< previous page page_11 next page >

Page 11
Consider the following expressions from Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations, 66:
(2) Consider for example the proceedings that we call ''games.'' I mean board-games, card-games, ball-games. . . . Look and see whether there is anything common to all. For if you look at them you will not see something that is common to all, but similarities, relationships, and a whole series of them at that.
All the personal pronouns (whether explicit or implicit) are not indicating a person called Wittgenstein or any empirical reader: they are textual strategies. The intervention of a speaking subject is complementary to the activation of a Model Reader whose intellectual profile is determined only by the sort of interpretive operations he is supposed to perform (to detect similarities, to consider certain games . . .). Likewise the 'author' is nothing else but a textual strategy establishing semantic correlations and activating the Model Reader: /I mean board-games/ and so on, means that, within the framework of that text, the word /game/ will assume a given semantic value and will become able to encompass board-games, card-games, and so on.
According to this text Wittgenstein is nothing else but a philosophical style, and his Model Reader is nothing else but his capability to cooperate in order to reactualize that philosophical style.
In the following paragraphs I shall renounce the use of the term /author/ if not as a mere metaphor for «textual strategy», and I shall use the term Model Reader in the terms stipulated above.
In other words, the Model Reader is a textually established set of felicity conditions (Austin, 1962) to be met in order to have a macro-speech act (such as a text is) fully actualized.
0.3. Textual Levels
0.3.1. Narrative and Nonnarrative Texts
To say that every text is a syntactic-semantico-pragmatic device whose foreseen interpretation is part of its generative process is still a generality. The solution would be to represent an 'ideal' text as a system of nodes or joints and to establish at which of them the cooperation of the Model Reader is expected and elicited.
Probably such an analytical representation escapes the present possibilities of a semiotic theory: this has been attempted only apropos of concrete texts (even though the categories provided ad hoc were aiming at a more universal application). The most successful examples are, I think, Barthes' (1970) analysis of Sarrazine and Greimas' (1976) of Maupassant's Deux amis. More detailed analyses of shorter textual frag-

 
< previous page page_11 next page >