Cover not available
Article published In:
Integrating dialogue
Edited by Răzvan Săftoiu and Adrian Pablé
[Language and Dialogue 8:1] 2018
► pp. 66–83

Dialogue and what it means for discourse

| University of Birmingham (UK)
My starting and concluding point is the Zhuangzi, at least in parts attributed to the Chinese philosopher of the same name. His view, guided by the Daoist tradition, is that language users are free to reconstruct collectively their discursive realities (for instance the notion of happiness), as discourse does not refer to the unspoken reality. While both Edda Weigand and Roy Harris accept that meanings are not fixed, I disagree with Weigand as she wants to leave behind the language sign, and with Roy Harris, as for him it is each solitary person who is creating their signs, whether they take part in discourse or not. For me, but not for them, dialogue drives discourse in the sense of a contingent evolution of ideas, while for them dialogue is driven by solitary individuals. Perhaps we all agree that the meaning of a word like happiness is arbitrary and we are free to construct its discursive reality, the only reality that counts.
Keywords: discursive reality, linguistic sign, dialogue, discourse
Article outline
  • 1.Zhuangzi and the aboutness of meaning
  • 2.Dialogue and the arbitrariness of signs
  • 3.Two perspectives on dialogue: intentional activity or contingent evolution of ideas?
  • 4.The happiness of fish
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 26 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00005.teu
References (26)
References
Ames, Roger and Takahiro Nakajima (eds). 2015. Zhuangzi and the Happy Fish. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’I Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diener, Ed. 2000. “Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index.” American Psychologist 55(1): 34–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A. 2005. “Give me that juicy bit over there.” London Review of Books, 6 October.Google Scholar
Hansen, Chad. 1992. A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1975 [1965]. Truth and Method. 2nd ed. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Harmon, Daniel. 2006. “Daniel Harmon tries to make an Eden in the wilderness.” In Canadian Exploration Literature, ed. by Germaine Warkentin, 329–349. Toronto: Dundurn Press.Google Scholar
Harris, Roy. 1990. Language, Saussure and Wittgenstein: How to Play Games with Words. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1990. “On redefining linguistics.” In Redefining Linguistics, ed. by Hayley G. Davis and Talbot J. Taylor, 18–52. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1996. Signs, Language and Communication: Integrational and Segregational Approaches. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2009. After Epistemology. Gamlingay, Sandy: A bright Pen Book.Google Scholar
Hutton, Christopher. 2017. “The self and the ‘monkey selfie’: Law, integrationism and the nature of the first order/ second order distinction.” Language Sciences 611: 93–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jäger, Ludwig. 2010. Ferdinand de Saussure. Hamburg: Junius.Google Scholar
Milne, A. A. 1995. Pooh’s Little Instruction Book. New York, NY: Dutton.Google Scholar
Möller, Hans-Georg. 2000. “Zhuangzi’s fishnet allegory: a text-critical analysis.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 27(4): 489–502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moeller, Hans-Georg. 2015. “Rambling without destination: On Daoist “you-ing” in the world.” In Zhuangzi and the Happy Fish, ed. by Roger Ames and Takahiro Nakajima, 248–260. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pablé, Adrian and Christopher Hutton. 2015. Signs, Meaning and Experience: Integrational Approaches to Linguistics and Semiotics. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pateman, Trevor. 2017. Studies in Pragmatics. Brighton: Degree Zero.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul. 1976. Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning. Fort Worth, TX: The Texas Christian University Press.Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 2013. Course in General Linguistics. Translated and annotated by Roy Harris. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2017. Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher. [URL].
Teubert, Wolfgang. 2015. “The Zhuangzi, hermeneutics and (philological) corpus linguistics.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 201: 421–444. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toolan, Michael. 1996. Total Speech: An Integrational Linguistic Approach to Language. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Watson, Burton. 1968. The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Weigand, Edda. 2010. Dialogue: The Mixed Game. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wu, Kuang-Ming. 2000. “Textual hermeneutics and beyond: With the Tao-Te Ching and the Chuang Tzu as examples.” In Classics and Interpretation, ed. by Tu Ching-I, 291–314. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Ziporyn, Brook. 2009. Zhuangzi: The Essential Writings. Indinanapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar