 German

original in the Appendix, text 2). By now, the young have reached rock bottom

on the intelligentstupid scale and the author relies on (what she considers to be)a consensual norm when referring to them with an ironic understatement as not

too bright.

4.2 Social cohesion

The Luxembourgish school system is a highly traditional one, with a clear



Figure 2

young in the past [good international test results

of the young in the past]

young in the present young in the present

Scale 1: level of intelligence Scale 2: nature of international test results



8/19

division into classical and technical lyces, and with high language requirements

in French and German from primary school upwards, and some additional

languages (mostly English) at secondary level. The language requirements are

used as a mechanism of selection or exclusion, as acknowledged by the Ministry

of National Education itself: Failing in German is particularly frequent among

foreign children, whereas it is failing in French that slows down and ends up

discouraging or eliminating [sic] large numbers of Luxembourgish pupils

(Ministre de lEducation Nationale et de la Formation Professionnelle, 1998: 15;

French original in the Appendix, text 3). The situation is complicated by the fact

that the national language, Luxembourgish, is used as a medium of spoken

communication on a daily basis, and is frequently relied upon by teachers as a

medium of instruction. This complex linguistic situation creates huge problems

for the increasing number of immigrant students, the largest group of whom are

of Portuguese origin. Yet no government so far has had the political courage to

face this highly sensitive issue head-on. It might seem that a major

catastrophe(such as the bad PISA results) would be necessary to shake the old-

fashioned school system to its deepest foundations and spark off a fundamental

rethinking of the whole educational structure.

However, our data show that the PISA results have not led to a new awareness

of, or general consensus concerning, the need for structural changes to the

system. In fact, just the opposite seems to have happened. The following extract

from an editorial is typical in this respect:

It is above all multilingualism that represents the real foundation of the

Luxembourgish school system. Language skills are still the key to successboth in higher education and in the workplace for most young people who

have completed their secondary education in a Luxembourgish lyce.

Whoever reforms and tinkers with this solid foundation thoughtlessly, inevitably

paves the way for a second PISA disaster. Presumably much worse, because

of a structural nature. (11.4.2002 German original in the Appendix, text 4)

The mixing of metaphors could perhaps be seen as a sign of confused thinking

on the part of the author. First, the Luxembourgish school system is compared to

a building with multilingualism a highly specific and restrictive version of

multilingualism consisting of Luxembourgish, French and German as its

foundation, which is simply assumed to be a solid one. There is a non sequitur

here: not reforming the foundation has led to the first PISA disaster but,

according to the author, reforming it will lead to a second, hypothetical and muchworse one. The idea is then set out in the familiar scenarios of somebody

tinkering with the foundation thoughtlessly, and as a result pav[ing] the way for

a second PISA disaster which might undermine the whole Luxembourgish

school system (and/or society). This is the discourse of threat, which we also

found to be quite widespread in our data, warning that any structural change will

lead to social conflict (see Horner and Weber, forthcoming).

The two linked scales in this reasoning are shown in Figure 3.





9/19

The implication is that the first PISA disaster unlike the second hypothetical

one is not of a structural nature; presumably, for the author, it is of a

methodological nature since, at the end of his editorial, he advocates a change

in teaching methods which according to him should be more innovative: what

matters are not extensive structural reforms but rather new pedagogical concepts.

Another implicit assumption underlying the suggestion that any structural

change will lead to social conflict is the following one: at present in

Luxembourg, social cohesion is a reality, though under threat. With its vague

discourse of threat, the editorial belongs to a genre that could almost be referred

to as apocalyptic or what Fairclough (2003: 96) has termed hortatory report:it is concerned more to persuade people that these are indeed the only

practicable policies than to open up dialogue. This form of report is what we

might call hortatory report: descriptions with a covert prescriptive intent,

aimed at getting people to act in certain ways on the basis of representations

of what is.

The editorial is also ideological in the sense of plastering over contradictions

which, I believe, come out into the open in another letter to the editor, to which I

now turn.

