It is the aim of these projects to investigate and specify the assumption of a competition between economy principles on the speaker’s part and on the listener’s part.

The concept of an economy principle on the speaker’s part is directly connected to fields PS– und PS+ (cf. our matrix) since it concerns non-strategic and strategic forms of production. Brevity and effectiveness are the guiding notions. The concept of an economy principle on the hearer’s part is immediately linked to field RS–. Our assumption is that both principles are mutually related to each other. From this we infer that, for example, the processing effort of the hearer becomes greater when the speaker observes maxims like “be brief”. A prototypical case in point is the poem.

4.1  Linguistic Economy in Everyday Communication

English Linguistics with Literary Studies, Psychology and General Rhetoric

The economy principle of language, understood as „the reason or occasion for the tendency to achieve a maximum of effect by a minimum of linguistic effort“ (Bußmann 1990: 711) is one of the concepts – besides the explanation of phenomena of language change (Jespersen 1924) and the economy of various parts of grammar (economy of components and inventories) – that is used to describe the efficiency of the communication between speaker and hearer (Levinson 1983; Horn 1993). Zipf (1949) already suggested to explain essential linguistic processes by a competition between the “principle of least effort” (on the speaker’s part) and the “antiambiguity principle” (on the hearer’s part). The basic idea is that ambiguity is triggered at the points of friction of these opposing tendencies. In the suggested dissertation project, the specific linguistic means employed in different kinds of texts will be investigated that characterize economy on the speaker’s part and that may potentially trigger ambiguity when interpreted. In particular, attention will be paid to phenomena of syntactic simplification through abbreviation, e.g. in elliptical expressions (“the hammer” for “please hand me the hammer” or “please take the hammer”, e.g. Klein 1993) but also to other phenomena of reduction like secondary predication and reduced relative clauses (“they found the river navigable”, Winkler 1997), as well as coordination and apokoinou-constructions like “there’s a woman urgently wants to see you”. This is to be complemented by investigations into the principles of language processing on the hearer’s part and general cognitive principles that are available to resolve ambiguity. These are, in particular, context and specific devices of prosodic differentiation (Lang 2010; Lang/Pheby 2011). With a focus on selected thematic areas, these tendencies towards linguistic economy will be explored at the interface of linguistics and literary studies, as well as psycholinguistics, psychology, and rhetoric. Examples could be the prosodic (dis-)ambiguation of spoken texts (e.g. Reusch 2008), intentional ambiguity in communication (advertising) or in soliloquies (e.g. Marc Antony’s speech in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar), and the development of strategies for recognizing ambiguity in the process of language acquisition (cf. Tracy 2005).

Works Cited:

Bußmann, Hadumod (ed.) (1990). “Sprachökonomie.” In: Lexikon der Sprachwissenschaft. 2nd, rev. ed. Stuttgart: Kröner, 711.

Horn, Laurence R. (1993). “Economy and Redundancy in a Dualistic Model of Natural Language.” In: SKY – Yearbook of the Linguistic Association of Finland 1993, 33-72.

Jespersen, Otto (1924). The Philosophy of Grammar. London: George Allen and Unwin.

Klein, Wolfgang (1993). “Ellipse.” In: Syntax: Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössicher Forschung / An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Vol. 1. Ed. Joachim Jacobs, Arnim von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld and Theo Vennemann. Berlin: De Gruyter, 763-799.

Lang, Ewald (2010). “Der Ton macht den Sinn: Prosodische Differenzierungen bei syntaktischer Indifferenz als Lehrstoff.” In: Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 158, 172-188.

Lang, Ewald; Pheby, Barbara (2011). “Intonation und Interpretation von Satzverknüpfungen in literarischen Hörbuchtexten.” In: Satzverknüpfungen: Zur Interaktion von Form, Bedeutung und Diskursfunktion. Ed. Eva Breindl, Gisella Ferraresi and Anna Volodina. Berlin: De Gruyter, 297-326.

Levinson, Stephen C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Reusch, Stefan (2008). “Kraftfrisuren können.” In: Feine Ablese: Textflüsse und Duologe. Ismael Fischmord and Stefan Reusch. Münster: Monsenstein und Vannerdat, 40-43.

Tracy, Rosemarie (2005). “Spracherwerb bei vier- bis achtjährigen Kindern.” In: Bildung 4 - 8-jähriger Kinder. Ed. Titus Guldimann and Bernhard Hauser. Münster: Waxmann, 59- 75.

