Pynchonian semantics

[jolly]

.... Semantic content (i.e. "meaning") *always* relies on 
context,
subject-object orientation, agency. In speech acts in many languages a
speaker's "meaning" is conveyed by tone -- in any language the notion 
that
there is an ultimate or inherent "meaning" to any given sequence of 
phonemes
or graphemes is absurd. See de Saussure, F.; Bakhtin, M.M.; et al."

 
Ugh. Apart from the fact that you did grant Searle 2nd premise ("sure they can") and thus contradicted your initial point, you are misreading Pynchon if you think that your Lit Crit. professor's favorite belle-lettrist litany du jour provides any sort of adequate grounding for an intelligent interpretation of TP.   
 
Wittgenstein's Tractatus is a much better starting point, and Witt. was a real philosopher as opposed to Derrida's autodidactic heideggerian anthropologist (or Saussure for that matter).  Then you will need to absorb some materials covering information systems, electronics, quantum physics, behaviorism, Krazy Kat,  Sandoz, etc.....  




		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20041011/44a5d6de/attachment.html>