At the beginning of this letter, the author talks about the extreme difficulty of

achieving literacy in their third or even fourth language faced by many

Portuguese children living in Luxembourg, and then concludes by arguing that a

change in teaching methods will not be sufficient to solve this problem:

[1] New methods on their own, such as student-centred or team teaching, or

alternative methods of assessment, are only of limited help, if we do not want

to make utter fools of ourselves again in the next PISA study.

[2] Unfortunately they are nothing but patchwork, which may help us get over

certain short-term obstacles, but which cannot solve/remove the fundamental

problems caused by our special linguistic situation.



Figure 3

1st PISA disaster bad [?]

2nd PISA disaster worse of a structural nature

Scale 1 Scale 2



10/19

[3] If one wants to improve the existing system, in order to offer every

pupil educational opportunities corresponding to their abilities, so that they

can survive in the highly competitive struggle with neighbouring areas, then

the only way is a radical change in our multilingualism. [4] However, such a

change might not be without influence upon our social cohesion: in return, we

would be forced to give up an essential integrative aspect, namely the

German or the Luxembourgish language as the case may be.

[5] Thus PISA retrospectively turns out to be a two-edged sword:

integration or highest possible qualifications? (26.1.2002 German original in

the Appendix, text 5; I have numbered the sentences for ease of reference.)

This writer is convinced that the existing system is in need of improvement, and

that the only effective solution would be a structural change, namely anadaptation of Luxembourgish trilingualism. However, he then uses integration

(integrative) in a counter-intuitive sense as synonymous with assimilation: after

all, Luxembourgish and German can only be seen as the elements that bond

together autochthonous Luxembourgers, and it is precisely these languages that

exclude many immigrant children. His somewhat illogical argument is combined

with the vague discourse of threat to social cohesion (might not be without

influence, forced to give up) and the discourse of declining standards, so that

the final choice becomes one between integration/social cohesion and high

qualifications.

The ideological contradictions referred to above become explicit here. A first

contradiction is that we have both integration and social cohesion now (since

they could be threatened by structural changes to the school system seesentence 4) and we do not have them now (since highest possible

qualifications rather than integration/social cohesion is the ultimate aim of the

educational system as is implied by sentences 3 and 5). The second, related

contradiction is that throughout the letter integration is assumed to be the

ultimate goal, but when faced with the clear need for structural changes, they are

rejected in the name of high standards. In other words, the discourse of declining

standards is relied upon as a way of resisting demands for change.

Moreover, sentence 5 is based upon a dubious assumption: namely, that the

Luxembourgish school system offers at least those students who are successful

the highest possible qualifications. Again, an evaluative scale is implied here by

the superlative construction: since the highest end-point on the qualifications

scale has been reached by the Luxembourgish school system, it follows that any

change, such as greater emphasis on integration as the ultimate goal, wouldnecessarily lower the standards and lead to less than optimal qualifications for

the students. In other words, integration and high qualifications are presented as

mutually exclusive objectives; the needs of the immigrant students and those of

the autochthonous Luxembourgish ones are presented as being incompatible,

and the metaphor of the two-edged sword suggests that empowering the former

can only be done by disempowering the latter (after all, such a sword is





11/19

something that simultaneously helps and hurts see Fauconnier and Turner,

2002: 306).

These analyses have revealed the ways in which the writers rely on linguistic

implicitness and, more particularly, on presupposed scales of evaluation in their

arguments. Implicit assumptions and pragmatic scales form the basis for the

construction of a number of related myths: on the one hand, the myths of the

golden past and of declining standards and, on the other hand, the myth of threat

to social cohesion. These can be seen as the pillars of a cultural model which

seems all-pervasive in both official and popular discourses about education in

Luxembourg. Together they constitute the essential elements of an educational

ideology which is usually referred to as classical humanism. In Horner and

Weber (forthcoming) we show to what extent the classical humanist ideology

dominates thinking about education in Luxembourg and how it has kept out

alternative paradigms such as progressivism or social reconstructionism,2 and it

is because this ideology is so dominant that arguments about education can be

couched in such highly implicit ways, with writers expecting their readers to be

able to retrieve or construct effortlessly the missing values, however questionable

or discriminatory they may be.

