Peter J. Leithart

In an effort to maintain his distinction of meaning and significance, interpretation and critical assessment, E. D. Hirsch examines Welleck’s treatment of Marvell’s phrase “vegetable love.” He notes that “Welleck could not even make his point unless he could . . . . Continue Reading »

Tallis yet again: He argues that confusion of langue and parole : leads to “conflation of the idea of a world as a value or set of values within the system with the meaning of a word used on a particular occasion, that by virtue of which verbal meaning is specified with verbal meaning itself, . . . . Continue Reading »

Tallis thinks that one of the basic confusions of post-Saussurean criticism is a confusion of the levels of parole and langue . Signifiers and signifieds are, for Saussure, purely differential; but words are not signifiers or signifieds, but types of signs, which are combinations of the two. . . . . Continue Reading »

Does language take cues from reality? Tallis says Yes; at least, that’s one kind of relation language has to reality. His charming evidence: He notes that it’s more common to add “barking” to “dog” than to add other verbs. If language doesn’t take its cues . . . . Continue Reading »

Tallis contests the post-structuralist notion that all distinctions are linguistic, imported to reality by what we say about them. This, he thinks, oversimplifies a more complex situation. For some realities, the “edges” are determined by language, because those realities depend on . . . . Continue Reading »

Tallis is Not Saussure about post-structuralism, but that’s partly because he things posts distort the original structuralism of Saussure. Even if Saussure is correct that there no ideas before language links a sound with a concept, that doesn’t mean that there is no differentiation in . . . . Continue Reading »

Raymond Tallis ( Not Saussure ) is no friend of post-structuralism, but he recognizes that absent texts shape the reading of present ones: “What seems to be offered to us when we confront a particular work is at least partly determined by the silent presence of other works belonging to the . . . . Continue Reading »

Also from Robinson’s essay: Clarence Darrow defended two young men charged with the murder of the child. One he defended by saying he got his ideas from Nietzsche: “Is there any blame attached because somebody took Nietzsche’s philosophy seriously and fashioned his life upon it? . . . . . Continue Reading »

In a wonderful opening essay on Darwinism in her book, The Death of Adam , Marilynne Robinson (of Gilead fame) offers a few paragraphs on the Scopes trial: “It requires a little effort . . . to remember that [Bryan’s] attack on Darwinism came from the left , from the side of pacifism . . . . Continue Reading »

Another of my lectionary meditations at the Christian Century web site: http://www.theolog.org/blog/2008/06/blogging-toward.html. . . . . Continue Reading »