Keywords:
censorship, politeness, theory of mind, discourse representation, linguistic activityCopyright (c) 2023 Fernando García Murga
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Abstract
Censorship controls communication for ideological reasons. This work analyzes the influence of censorship on the formulation of the message. The study focuses on overt censorship of the message. The utterer activates the parameter censor (and receiver) in the representation of the communicative situation. Therefore, the utterer builds two theories of mind at the same time. In each one, there is information about the ideological systems at play, as well as information mandatory for the evaluation of the message’s degree of threat (the relative power between censor and censored, the social distance between them, the level of imposition, the level of diffusion and the occasion). Linguistic activity cannot be spontaneous because there are strategies at play such as the split in the utterer, the calculated distance towards the content of what is said or the formulation of the message using non fossilized metaphors, euphemisms or near homophones such that what is said points to non-committal situations.
Downloads
References
Arendt, Hannah (2018), Ensayos de comprensión 1930-1954: formación, exilio y totalitarismo, Barcelona, Página indómita.
Brown, Penelope, y Stephen C. Levinson (1978), Politeness: some universals in language usage, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Bunn, Matthew (2015), «Reimagining repression: new censorship theory and after», History and Theory, 54: 25-44.
Carston, Robyn (2010), «Metaphor: ad hoc concepts, literal meaning and mental images», Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 110, 3: 297-323.
Casas Gómez, Miguel (2009), «Hacia una nueva perspectiva de enfoque en la definición lingüística del eufemismo», en Cristina Fuentes y Esperanza Alcaide (eds.), Manifestaciones textuales de la descortesía y agresividad verbal en diversos ámbitos comunicativos, Sevilla, Universidad Internacional de Andalucía: 11-29.
Cassany, Daniel (2006), Tras las líneas: sobre la lectura contemporánea, Barcelona, Anagrama.
Chamizo, Pedro J. (2008), «Tabú y lenguaje: las palabras vitandas y la censura lingüística», Revista de Filosofía 40: 31-46.
Ducrot, Oswald (1990), Polifonía y argumentación, Cali, Colombia.
Eagleton, Terry (1991), Ideology: an introduction, Nueva York, Verso.
Even-Zohar, Itamar (1990), «The “literary system”», Poetics Today, 11 (1): 27-44.
Foucault, Michel (1970), L’ordre du discours, Paris, Gallimard (traducción, El orden del discurso. Barcelona, Tusquets, 1983).
Grice, H. Paul (1989), Studies in the way of words, Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press.
Jonas, Kai J., y Joseph Cesario (2013), «Introduction to the special issue: situated social cognition», Social Cognition, 31 (2): 119-124.
Keith, Allan, y Kate Burridge (1991), Euphemism and dysphemism: language used as shield and weapon, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Keith, Allan, y Kate Burridge (2006), Forbidden words: taboo and the censoring of language, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Koike, Dale A., y J. Cesar Felix-Brasdefer (eds.) (2020), The Routledge handbook of spanish pragmatics, Londres, Routledge.
Leydesdorff, Loet (2000), «Luhmann, Habermas and the theory of communication», Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17: 273-288.
Noh, Eun-Ju (2021), «On linguistic communication based on resemblance in form», Journal of Pragmatics, 186: 20-32.
Portolés, José (2004), Pragmática para hispanistas, Madrid, Síntesis.
Portolés, José (2009), «Censura y pragmática lingüística», Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 38: 60-82.
Portolés, José (2013a), «Evitar la censura: análisis pragmático». Revista de Estudios do Discurso, 2: 209-227.
Portolés, José (2013b), «Censura y análisis de la conversación», Cuadernos AISPI, 2: 133-150.
Portolés, José (2016), La censura de la palabra, Valencia, Universitat de València.
Portolés, José (2020), «Pragmatics and censorship in Spanish research», en Dale A. Koike y J. Cesar Felix-Brasdefer (eds.) (2020), The Routledge handbook of spanish pragmatics, Londres, Routledge: 237-250.
Roberts, Craige (1996), «Information structure in discourse: towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics», en Jae-Hak Yoon y Andreas Kathol (eds.), Papers in semantics (Working Papers in Linguistics 49), Columbus, The Ohio State University.
Rocher, Guy (1973), Introduction à la sociologie générale, Montreal, Hurtubise (traducción, Introducción a la sociología general [7ª edición], Barcelona, Herder, 1980).
Sánchez de Zavala, Víctor (1994), Ensayos de la palabra y el pensamiento, Madrid, Trotta.
Sánchez de Zavala, Víctor (1997), Hacia la pragmática (psicológica), Madrid, Visor.
Sperber, Dan, y Dreide Wilson (1995), Relevance: communication and cognition, 2.ª ed., Oxford, Blackwell.
Sperber, Dan, y Dreide Wilson (2002), «Pragmatics, modularity, and mind-reading», Mind & Language, 17 (1-2): 3-23.
Stalnaker, Robert (1999), Context and content, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Spivak, Gayatri, Ch. (1998), «Can the subaltern speak?», en Cary Nelson y Lawrence Grossberg (eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture, Basingstoke, Macmillan Education: 271-313.
Tymoczko, Maria (2009), «Censorship and self-censorship in translation: ethics and ideology, resistance and collution», en Ní Chuilleanáin, Eiléan et al. (eds.), Translation and censorship:
patterns of communication and interference, Dublín, Fourt Court Press: 24-45.
Van Dijk, Teun A. (2006), «Ideology and discourse analysis», Journal of political ideologies, 11 (2): 115-140.