5 Deconstructing the readers cultural model of tourism: Jamaica KincaidsA Small Place

In this section I discuss Kincaids highly controversial essay about the West

Indian island of Antigua. Its theme is the encounter between two worlds: she

feels that Antigua has been raped by both colonialism and tourism. In order to

get this point across as forcefully as possible, she juxtaposes a multiplicity of

discourses and perspectives, and turns the colonial gaze back upon the (implicitly

male) tourist and colonizer, thus in turn objectifying and dehumanizing him, until

eventually he becomes an ugly thing (1997 [1988]: 17). In this way, what

initially looks like a travelogue or a tourist guidebook gradually turns into an

angry denunciation of tourism and colonialism.3

At the very beginning of the essay, the first-person narrator addresses you as

a tourist spending his vacation in Kincaids native Antigua. In order to make the

reader feel good about identifying with the position of tourist, she distinguishes

between two types of tourists:

If you go to Antigua as a tourist, this is what you will see. If you come by

aeroplane, you will land at the V. C. Bird International Airport. Vere Cornwall

(V. C.) Bird is the Prime Minister of Antigua. You may be the sort of tourist

who would wonder why a Prime Minister would want an airport named after

him why not a school, why not a hospital, why not some great public

monument? You are a tourist and you have not yet seen a school in Antigua,

you have not yet seen the hospital in Antigua [In the taxi from the airport,





12/19


13/19

form of backwardness (1997 [1988]: 1617). There is thus an almost

unbridgeable gap separating the tourist from the local people, which allows him

to feel superior, though this feeling of superiority is based on a lack of ethical

values and critical thinking.

The clash of perspectives is enacted through a very special aspect of Kincaids

narrative technique, her frequent use of brackets:

rain is the very thing that you, just now, do not want, for you are thinking of

the hard and cold and dark and long days you spent working in North America

(or, worse, Europe), earning some money so that you could stay in this place

(Antigua) where the sun always shines [. . .] You are feeling wonderful, so

you say, Oh, what a marvellous change these bad roads are from the splendid

highways I am used to in North America. (Or, worse, Europe.) (1997 [1988]:4, 5)

The reader is taken aback here by the repetition of one word. Why is Europe

worse? Whose perspective is this? Gradually the reader becomes aware that the

material between brackets is presented from the perspective of the autochthonous

Antiguans or the author (who is also an autochthonous Antiguan), and so

provides an ironic counterpoint to the main-text perspective of the tourist. The

comparative form worse again implies a pragmatic scale: being a tourist from

the US is bad, being a tourist from Western Europe is worse. Presumably those

who would be classified as good would be the autochthonous Antiguans, and so

we end up with the evaluative scale shown in Figure 5.

But why would the Antiguans see American and European tourists as bad?

Could it have anything to do with Antigua having suffered from Europeancolonialism and now suffering from American neo-colonialism? Such reasoning

(which will be confirmed later on by the text) might lead the reader to set up a

second, related scale (Figure 6).

The second scale is implicit in the text at least at this stage and has to be



Figure 5

good autochthonous Antiguans

bad North American tourists

worse Western European tourists

Scale 1



14/19

inferred by the reader. Gradually, however, the connection between the two

scales is made more explicit, mostly through the authors use of the adjective

free. On page 5, we are told that the tourist feels free, for things seem so

cheap in Antigua. The emphasis on the tourists materialistic concerns is

achieved through a semantic narrowing of free, which is somewhat reminiscent

of Orwells Newspeak in his novelNineteen Eighty-Four(1969 [1949]).4

Interestingly, the same materialistic concerns are associated a little later in the

text with the former colonialists who got rich from the free (free in this case

meaning got-for-nothing) and then undervalued labour, for generations, of peoplelike me you see walking around you in Antigua (Kincaid, 1997 [1988]: 10).

