Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Lafuente, Enrique. The Use of Pragmatic Politeness in The Interpretation of Hemingway's "Hills Like White Elephants"

    Uploaded by

    ENRIQUE LAFUENTE MILLÁN
    7 views6 pages

    Original Title

    Lafuente, Enrique. The use of pragmatic politeness in the interpretation of Hemingway's "Hills like white elephants"

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views6 pages

    Lafuente, Enrique. The Use of Pragmatic Politeness in The Interpretation of Hemingway's "Hills Like White Elephants"

    Uploaded by

    ENRIQUE LAFUENTE MILLÁN

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 6
    THE USE OF PRAGMATIC POLITENESS THEORY IN THE. INTERPRETATION OF HEMINGWAY'S "HILLS LIKE WHITE ELEPHANTS” oe ENRIQUE LAFUENTE MILLAN ‘UNIVERSIDAD DE ZARAGOZA 1. INTRODUCTION ‘The eitice sem to offer contadicinry accounts of the extent to which the reader may vente t give a epecfic interpretation of a literary text It i fen the case that a texts Iteral meaning seems not 10 suffice, and ‘einterpretation based on inferencing is requied. However, our inferences a ‘eades are grounded upon previously organized representations of background knowledge or schemata" (Brown ant Yule 1983: 248) which help the reer to econfextilize the behaviour represented but left unexplained In te text ‘Those inferences ae the result of a logical nest to close the opewrenedness ofthe events alluded to in a text. The more laconic the narration —at i, the more elements not manifested om the surface ofthe text— the rete the ‘erpetative effor rue (ofl the information gaps found there ae the _redfer the likelihood of mulifarious readings ofthat ext. Th Hemingway's short story “Hills ike White Elepbants” (1935) a basic dilemma is preseted, tat of 2 couple who are considering an abortion. AS readers, we are constrained in our interpretation ofthe story by is brevity an tlmost total Ick of deseripson or explanation inthe text. Consequently, we have to rely on *higherlevel schemata Which cause us t see messages in cetsin ways” (Anderson etl, 1977: 377 for that sort of situation: the man, MiseeléneasA Journal of English and American Studies 2 20003: 137-147 be ENRQUE LAFUENTE, the adventurer, fnds his freedom threatened the oman, mare sensitive, probably want to keep the baby asa sgn of thet love, and so forth. Such's Textengages the attention of the rr and thus requires an interpretation of the story whichis bound tobe highly dependeat on hiser belie, previous ‘experiences, moral stance et, The reader will also bring tothe intexpetation ‘ofthe text ister intrtextual competence, since, as eo suggests (1987), no text is read independently of the experience the reader has had With other ext, ‘Commenting on this specific story, Kunders (1994: 136) clsims that readers ae dened any definite cue to tase thei iterpretstion on by the ‘ites omission of Background information spd the scarcity of da We have access to through the suceinct text; to use Eeo's terminology, we ae dealing with a“fabulaaperta” (1987: 169). The reader does nt know mush about the characters, or about what has happened to them before, and thus he remains fiee to construct many different stores fom the Kemel situation he i rseniod with when reading the story. In other words, in the sled Gialogue berveen actual writer and ready what is unsaid weighs a much, if ‘ot more, a8 Whit is sid. ‘As Brown and Yule (1983: 268) remark, a lage part of the comprehension of wat we read comes from our ability 10 make sense af the motivations and sims of the fictional participants. Accepting this is fantamoune to saying that a text is to a greater or lesser extent open 10 overnterpretation (Eco 1987), thats, that a text allows for almost &§ many Possibly divergent interpretations as readers exist. [evertelss the reader isnot entirely adi; there isa eatvely secure Source of information in this short story which is one other thin its ‘atiering of relevant dialogue betveen two characters waiting fra tain. We ‘ae allowed to occupy the seat next to the two strangers (the American and his indy companion) and overhear their exact words While they wait and have 4 dink together. Ibeliewe i i precisely onthe analysis of that interaction ‘hat we can base our interpretation ofthe story Inthis respect, pragmatic theory has enabled researchers to probe forthe uses which speakers put language in actual communication In additon, i theare studies, the pragmatic approach bas also recently brought about research into the nature of fictional dialogue as socal ineracton within possible world. Elam (1980), Burton (1980), Herman (1995), Guillén Niew (1998) and others operate on the assumption that calogue in plays is orm ‘of socal interaction. Guillén Nieto (1998) testifies to the existence of & sociolinguistic and a linguistic approach to the interactive nature of dramatic Gialogue. The ethnomethodologists and the Birmingham school, POLITENESS IN HEMINGHAY'S “HILLS LIKE KHITE ELEPHANTSTO9 ives of the sociolinguistic approach (Sacks, Schegloff an ferfeson 1978: Coulthard 1987; Buron 1980), have concentatsd on the Systematic stay of tumtaking, while