论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】Cat in the rain is a short novel written by the famous American writer Hemingway. The story is simple in terms of plots while reveals some thought-provoking concerns on women that express the struggle for women social status in the patriarchal society at that time. In this article， we will use the pragmatic analysis， namely the cooperative and politeness principle and person deixis， to find out how the author reveals the theme through conversations.
【Key words】Cooperative principle； Politeness； Person deixis
Hemingway is very good at the description of conversation. According to his iceberg theory， there are deep meanings beneath the utterances， and pragmatics is just a subject which studies the relation between the literal meaning and the actual meaning. In this article， we will thoroughly analyze one of Hemingway’s work， Cat in the rain， through some principles in pragmatics.
I. Cooperative and Politeness Principle
In 1975， Herbert Paul Grice， a British philosopher of language， put forward the theory of conversational implicature. To make a dialogue go well， two people should observe the cooperative principle. Cooperative principle consists of four maxims—the Maxim of Quality， Quantity， Relevance and Manner. The utterance is required to be true due to the Maxim of Quality， to be adequately presented due to the Maxim of Quantity， to be relevant due to the Maxim of Relevance， to be explicit and brief due to the Maxim of Manner. Sometimes people disobey the cooperative principle intentionally to show their implicature （the meaning that people have to deduce from the context， not a literal meaning）. Besides cooperative principle， Grice also came up with politeness principle， which is one of the reasons why people violate the cooperative principle. And we will try to use these two principles to analyze the conversation in the story Cat in the Rain Fall.
One example is：The American wife said， “I’m going down and get that kitty.” Her husband replied， “I’ll do it.” She said “No， I’ll get it. The poor kitty out trying to keep dry under a table.” He said， “Don’t get wet.” It was clear that the wife spoke a lot but the husband only spoke three words each time. What the husband said was against the Maxim of Quantity. It could be concluded that the husband preferred to read the book rather than talk to his wife. Maybe their relationship was not that good and the man did not love her wife very much. The man was just being polite and said some empty talk. Another one goes like this：The wife returned without the cat and the husband said， “Wonder where it went to.” However， the wife said， “I wanted it so much. I don’t know why I wanted it so much. I wanted that poor kitty. It isn’t any fun to be a poor kitty out in the rain.” The man just said one sentence but the wife said four. What she said had little to do with the man’s utterance and the dialogue was not consistent at all. What is more， the wife was repeating her meaning since the first three sentences had similar meanings. Therefore， it was against the Maxim of Quantity， Relevance and Manner. Obviously， the wife violated the cooperative principle intentionally to express her feelings and opinions.
The last sentence she said was “It isn’t any fun to be a poor kitty out in the rain.” If we paraphrase the sentence， we can get “to be a poor kitty out in the rain is not fun.” Women always have a subtle connection to cats and affection for cats. The wife empathized with the cat because she was in a similar situation. Just like a cat in the rain， she felt isolated in a patriarchal society. Then the wife kept repeating her wish for a cat but George was kind of rude—“You look pretty darn nice” and “Shut up and get something to read.” George violated the politeness principle while his wife did not—George was impatient with his wife but she did not use the rude words to reply him. Firstly maybe at that time a woman had a very low status in a patriarchal society， so she did not dare to rebel. Secondly maybe she was so desperate that she gave up rebelling and chose to submit to her husband. Also George violated the Maxim of Quantity and Relevance. The wife wanted to change， but he did not reply his wife directly but kept demanding her to shut up and listen to him. He was a control freak to some extent.
From the beginning to the end， the couple were ignoring the cooperative and politeness principle all the time， which indicates that there was no love but trust crisis between them. Although the wife was the weak side but actually both two people were kind of selfish—the wife wanted a cat and the husband wanted to read. They both ignore others’ needs. It was just a completely failed marriage. There must be some conflicts before. Maybe it was an arranged marriage. Another explanation is that cat represents the baby. The wife desired a child but the husband failed to fulfill her wish. Both ones make sense to some degrees.
II. Person Deixis Person Deixis is also an important part of pragmatics. Considering the different context， the change of deixis shows different emotions and thoughts of the speaker.
