Dialogicality and ethics
Four cases of literary address
Now that linguists are beginning to see an element of dialogicality in all language use, there is more scope for a humanized dialogue analysis with ameliorative goals. This can divide its labour between a communicational criticism dealing with the ethics of address, and a mediating criticism dealing with the ethics of response. In the present article, I outline the distinctive features of such an approach, and by sketching a communicational theory of literature (cf. Sell 2000) draw particular attention to the dialogicality arising between literary writers and their audience. From this starting-point, I then examine instances of four different literary genres for the light they can throw on the general ethics of address. Key terms here are “genuine communication”, by which I mean any manner of communication which respects the autonomy of the human other, and “negative capability”, defined by Keats (1954 : 53) as the capability of “being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason”.
Keywords: dialogicality, humanized dialogue analysis, communicational criticism, mediating criticism, literary-communicational theory, genuine communication, negative capability, ethics
Published online: 27 May 2011
Cited by other publications
No author info given
Garcia Landa, Jose Angel
Gunilla Hermansson & Jens Lohfert Jørgensen
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 january 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.