Smith: You have a heart like an icicle We’re on hot bricks
(9) Mrs. Martin: I implore you
(10) Fire-Chief: All right then
(11) Mr. Smith: There we are He agrees He’s going to bore us again
(12) Mrs. Martin: Damn
(13) Mrs. Smith: Serves me right for being too polite
What would be the graphic representation of politeness/impoliteness for these lines?
In what way do the last three lines show the contrast between what was said in previous lines and the real meaning behind these lines?1
Is the contrast between words and their real meaning found in everyday
conversation?
Which lines belong to the communication between a character and the
audience?
Ionesco uses hyperbola of conventions that sometimes predominate in everyday communication. What is the relation between the quality maxim and politeness?
1 Pragmatics claims that “words can mean more – or something other – than what they say” (Blum-Kulka 1997: 38).
66
EXAMPLE 3
Compare two short dialogues from Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot and Ionesco’s The Bald Prima Donna, containing contrast between what the characters say and what they do.
In this case students need to have background information of the complete dramas or at least should be provided with detailed explanations by the teacher.
Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let’s go.
They do not move.
(Beckett:
Waiting for Godot)
Mrs. Smith: Do take off your helmet and sit down a moment.
Fire-Chief: I’m sorry but I can’t stay very long I’ll be glad to take off my helmet but I really haven’t the time to sit down.
He sits down without taking off his helmet.
(Ionesco:
The Bald Prima Donna)
In the first case the closing dialogue of the drama shows the tragic end: absurdity of every motion, lack of sense and uselessness of any change, whereas in the other case it creates comic effect, and again serves as an illustration of emptiness and triviality of words in everyday communication. Pragmalinguistic analysis shows that in both cases the speech act is completely contradicted by action. Words lose their meaning, the action alone dominates (the meaning of action being different in Beckett’s and Ionesco’s dialogues). Examples show the same device in two styles and with two separate purposes.
How was this done? Why is one dialogue comic, and the other is not?
Why is the author’s comment necessary in both cases for understanding the controversy between words and action?
Which of Grice’s maxims are violated?
Is it possible to find such dialogues in everyday conversations?
In what way is controversy between words and action understood in the
dialogues? (Context is the most important).
67
Suggestions for further work
The drama My Mother Said I Never Should by Charlotte Keatley shows the relationships between several generations of women as the basic dramatic conflict. An important trigger of the conflict and its catalyst is language itself.
Charlotte Keatley provides a fairly long comment on the importance of
language for understanding and interpretation of dialogue.
One of the key mini dialogues is the one wherein the daughter requests
explanations from her mother or seeks for her protection and gentleness, whereas her mother in response says, “I’ll bring you some hot cocoa”.
Instead of responding, her mother reaches out for a reply that is at first sight irrelevant to the topic (violation of the maxim of relevance). If every dialogue is understood as an exchange or transfer model, then the mother’s response cannot be regarded as a proper reaction. Such a reply would be expected in response to another line of the daughter’s, e.g. “I’m thirsty or May I have some cocoa?”.
Does the mother avoid serious talk?
Is this a frequent pattern in the communication mother – daughter in everyday life as well?
What is your personal experience? Is this a pattern of behaviour characteristic for only one culture or it is a cross-cultural phenomenon that mothers cannot verbalise their emotions but try to express them through care for nutrition?
Is the communication between mother and daughter in the drama subject to a negotiation of roles?
Which character is more dominant? In what way is it expressed through
language?
Do these lines have relevance for the development of dramatic conflict?
68
Conclusions
The model of interaction with dramatic dialogue as presented in this paper is based on the hypothesis that it can be both challenging and rewarding for teacher and learners. Since the very analysis of dramatic dialogue is not seen as the only approach, but as a combination of various mutually interactive techniques, it enables permanent reflection of one’s own point of view, as well as the point of view of the Other. The classroom work proves that by this means, i.e. by using analogy with interaction in drama, a constant negotiating of roles, negotiating of meanings and beliefs are made possible. Learners are encouraged to subjective interpretations of dramatic text and of dramatic characters, given that contemporary stylistics claims that the reader of every literary text is the person who always recreates it in the constant tension existing in the triad of text (including the sociocultural and cognitive background wherein it originated and is received) – author – reader.
The suggested model is an expression of the belief that language is not only a tool of communication, but possesses the unquestionable “symbolic power”
(Bourdieu 1991), expressed in various types of discourse. Especially interesting is its realisation in literary texts due to their aesthetic nature. Only elaborate-code speakers, ready to reflect on their place in the world, their cognitive models as well as on those of the Other, can represent true partners in a pluricultural dialogue which FLT has aimed at over the past few years.
69
References:
Asher, R.E. (ed.) (1994) The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics.
Oxford, New York, Seoul, Tokio: Pergamon Press.
Beckett, S. (1969) Waiting for Godot. London: Faber and Faber.
Birch, D. (1991) The Language of Drama. London: Macmillan.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1997) Discourse Pragmatics. In: van Dijk, T.A. (ed.)
Discourse as Social Interaction. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications, pp. 38-63.