Again， we will analyze the article. “I’m going down and get that kitty.” At first the woman called it “kitty”. “Anyway， I want a cat.” In the end， the woman changed it to “cat”. A kitty refers to a little and pretty cat. We can see that the woman lowered her standard gradually out of her increasing disappointment. Finally she got “a big tortoise-shell like cat”， which was not pretty and cute. I suppose she was sort of happy because an ugly one was better than nothing.
Then the woman said， “No， I’ll get it.” and “It was gone.” The woman used “it” to describe the kitty. But in the end， she said， “I want to have a kitty to sit on my lap and purr when I stroke her.” She called the cat “she”. Personification was used here， which helped to show a character’s attitudes toward a certain thing if they project or ascribe their own feelings onto a non-human object. “She”， compared with “it”， implied that the woman regarded the cat as a live creature. She thought of the cat as the woman’s counterpart or companion. But the man used “it” all the time. For example， “I’ll do it.” and “wonder where it went to.” “It” showed that the man didn’t care anything about the cat. There was no affection for the cat.
From the different deixis the woman used， we can feel that the feeling of disappointment and loneliness was strengthened. Also the special bond between the woman and the cat was reinforced. The man， however， was a typical figure in the patriarchal society—strict and tyrannical.
At last we analyze how Hemingway called these two Americans. Hemingway called the woman “the American wife”， “the wife”， “the American girl” and “the girl”. He called the man “her husband” and “George”. The man’s name is George but we do not know the woman’s name. Normally， the main character has a name while the supporting role sometimes is anonymous. In this story， the woman certainly appeared more than the husband did. But still， George was the most important person. Just like in some movies， the boss of underworld seldom appeared but controlled everything. On the contrary， “girl” showed that the woman was young， weak and helpless. From the comparison， we can see that all of the deixis showed the different status between men and women in a patriarchal society.
III. Conclusion
Through the analysis on the conversations in the book， we have learned about the prominent writing skills of the author Hemingway and the theme he wanted to express. The Maxim of Quantity， the changes of callings， etc. all indicate the author’s implicit willing to evoke women to struggle for equal status in the society.
References：
[1]Wei Xiaoling，Wu Chuanyin.《雨中貓》中人称指示语的语用分析.Journal Of Chifeng University，2010（8）：115-116.
[2]Oddvar Holmesland.Structuralism and interpretation：Ernest Hemingway’s ‘cat in the rain’.English Studies，1986（67）： 221-233.
作者简介：张谦，男，外交学院英语系英语专业大三。
【Key words】Cooperative principle； Politeness； Person deixis
Hemingway is very good at the description of conversation. According to his iceberg theory， there are deep meanings beneath the utterances， and pragmatics is just a subject which studies the relation between the literal meaning and the actual meaning. In this article， we will thoroughly analyze one of Hemingway’s work， Cat in the rain， through some principles in pragmatics.
I. Cooperative and Politeness Principle
In 1975， Herbert Paul Grice， a British philosopher of language， put forward the theory of conversational implicature. To make a dialogue go well， two people should observe the cooperative principle. Cooperative principle consists of four maxims—the Maxim of Quality， Quantity， Relevance and Manner. The utterance is required to be true due to the Maxim of Quality， to be adequately presented due to the Maxim of Quantity， to be relevant due to the Maxim of Relevance， to be explicit and brief due to the Maxim of Manner. Sometimes people disobey the cooperative principle intentionally to show their implicature （the meaning that people have to deduce from the context， not a literal meaning）. Besides cooperative principle， Grice also came up with politeness principle， which is one of the reasons why people violate the cooperative principle. And we will try to use these two principles to analyze the conversation in the story Cat in the Rain Fall.
One example is：The American wife said， “I’m going down and get that kitty.” Her husband replied， “I’ll do it.” She said “No， I’ll get it. The poor kitty out trying to keep dry under a table.” He said， “Don’t get wet.” It was clear that the wife spoke a lot but the husband only spoke three words each time. What the husband said was against the Maxim of Quantity. It could be concluded that the husband preferred to read the book rather than talk to his wife. Maybe their relationship was not that good and the man did not love her wife very much. The man was just being polite and said some empty talk. Another one goes like this：The wife returned without the cat and the husband said， “Wonder where it went to.” However， the wife said， “I wanted it so much. I don’t know why I wanted it so much. I wanted that poor kitty. It isn’t any fun to be a poor kitty out in the rain.” The man just said one sentence but the wife said four. What she said had little to do with the man’s utterance and the dialogue was not consistent at all. What is more， the wife was repeating her meaning since the first three sentences had similar meanings. Therefore， it was against the Maxim of Quantity， Relevance and Manner. Obviously， the wife violated the cooperative principle intentionally to express her feelings and opinions.
