![]() ![]() Seven types were not sacred - or rather, the number 7 was sacred, but did not limit the possible types of ambiguity and certainly not the number of ambiguities. technique is ‘in part the metaphysical tradition dug up when rotten’ the sixth occurs when a statement in itself meaningless or contradictory forces the reader to supply interpretations and an account of the seventh, which ‘marks a division in the author's mind’, is accompanied by quotations from Freud and illustrations from Crashaw, Keats, and Hopkins. Empson’s criticism never lost its fine edge, and new modes of ambiguity kept bubbling to the surface. Hopkins) the fifth consists of what Empson calls ‘fortunate confusion’, with examples from Shelley and Swinburne, suggesting the possibility that 19th‐cent. The second occurs ‘when two or more meanings are resolved into one’ (as by ‘Double Grammar’ in Shakespeare) the third consists of two apparently disconnected meanings given simultaneously, as in a pun, or, by extension, in allegory or pastoral, where reference is made to more than one ‘universe of discourse’ the fourth occurs when ‘alternative meanings combine to make clear a complicated state of mind in the author’ (with examples from Shakespeare, Donne, and G. ![]() The first, or simplest, type of ambiguity he defines as simple metaphor, ‘a word or a grammatical construction effective in several ways at once’. Richards's experiments with practical criticism.Įmpson uses the term ambiguity ‘in an extended sense’, to refer to ‘any verbal nuance, however slight, which gives room for alternative reactions to the same piece of language’. ![]() 1947, 1953 one of the most enjoyable and influential offshoots from I. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |