Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

197956Re: Mood and author opinion

Expand Messages
  • Padraic Brown
    Jul 4 9:53 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      > From: Leonardo Castro <leolucas1980@...>
      > 2013/7/3 Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...>:
      >>>   On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 09:11:18 -0300, Leonardo Castro
      >>> <leolucas1980@...> wrote:
      >>> It's very succinct, so it looks like a "conjugation"
      > associated with the
      >>> the person being deictically referred to by the first person singular.
      >>> But "afirma-se que" (it's affirmed that) and
      > "nega-se
      >>> que" (it's denied that) have the additional idea of "but
      > I don't guarantee what
      >>> is being told", while using "sim" (yes) and
      > "não" (not)
      >>> gives us the idea of undoubtful information, although we know that we
      > are simply
      >>> trusting the person who says that.
      >> Right. I don't see any "conjugation" here that specifically
      > refers to the speaker.
      > It occurs to me that if there was a "narrator pronoun" in some
      > language, it could unify "not" and "deny", "yes"
      > and "affirm", "may"
      > and "guess", but it would sound very unnatural or philosophically
      > sophisticated.
      I'm not sure I follow... How does a narratory pronoun "unify" those words?
      I'm also not so sure I'd actually wánt a narratory pronoun --- if Narrator
      and Speaker are the same person, there's no need. If Narrator is external
      to the story, there is also no need, because he takes no part in the action
      and only rarely injects his own opinions on the action. (Indeed, I have written
      stories where Narrator speaks on his own behalf, offering some opinion on
      this or that. I'd rather not overdo it, because of the risk of letting the story
      become about Narrator rather than about the people in the story.) I didn't
      need a special pronoun; I just used ordinary conventions to alert the Reader
      that what he's reading is now not part of the plot. I placed the aside into a
      foot note and used a more direct, conversational / conspiratorial tone, as if
      Narrator had just set the book down for a moment of extemp conversation
      with his interlocutor. Aside done, Narrator simply picks the book up again
      and continues with the story.
      I could see devising such a combined pronoun if, for example, the conventions
      of typography did not have any quotation marks. In most (all?) real world
      languages, quotation marks are used to denote direct speech, and thus Speaker
      is made explicit and is also differentiated from Narrator. If we get rid of the
      quotation marks, it might indeed be helpful for there to be some way of
      distinguishing those roles.
      > Isn't "narrator" a better word than "speaker" for the
      > person we're talking about?
      Perhaps. If Narrator and Speaker are the same person! Indeed, the story
      can be narrated by one of the characters (typical of first person stories),
      or by an external / dispassionate / omniscient narrator (third person), or
      even by Reader (second person). In the cases of the first and third,
      Narrator and Speaker are (or may be) the same. We just have to keep in mind
      that the "speaker" can change at any given time, depending upon who in
      the story is actually talking! If the narration is first person, but someone
      else is talking, then that character is Speaker, but not Narrator.
      > 2013/7/3 H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>:
      >>  my English teacher  once stated in class that while a story could be
      >> written in the 3rd  person or the 1st person, it was impossible to write a
      >> story in the 2nd  person.
      > That's how choose-the-ending kids books are written. Take a look:
      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choose_Your_Own_Adventure

      Quite so.
    • Show all 16 messages in this topic