In cognitive-linguistic terms, what the author does here is not simply link the

above scales but actually blendthem: the two scales constitute the input spaces,

while in the blended space the tourist merges with the colonizer, his values being

equated with colonial values, since both sets of values are based on materialism

and a feeling of superiority. The tourist has thus become a shallow materialistic

creature with the same attitudes as those of the former colonialists, and so it is

not surprising that by the end of Part 1 of A Small Place the tourist is described

as being ugly. The colonial gaze has been turned back upon the

colonizer-tourist and it is he who is seen as the despised Other:

An ugly thing, that is what you are when you become a tourist, an ugly, empty

thing, a stupid thing, a piece of rubbish pausing here and there to gaze at this

and taste that, and it will never occur to you that the people who inhabit the

place in which you have just paused cannot stand you, that behind their closed

doors they laugh at your strangeness. (1997 [1988]: 17)

As a result, the readers who at the beginning might have felt comfortable about

identifying with the tourist position are now shaken out of their complacency

and jolted into thought, as they stand accused of shallow materialism and, worse,



good colonized Antiguans

bad North-American neo-colonialists

worse (former) Western European colonialists

Scale 2

Figure 6



15/19


16/19

it was felt necessary to construct particular cultural models and pragmatic scales.

However, the examples also show that pragmatic scales and the hierarchical

thinking associated with them inform a lot of racist, sexist and classist attitudes

and prejudices. Therefore it is important to study this fundamental aspect of our

cognitive architecture in order to understand better how it works and to be in a

position to combat its more pernicious effects.

Moreover, the analyses illustrate how very different authors writing very

different texts use these strategies of hierarchical organization and linguistic

implicitness in their argumentation, whether it is ordinary people writing letters

to the editor, journalists writing editorials, or literary authors writing essays. All

of them can be seen to be linking scales, usually with one end-point left implicit

on the second, related scale. Readers are then prompted to fill in the missing

values both by transferring inferences from one scale to the other and by

constructing the relevant cultural models.

In cognitive linguistics and cognitive science, a major research emphasis at

present is on blending processes. While blending has been found to play a key

role in at least one of these analyses, the focus of the present article has been on

the processes of moving information across evaluative scales and filling in

missing values. All these aspects of reasoning processes are characteristic of the

way human beings think, and they work together to produce the full complexity

of human thinking. Conceptual blends, cultural models and pragmatic scales are

all in the words of Coulson (2001: 266) tools we use to construct and

reconstruct a cultural understanding of the world we both inhabit and create.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Kristine Horner, Paul Simpson and two anonymous

reviewers for their very perceptive comments on an earlier draft of this article.

Notes

1 See also my review of these three books (Weber, forthcoming a). For other overviews of thecognitive turn in literary studies, see e.g. Crane and Richardson (1999), Richardson and Steen(2002) or Freeman (forthcoming).

2 The classical humanist ideology is based on the transmission of knowledge and a cultural

heritage which combines moral and aesthetic values. According to Ho (2002: 2945), thisideology is concerned with the preservation of the social order as well as conformity to acceptedstandards of linguistic and moral correctness. Its proponents therefore favour an authoritativeapproach to language teaching which emphasizes formal correctness and accuracy of writingconventions (Ho, 2002: 2989). The progressivist ideology, on the other hand, is concernedwith individual child growth and development (Skilbeck, 1982: 10); hence, it stresses suchaspects as exploration, investigation, choice, creativity, enjoyment, confidence andindependence (Ho, 2002: 285, 292). Finally, in a school system informed by reconstructionistideology, the prevailing social norms and practices are analysed, criticized and reconstructedaccording to rationalistic, democratic, communitarian values (Skilbeck, 1982: 11). The





17/19

keywords here are equality, tolerance, acceptance of diversity, as well as a critical awareness ofhow language works (for example) to include or exclude others (Ho, 2002: 285, 293), and theaim is to form independent and critical learners who are able to challenge the status quo inorder to improve it (Ho, 2002: 299).

3 For a detailed discussion ofA Small Place, see Weber (forthcoming b).4 In Orwells Newspeak, there is no way of referring to political or intellectual freedom any

longer.Free can only be used in such sentences as this field is free from weeds (Orwell, 1969[1949]: 2412).

References

Chambre des Dputs: Dbat dorientation sur ltude PISA ralise dans les pays de lOECD(2003) Luxembourg.