Winkler, Susanne (1997). Focus and Secondary Predication. Berlin: De Gruyter.

4.2  Poetic Economy

English Literary Studies with English Linguistics and Theology (New Testament Studies)

The principle of economy is a commonplace in the poetological tradition; it becomes evident, for example, in Sidney’s Apology for Poetry when he says “one word cannot be lost but the whole work fails” (Sidney 1595/2002, 101). This implies the idea that all the parts and elements of a literary work are functional, which can be linked to the assumption above. In the suggested dissertation project, it will be primarily explored how ambiguity is brought about by deliberate reduction or extension and it will be asked whether this ambiguity depends on a balance between different strategies of economy. Based on the analysis of selected English literary texts (poems), it will be studied in how far redundancies and omissions contribute to (involuntary) ambiguity and to what degree strategic ambiguity similarly depends on a principle of economy. In this respect even the disregard of economic principles (cf. Matala de Mazza 2003) on a different level (e.g. with regard to specific effects) may contribute to the economy of a literary text. Apart from the link with linguistics (see above) it seems interesting to link the subject with theology which is concerned with a strategic problem familiar from literary texts: How is it possible, without becoming vague, to say “more” than in utterances which mainly serve to transmit information? An example of this are intertextual references and allusions, which may evoke contexts that need not spelled out in order to be recognized as part of the overall meaning of a literary utterance.

Works Cited:

Matala de Mazza, Ethel (2003). “Versprechen, Verneinen: Aufgehobene Zeichenökonomie und Gabe der Gerechtigkeit in Mozarts Don Giovanni.” In: Die Medien der Künste: Beiträge zur Theorie des Darstellens. Ed. Dieter Mersch. München: Fink. 227-50.

Sidney, Philip (1595; 2002). An Apology for Poetry (or The Defence of Poesy). Ed. Geoffrey Shepherd und Robert W. Maslen. 3rd, rev. ed. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

4.3 The Influence of Ambiguous Literary Content on Readers

Psychology, Literary Studies, Linguistics

This suggested dissertation project combines psychological attitude research with literary studies in order to explore the evaluation of the content and other features of literary (fictional) texts. Our working hypothesis is that the ambiguity of literary texts (PS^– and PS⁺;cf. our matrix) plays an important role for their evaluation. Accordingly, our project will take up recent research on the influence of linguistic structures on the evaluation of literary texts (Hunston/Thompson 1999; Peer 2008) and will combine textual analysis with psychological research into the factors that influence the evaluation of all sorts of attitude objects (Eagly/Chaiken 1993). As a rule, specially prepared material which is presented as real (e.g. Ziegler/Diehl 2003) has been used in psychological studies in order to investigate, for example, the mechanisms bringing about the effects of advertising (Wänke 2008). Only quite recently there has been research not only in rhetorical appeals but also in narrative content and its influence on attitudes and opinions (Dal Cin/Zanna/Fong 2004; Green/Brock 2000; Mar/Oatley 2008; Prentice/Gerrig 1999; Slater/Rouner 2002; Vaughn et al. 2010). A central mechanism identified in this context is the “transportation” of the reader (Green/Brock 2000), which is influenced by external and narrative realism (Busselle/Bilandzic 2008; see also Gilbert/Ta­fa­rodi/Malone 1993). The “transportability” of readers varies between individuals (Dal Cin et al. 2004; Mazzocco/Green/Sasota/Jones 2010), partly due to stable individual difference factors (Thompson/Haddock 2012). The possible function of ambiguity in this process has not yet been investigated, even though the content of fictional texts, which (at least potentially) refers to real-world issues, is always ambiguous. Accordingly, it may be asked whether the evaluation is influenced by the fact that literary content is regarded as “true” or “false”, or is regarded as ambiguous in this respect. For example, does it make a difference as regards the evaluation of a literary character like Sherlock Holmes whether he really exists? Furthermore, obviously fictional content may be ambiguous itself. Thus, Conan Doyle’s text is ambiguous as regards the question whether Professor Moriarty dies or not. It will have to be explored which factors (e.g. features of a fictional character, preferences of the readers, status of the author) influence the evaluation of literary ambiguity under which circumstances (e.g. high vs. low transportation) and through which processes (e.g. biased processing). Last but not least, ambiguity itself may be the reason why a literary text is evaluated positively or negatively.