pragmalingustic theres have tneraken explorations ofthe way in which users constuct meaning onthe ‘is ofthe verbal code as well as otber codes intersecting within language 8 soe interaction, "Mere specifically T intend to use Brown and Levinsons pragmatic theory of politeness (1987) a the means of analyzing the use thatthe two ceazal ‘huracters make of lnguage when facing a conficesdden situation such as the one described inthe story "Hl ike White Elephants 2. METHOD Brown and Levinson (1987) postulate 8 Model Person endowed with the uals of raonality and fate who, being as efficent as posible, will ‘hoose the communicative strategies that will most suit hiser ‘Sommunicatve and face needs. Furthermore, they atiibute a central role % te concept of face which they define at "the pubic selt'iage tat everyone ‘wants t claim for himself" (1987: 61) and which consists of two ‘components: positive face, or the desire to be approved of and appressed, ‘nd epatve face, the desire not toe imposed upon ‘Certain actions are intinsially threatening o either kindof face; Brown nd Levinson call them Face Threatening Acts (FTAS), and they include der, eguests, advice, disagreement, etc. The speaker will ty 10 minimize ‘he treat to fae by using postive or negative politeness strategies. ‘Brown and Levinson's framework, unlike Leec's Politeness Principle (4983), succeeds in providing « motivation forthe strategies chosen by the priipans in an interaction and as a esl, her framework canbe of peat falp in throwing ight onthe desires, fears and motivations of the chances ard, by extension, in contributing to a less arbitrary interpretation of the ‘nm view, the whole issue of aboron in “Hills like White Elephants" is deat with by using well-dtined politeness strategies. As Smiley (1990: 294) remark, the American on the one hand has two major conversational ‘objectives, vie he wants to avoid coercing / imposing on his piiiend while tthe seme time he wants her o go ahead with the FTA which the abortion ‘represents, The gil onthe oher hand doesnot want to ave the abortion but she wants to maintain camaraderie, Le, to decease distance. In brief, she ‘wants to make hee American man and her baby compatible. 0 ENRIQUE LAFUENTE ‘The critics suggest that, forthe American, having this baby is & great ‘imposition, an undesirable act which means totally changing his lifesyie at ving avay his freedom For the woman, in contast the baby means life ‘motherhood and erly; it probably also means developing & dcp bond With her partner and therefore she endeavors to prec abortion. seems cleat that they both have their own reasons for Or agains the sbortion. Therefore, by asking the gel nt to have the baby, the American ig performing aot only a very sttong FTI, since this can be interpreted as lack ‘of consideration forthe gil's negative face, ie. her Seedom of choice, but also be is taking a very powerful ideological position (Fuirelough 1931) Conversely, ig the woman ries to preserve the baby’s life on ethically ai legally codified norms, eventhough that would bring sbout a radical change in their habits and severely restrict their current adventrous life. In doing thi, she is also partially impinging on her parmes's negative face, In bret they both ty to achieve their opposing objectives without losing face by ‘using a variety of postive and negative politeness suatgies which I wl ty owt deal "Haas (1979: 290) and Tannen (1991) contend that female language tends to be relationshiporiented while male language is goal-oriented. In thse terms, the strategies of the chiracters seem to work exacly in the expecta) direction. agree with Smiley (1990: 290) that Tig'sconvercational objective is to establish intimacy though shared words and humer, the jote srategy. The gis litle winicism about the hills looking like white elephants can be explained in that light ‘The gil was Joking ofa the line of ills. They were whit inthe sun ad the county Was brown an ry “They look like whe eephane, sh si ‘Te never seen one, the man ak hit ber *No, you woulda hve” “Tmight have", De man slé. Just because you say Twoulér't have doesn't prove anything” ‘The gi ona th bead curain. “They've painted something on Ay ahe std, “What does fay “Ante dl tro I il Could we ey it” 211) The American refuses to laugh at her innocent gag and this refisl strategically creates distance and increases is power. This is only one ofthe Several sulle ways in which he erafily contol the interchange and also the relationship by playing with the variables in all politeness situations POLITENESS IN HEMINGHAY'S "NLS LKE AHITE ELEPHANTS" sunely power and distance (Fairclough 1991). Jig, the woman, chooses to out his ispraise and to tur it against him, but then quickly changes ber {Shes when he tans defensive. She gras him his dase for power By Sing him about the words on the bea cuain thos reaming it ‘fer knowledge ad his ole as an expert, sn obvious postive politeness ep his study ofthe beaviorl content res tht relate to fiendship, Kays (use: 78) includes companionship (doing things together), tty (end as (pepe, communication (@sclosing information about onesl) and fection, among