P.J. van den Hoven

Peircean semiotics and text linguistic models

Text linguists do not pay much attention to the semiotics of Charles Sanders Peirce. That is unjust. This essay illustrates its significance. By means of Peircean semiotics three questions that relate to proposed cognitive models for text processing can be stated more precisely than currently done in the literature. The triadic character and the ( in principle unlimited) connectivity make the Peircean semiotic model dynamic and adaptive. These dynamics and this adaptively are exactly what text linguistic models presuppose. A Peircean semiotics analysis can therefore elaborate some of the fundamental presupposing underlying these cognitive models.

Discussing discourse modalities in argument theory : Reconsidering a paradigm

This article analyzes a statement by Blair that the conditions of interpretation of visual expression are indeterminate to a much greater degree than is the case with verbal expression. We argue that this proposition reveals a somewhat hidden paradigm about what argument theory is or should be. This currently dominant paradigm takes as its object a prototypical verbal discourse from which arguments can be “reconstructed” in a fairly straightforward way. In this article, we argue that accepting multimodal discourse as a means to convey argumentation implies the necessity of a serious amendment of this paradigm. The problem of modeling the protagonist’s commitments inevitably requires our having to deal more with indeterminate, “raw” discourse formats, not to be replaced by verbal reconstructions. It requires our incorporating multimodal semiotics as an integrated element of argumentation theory; and it requires our accepting that argumentative commitments are deliberately underspecified and negotiable.

Narratives and Pragmatic Arguments: Ivens’ The 400 Million

Narratives and pragmatic arguments maintain a tight but complex relation. Narratives are a proto-scientific method to empirically investigate actions. In narratives, actions are explored, explained, interpreted, and evaluated. The action is a central element in a causal chain of events: motive – action – consequences. Storytelling is a way to summarize, share, preserve and accumulate narrative investigations. Pragmatic argumentation is another method to evaluate actions. Pragmatic arguments evaluate actions in terms of their observed or predicted consequences. Therefore, pragmatic argumentation is an abstract, intellectual complement of the narrative. Rhetorically, storytelling is supposed to appeal to reason, just as a pragmatic argument appeals to reason. Both devices are employed to support standpoints in which an action is positively or negatively evaluated, encouraged or discouraged. The rhetorical dynamics, however, differ. The justifying force of the narrative is primary, its causality is direct, motivated, embodied. The justifying force of the pragmatic argument is apodictic, grounded on abstract generalized regularities. We see this complex relation reflected in creating a documentary. In this chapter, I elaborate on the connection between narrative and pragmatic argument and illustrate its application to Joris Ivens’s 1939 documentary The 400 Million.

Een strafrechtelijke uitspraak als tekstueel stelsel

Dit is een ambitieuze doelstelling, niet alleen omdat het strafrechtssysteem een ingewikkeld stelsel van leerstukken is met veel lastige terminologie, maar ook – en daarover gaat dit themanummer – omdat de rechterlijke uitspraak het (voorlopig) sluitstuk is van een complex stelsel van teksten. Het is niet eenvoudig een uitspraak zo te schrijven dat een leek de intertekstuele relaties kan reconstrueren, laat staan de betekenis ervan kan interpreteren en beoordelen. Omdat niet veel mensen regelmatig strafrechtsvonnissen in hun geheel lezen, opent dit themanummer met een voorbeeld. We publiceren bijna integraal de ‘Runescape’ uitspraak van de Rechtbank Leeuwarden (LJN BG0939). Overigens is dit geen uitspraak die al helemaal conform de promis-modellen is opgemaakt, hoewel er vergeleken met een ‘traditioneel’ verkort vonnis wel al duidelijke invloeden zijn. In de tekst van de uitspraak zijn de meest relevante momenten waarop een relatie wordt gelegd naar een andere tekst gearceerd. Tussen vierkante haken wordt verwezen naar enkele korte commentaren. Paul van den Hoven