Coulson, S. (2001) Semantic Leaps: Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in MeaningConstruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Coulson, S. and Oakley, T. (2000) Blending Basics, Cognitive Linguistics 11: 17596.Coulson, S. and Oakley, T. (eds) (forthcoming) Conceptual Blending: Representation, Principles,

Processes. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Crane, M.T. and Richardson, A. (1999) Literary Studies and Cognitive Science: Toward a New

Interdisciplinarity,Mosaic 32: 12440.Culpeper, J. (2001)Language and Characterization. London: Longman.Fairclough, N. (2003)Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.Fauconnier, G. (1975) Pragmatic Scales and Logical Structure,Linguistic Inquiry 6: 35375.Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. (2002) The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Minds

Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.Fillmore, C.J., Kay, P. and OConnor, M.C. (1988) Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical

Constructions: The Case of let alone,Language 64: 50138.Freeman, M.H. (forthcoming) Cognitive Linguistic Approaches to Literary Studies: State of the Art

in Cognitive Poetics, in D. Geeraerts and H. Cuyckens (eds)Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.Gavins, J. and Steen, G. (eds) (2003) Cognitive Poetics in Practice. London: Routledge.Gibbs, R.W. (2003) Prototypes in Dynamic Meaning Construal, in J. Gavins and G. Steen (eds)

Cognitive Poetics in Practice, pp. 2740. London: Routledge.Ho, J.W.Y. (2002) Curriculum Documents as Representation of Institutional Ideology A

Comparative Study,Language and Education 16: 284302.Horn, L.R. (1972) On the Semantic Properties of the Logical Operators in English, mimeo.

Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Horner, K. and Weber, J.J. (forthcoming) Firwat ass alles schief gaang?: Discursive Strategies for

Justifying Luxembourgs PISA Test Results, in A. Schuth, K. Horner and J.J. Weber (eds)Language, Culture and Change. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.

Hunston, S. and Sinclair, J. (2000) A Local Grammar of Evaluation, in S. Hunston and G.Thompson (eds)Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse,pp. 74101. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kincaid, J. (1997 [1988])A Small Place. London: Vintage.Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. and Turner, M. (1989)More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Milroy, J. (1998) Myth 8: Children Cant Speak or Write Properly Any More, in L. Bauer andP. Trudgill (eds)Language Myths, pp. 5865. London: Penguin.

Ministre de lEducation Nationale et de la Formation Professionnelle (1998)Pour une coledintgration: constats questions perspectives. Luxembourg: Ministre de lEducationNationale et de la Formation Professionnelle.

Morgan, P.S. (2001) The Semantics of Impeachment: Meanings and Models in a Political Conflict,in R. Dirven, R. Frank and C. Ilie (eds)Language and Ideology. Volume II: Descriptive CognitiveApproaches, pp. 77105. Amsterdam: Benjamins.





18/19

Orwell, G. (1969 [1949])Nineteen Eighty-Four. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969) The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, trans.

J. Wilkinson and P. Weaver. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.PISA 2000: Kompetenzen von Schlern im internationalen Vergleich. Nationaler Bericht. (2000)

Luxembourg: Ministre de lEducation Nationale, de la Formation Professionnelle et des Sports.Richardson, A. and Steen, F.F. (2002) Literature and the Cognitive Revolution: An Introduction,

Poetics Today 23: 18.Semino, E. and Culpeper, J. (eds) (2002) Cognitive Stylistics: Language and Cognition in Text

Analysis. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Skilbeck, M. (1982) Three Educational Ideologies, in T. Horton and P. Raggatt (eds) Challenge and

Change in the Curriculum, pp. 718. Sevenoaks: Hodder and Stoughton.Stockwell, P. (2002) Cognitive Poetics: An Introduction. London: Routledge.Sweetser, E. and Fauconnier, G. (1996) Cognitive Links and Domains: Basic Aspects of Mental

Space Theory, in G. Fauconnier and E. Sweetser (eds) Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar, pp. 128.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

van Dijk, T.A. (1988) Social Cognition, Social Power and Social Discourse, Text8: 12957.van Dijk, T.A. (1995) Discourse Semantics and Ideology,Discourse and Society 6: 24389.van Dijk, T.A. (1998)Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: Sage.Weber, J.J. (forthcoming a) A New Paradigm for Literary Studies, or: The Teething Troubles of

Cognitive Poetics, Style.Weber, J.J. (forthcoming b)Postcolonial Fiction: A Handbook for Students and Teachers. Trier:

Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.

Address

Jean Jacques Weber, Department of English, University of Luxembourg, 162A av. de la Faiencerie,L-1511 Luxembourg. [email:[email protected]]

Appendix

1 I. Schmit-Mines: A qui la faute?,Luxemburger Wort15.12.2001

Aprs ltude PISA de nouvelles questions se posent en ce qui concerne lcole

et la culture. Nous avons tous t secous. Personne ne stait attendu un

rsultat si ngatif de la part de nos jeunes lves, puisque les Luxembourgeois

sont en gnral connus pour leur bonne culture gnrale. Et mme en

comparaison aven de jeunes trangers, lenseignement des langues dans notre

pays nest pas si drisoire.

Si le niveau intellectuel des jeunes est en train de baisser, il ne faut pas

seulement accuser lcole et lenseignement au Luxembourg.

2 L. Hoschet: An den Prgel-Lehrer, Luxemburger Wort21.5.2003

Die Jugend von heute ist teilweise rotzfresch [sic] . . . einverstanden; sie ist auch

siehe die Pisa-Studie nicht allzu gescheit . . . auch einverstanden.

3 Ministre de lEducation Nationale et de la Formation Professionnelle, 1998: 15

Lchec en allemand est surtout frquent parmi les enfants trangers, alors que





19/19

cest lchec en franais qui retarde et finit par dcourager ou liminer bon

nombre dlves luxembourgeois.

4 M. Glesener: Aus der schulpolitischen Mottenkiste, Luxemburger Wort

11.4.2002

Da wre vor allem die Mehrsprachigkeit, die das eigentliche Fundament des

Unterrichts la luxembourgeoise darstellt. Die Sprachgewandheit ist noch immer

fr die meisten Absolventen der luxemburgischen Schule der Schlssel zum

Erfolg in Studium und Beruf. Wer leichtfertig an dieser soliden Grundbasis

herumbastelt und reformiert, macht unweigerlich den Weg frei fr ein zweites

PISA-Debakel. Vermutlich viel schlimmer, weil struktureller Natur [Sie haben

erkannt, dass] es nicht auf umfangreiche Strukturreformen ankommt, sondern

vielmehr auf neue pdagogische Konzepte.

5 R. Brachmond: Die wahre Ursache der Bildungsmisere?, Luxemburger Wort

26.1.2002

Neue Methoden allein, etwa offener Unterricht oder Team-Teaching, sowie

alternative Bewertungskriterien helfen nur bedingt weiter, wenn wir uns bei der

nchsten PISA-Studie nicht wieder grndlich blamieren wollen. Sie bleiben

(leider) nichts als Flickwerk, das vielleicht kurzfristig ber gewisse Durststrecken

hinweghilft, die grundlegenden Probleme, ausgelst durch unsere besondere

Sprachensituation, aber nicht zu beseitigen weiss.

Will man das bestehende System verbessern, um allen Schlern die ihren

Fhigkeiten entsprechenden Ausbildungsmglichkeiten anzubieten, damit sie im

harten Wettbewerb mit ihren Konkurrenten aus dem nahen Ausland bestehenknnen, dann fhrt kein Weg an einer radikalen Erneuerung (sprich: einer

Relativierung der Mehrsprachigkeit) vorbei, die nicht ohne Einfluss auf das

gesamte hiesige soziale Gefge bleiben drfte: Wir wren im Gegenzug

gezwungen, ein wesentliches integratives Moment, nmlich die deutsche bzw. die

luxemburgische Sprache, preiszugeben.

So entpuppt sich PISA im Nachhinein als zweischneidiges Schwert:

Integration oder bestmgliche Qualifikation?



Language and Literature-2005-Weber-45-63.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Language and Literature-2005-Weber-45-63.pdf