others. Aer the risk of giving the impression of lack of ‘Sempenionsip, ig qulekly shows intimacy and fendship by adressing him ‘Sutbeber and by sharing the agrecable expeience of tying 2 new erik foaeer "Nonetheless she somehow finds this situal pe of intimacy stators, inasmuch a8 her aston "That's all we do (.] ry Tew Anis” Cfemingway 1987: 212) is an atack on his postive fae, for she fenis common ground and creates distance. Yet the man does not seem fcocemed and even shows a compromising agreenet on that point. The fxplanation ofthis unexpecied agreement may le in the fact that he is feting realy to bring up the abortion topic and cannot afford to dase Shot hat would meas increasing distance and reducing his power over et Following s number of ieievae comments upon the drink, the topic of the sborion is at last iasoduced by the Americgn, who uses a Sombination of several strategies in ode achieve his goals "The bee's nice an co the man sd. i's lovely", he it sald U's realy an avfully simple opersio, Jig" che man sai. “I's ot realy an operation at al ‘The pl looked atthe prnd he abe legs rested on "Tiinow you moulds mid tg. It's rely aot anything. W's stole the a". 212) Iie nota mere coincidence that he is now using the g's nickname as 30 easering adress form and that this isthe fist time we ear him use a ckname a all In this way he manages to convey ingroup membership and ‘oreduce distance whereas not ong before he was drawing away fom her "Brown and Levinson (1987: 77) define power asthe degree to which the emer can impose his own plans and his own self.evalustion (face) at the expense of the Speaker's plans and selevaluion”. The man uses power ‘Hroughout the dialogue in that double way, He purposefully denies the te ENRIQUE LAFUENTE Importance of the abortion by repeatedly banalysing is significance to that o¢ avery simple insignificant operation. He consequenly atempis 1 minimize {he threat, that is, © manipaate(R), the rank variable ofthe imposition. is interesting to note how he always represses the word “abortion” wile smisdefining the operation as “natural” ae misreeesenting it by refering ty St metonymically as “Just leting the air in" 212). Through is choice ot ‘words he imposes his own image of the abortion om her, presenting itn 4 ‘vay she may be abe to cope with inspite of her moral scruples and in tat ‘vay, repeat, making it less weighty imposition, His words are in fact ¢ bending of realty exclusively to this needs e is also bending language construct (of ater reconstruct) the world to his measure and exerting power to refashion her perception af things accordingly ‘Nevertheless he does offer to be with he all the ime in exchange fo the sacrifice of her main objective, namely avoiding the abortion. This could te faken as an act of intimacy (sharing actions) but in the light of politeness theory itcan be explained as an offer of partial compensation for the heaters wants, while atthe same time including both in the acdviy. His is a ‘manipulative strategy in that itis aimed at leading ber to ake an unwanted dessin, “ri go with you and sty with you all he tie, They js le (he ai and ten e's all porte watral™ “Then what wl edo anwar?” "Welle ae sterward. Js ie we were before". (212) ‘The gi only appears to acknowledge that part of his uterance which affocs ‘her main goal, that i that of maintaining the relationship and obsiing commitment. She is then “on record about wanting. 1 know of hie commitment “And yo think then we'l be alight an be Bappy* ‘Tino we wl. You dot have fo be ai. Fve known ots of people that ave doe "Soave sald the gid, “and steward they were all perfectly happy ta Tihink i isthe best ting to do bat doo" want you todo ii you don't ell want” nd if do it youl be bapy an hings wil be ike they were and you ill love ae?" 213) POLITENESS IN HEMINGHAY'S "HLS LIKE KHITE ELEPHANTS'HS ‘Te man is willing to appease her with inadequate promises about what i t9 fame bt she pus an end to them by ironically echoing his questionable Full hat happiness will be achieved by staying childless. At this point be Shifts a diferent strategy and seeks redress by avoiding coercing, a begaive politeness stategy. He expliily gives ber an option aot to do the act and fosnves eo reduce che rank variable by minimizing the imposition and by inpersonaliaing it“ itis perfectly simple” (213), “[. itis the best thing to 45" 213) "J ft of people that have doe it" (213). Before giving in to having the abortion, Jig goes on recor agun to snake sue sbe can atleast gain one of her objectives. She asks him if be wl Joveher afterwards and he implies tat, since the baby isthe eauseof all their voi, everything will be fine once they get the abortion done with. But promising something you cannot possibly contol or full isan infelictous Ace and partly insincere one, which may allow 0s to conclude that he is tater more interested in geting he o go abead withthe abortion than inthe prssible consequences it may have forthe relationship. ‘What comes next in their exchange is very significant. The young woman knows that she has secured one of her objectives and so she becomes

    You might also like