The last sentence she said was “It isn’t any fun to be a poor kitty out in the rain.” If we paraphrase the sentence， we can get “to be a poor kitty out in the rain is not fun.” Women always have a subtle connection to cats and affection for cats. The wife empathized with the cat because she was in a similar situation. Just like a cat in the rain， she felt isolated in a patriarchal society. Then the wife kept repeating her wish for a cat but George was kind of rude—“You look pretty darn nice” and “Shut up and get something to read.” George violated the politeness principle while his wife did not—George was impatient with his wife but she did not use the rude words to reply him. Firstly maybe at that time a woman had a very low status in a patriarchal society， so she did not dare to rebel. Secondly maybe she was so desperate that she gave up rebelling and chose to submit to her husband. Also George violated the Maxim of Quantity and Relevance. The wife wanted to change， but he did not reply his wife directly but kept demanding her to shut up and listen to him. He was a control freak to some extent.
From the beginning to the end， the couple were ignoring the cooperative and politeness principle all the time， which indicates that there was no love but trust crisis between them. Although the wife was the weak side but actually both two people were kind of selfish—the wife wanted a cat and the husband wanted to read. They both ignore others’ needs. It was just a completely failed marriage. There must be some conflicts before. Maybe it was an arranged marriage. Another explanation is that cat represents the baby. The wife desired a child but the husband failed to fulfill her wish. Both ones make sense to some degrees.
II. Person Deixis Person Deixis is also an important part of pragmatics. Considering the different context， the change of deixis shows different emotions and thoughts of the speaker.
Again， we will analyze the article. “I’m going down and get that kitty.” At first the woman called it “kitty”. “Anyway， I want a cat.” In the end， the woman changed it to “cat”. A kitty refers to a little and pretty cat. We can see that the woman lowered her standard gradually out of her increasing disappointment. Finally she got “a big tortoise-shell like cat”， which was not pretty and cute. I suppose she was sort of happy because an ugly one was better than nothing.
Then the woman said， “No， I’ll get it.” and “It was gone.” The woman used “it” to describe the kitty. But in the end， she said， “I want to have a kitty to sit on my lap and purr when I stroke her.” She called the cat “she”. Personification was used here， which helped to show a character’s attitudes toward a certain thing if they project or ascribe their own feelings onto a non-human object. “She”， compared with “it”， implied that the woman regarded the cat as a live creature. She thought of the cat as the woman’s counterpart or companion. But the man used “it” all the time. For example， “I’ll do it.” and “wonder where it went to.” “It” showed that the man didn’t care anything about the cat. There was no affection for the cat.
From the different deixis the woman used， we can feel that the feeling of disappointment and loneliness was strengthened. Also the special bond between the woman and the cat was reinforced. The man， however， was a typical figure in the patriarchal society—strict and tyrannical.
At last we analyze how Hemingway called these two Americans. Hemingway called the woman “the American wife”， “the wife”， “the American girl” and “the girl”. He called the man “her husband” and “George”. The man’s name is George but we do not know the woman’s name. Normally， the main character has a name while the supporting role sometimes is anonymous. In this story， the woman certainly appeared more than the husband did. But still， George was the most important person. Just like in some movies， the boss of underworld seldom appeared but controlled everything. On the contrary， “girl” showed that the woman was young， weak and helpless. From the comparison， we can see that all of the deixis showed the different status between men and women in a patriarchal society.
III. Conclusion
Through the analysis on the conversations in the book， we have learned about the prominent writing skills of the author Hemingway and the theme he wanted to express. The Maxim of Quantity， the changes of callings， etc. all indicate the author’s implicit willing to evoke women to struggle for equal status in the society.
References：
[1]Wei Xiaoling，Wu Chuanyin.《雨中貓》中人称指示语的语用分析.Journal Of Chifeng University，2010（8）：115-116.
[2]Oddvar Holmesland.Structuralism and interpretation：Ernest Hemingway’s ‘cat in the rain’.English Studies，1986（67）： 221-233.
作者简介：张谦，男，外交学院英语系英语专业大三。