Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics

Creating meaning through the use of negation is a cooperative process between speaker and hearer or writer and reader; at surface level, negation acts as an instruction that a proposition should be understood as an unrealized state, event or existence. However, this unrealized state of affairs appears to add no positive information to an ongoing discourse, and approaches based on an analysis of formal semantics and predicate logic are limited in their ability to account for how negated propositions are meaningful in discourse. A reader must infer the intended relevant meaning of a negated proposition based on the assumption that it functions explicitly to deny its opposite, positive counterpart. Further, in order to understand a negated proposition we must be able to conceptualize the positive proposition that is being denied, and this concept, though understood as an unrealized state of affairs, adds to the ongoing discourse both as a concept and as an expectation. A cognitive approach to the analysis of negation in natural language provides the tools to examine how readers and writers cooperate to make meaning. In this article, I use a cognitive stylistic approach, Text World Theory (Werth, 1999), as a framework in my analysis of a small selection of poems, 'The Tyre' (Simon Armitage), 'The Listeners' (Walter de la Mare) and 'Talking in Bed' (Philip Larkin) to explore how negation, as a pragmatic phenomenon, creates unrealized worlds, which far from being discarded are integral to the construction of meaning and effect.

This article explores the functions of parentheticals in Free Indirect Style (FIS), and in particular their role in enabling the author to represent thoughts from a variety of perspectives — including his own. I argue that while there is a sense in which a FIS text can achieve relevance by creating a sense of mutuality that is unmediated by the presence of the author, there are also features which allow the author to signal his own attitudes towards the characters whose thoughts he is representing. Indeed, as Dillon and Kirchhoff (1976) and Fludernik (1993) have shown, an author is able to communicate a sense of ironic distance even if he does not necessarily explicitly comment on his characters. Using examples from Katherine Mansfield, Malcolm Lowry and Virginia Woolf, I show that parentheticals play a role both in establishing a sense of affective mutuality between reader and character and in establishing a sense of irony by placing represented thoughts in a ludicrous light.

The 'curse of knowledge' is a pervasive cognitive bias that makes it very difficult for us accurately to imagine, once we know something, what it is like not to know it. This article analyzes examples drawn from both novels and films to demonstrate that this bias plays a substantial and previously unexamined role in narrative structure. I argue that narratives often take advantage of the curse of knowledge to solve an ongoing storytelling dilemma: how to engineer satisfying twists that genuinely surprise audiences but also avoid coming off as non-sequiturs or cheats. The curse of knowledge provides a useful mechanism to encourage readers to over-generalize propositions in predictable and reproducible ways, while making it likely that they will also agree, in retrospect, that these generalizations were mistaken. The same bias serves to enhance the impression, in hindsight, that the narrative's outcome was indeed possible to predict. Finally, building on Mental Spaces theory (Fauconnier, 1985, 1997) and simulation-based theories of language processing (e.g. Barsalou, 1999; MacWhinney, 2005), I argue that the curse of knowledge is an artifact of a more general cognitive shortcut that is implicated in features of 'correct' sentence interpretation such as presupposition projection as well as in phenomena traditionally described as curse-of-knowledge errors. This account unifies the discussed examples and helps to explain why certain devices, particularly unreliable narration, emerge so frequently as aids to narrative surprise.

This article considers the role of accounts of inferential processes in the stylistic analysis of texts. It approaches this question by considering the range of contributions an account of inferential processes might make to the stylistic analysis of William Golding's 1955 novel The Inheritors. It considers what such an account might add to insights already provided by previous analyses, including Halliday's famous analysis ('Linguistic Function and Literary Style', 1971) and Hoover's more recent corpus-based work (Language and Style in 'The Inheritors', 1999), both of which say relatively little about inferential processes. This article suggests that an account of inferential processes is in principle a vital part of any adequate account of how texts create effects, even though it is not always practical to offer a detailed account. In some cases, including the case of The Inheritors, the nature of the inferential processes which the text gives rise to makes an important contribution to how we understand and respond to the text.