Silverstein's (2003) Notion of the n-th-order of Indexicality

Silverstein's (2003) notion of indexicality explained in his article entitled "Indexical Order and the Dialectics of Sociolinguistic Life", published in the Language & Communication Journal, is a concept that i am grappling at the moment with. In this blog my attempts are to use my knowledge with the help of Johnstone's (2008) chapter on "Some General Themes" to conquer and try to fathom Silverstein's notion of the n-th-order of indexicality. First, Johnstone (2008) in her approach to discourse analysis examines "A Heuristic Approach to Discourse Analysis" through the lens of Analytic heuristics. She explores the locations of meaning that are built and interpreted with relation to language and discourse. To help me with my own understanding of language and discourse at its root and seemingly with the notion of this complex analysis of the n-th-order of indexicality, I look at locations of meanings found within the text. Silverstein (2003) states:

"Not the essential role of metapragmatically imputed denotational equivalence-logically impossible, of course-in this characteristic ethno-metapragmatic understanding of indexical variability" (Silverstein, 2003, 212).

A Meaning Making Approach

Johnstone (2008) describes four possibilities[1] that allow me, the reader, to come into a more generalized yet specific meaning-making metalinguistic awareness of indexicality in terms of how he is explaining the n-th-order of indexicality. I asked myself immediately after reading the quote above: what does he mean by not possible ("impossible") to having denotation and metapragmatics features? In his carefully crafted rhetoric, not in the everyday sense in which “mere” rhetoric is heard daily but in the technical sense (Johnstone 2008), I find it helpful essential to my own understanding of this matter to delve into the unfamiliar (obfuscating) words and to proactively reread the passage again, a “New Criticism” approach (a method that Johnstone explains in her book).

OED Definitions

Definitions and understandings of obfuscated and technically inclined words allow for further understanding of grander ideas and concepts. According to the Oxford English Dictionnary OED, Metapragmatics[2] is the awareness of a speaker’s pragmatic functions of a speech act. Pragmatics[3] in Semiotics and Linguistics it is defined as follows (The study of) the use of linguistic signs (esp. sentences) in actual situations (OED). Some dictionaries mentions that metapragmatics is “an awareness by a speaker of the intentions and effects of one's speech” (dictionary.com, 2014). The term denotational an adjective form of the base word denotation is defined as being explicit and direct in its interpretations without any “implicature” or any associated ideas or concepts that the term may have following it: “the association or set of associations that a word usually elicits for most speakers of a language, as distinguished from those elicited for any individual speaker because of personal experience” (dictionary.com, 2014). The next term is ethno-metapragmatics but before learning its meaning, the worth ethno a in ethnography[4] in terms of anthropology is defined by the dictionary. Ethnology, n., is defined by the OED as follows “The branch of knowledge concerned with human society and culture, and its development; = social anthropology n.,” (2014).

Locations of Meanings

Analysis of the meanings in context as derived from Silverstein’s notion of n-th-order of indexicality from the lens of location meaning that Johnstone (2008) examines is to critically look at the text and derive local meaning from it. Before giving my insight as to what Silverstein meant by his quote on indexicality, I would like to explore my individual thoughts on each defined word from my own knowledge and understandings of the technical terms.

In my minds eye, the terms defined by the dictionary and OED gave meaning of words locating meaning in larger linguistic realms:

Metapragmatics- linguistics knowledge of everyday use of language

Pragmatics- linguistically the cotidian interactions and or utterances that humans engage in or interact with (a process).

Denotation- a direct and implicit meaning unadulterated from tacit understandings for the world. Saussurean concepts of the signified and signifier conjuring up the denotational image of a category of something and linking it to anther direct sound matching the signified (image/symbolic process) and signifier (sound).

Ethno-metaphragmatics-An analytical process which linguists use to study semiotics and linguistc anthropology among other interdisciplinary fields.

Discussion

Because Silverstein is directing this quote to language being the union of its registers or variants found in language communicative interactions, In the first independent clause where he states that the equivalence of logic that one may try to find in or become aware of in a speaker’s speech, he suggests that it is not possible to find such phenomena. He argues that in metapragmatics the use of intentionality that is found in a dyad that the possibility of finding explicitness is not one to aim for. Metapragmatics and denotation are not elements that can possibly overlap to provide an observer or and interactant with explicitness. Metapragmatics is like the top of a cube and denotation like the bottom of a cube, which can not logically ever meet face to face. They are polar opposites analogies the objects when concretized. Furthermore, this analogy is telling of my own understanding of the later part of the quote. There is a subtle overlap that can be found with a top and a bottom of let’s say a cube. If the cube has the top representing metapragmatics and the bottom of the same cube representing the term denotation as concrete object to visualize a pattern, then the subtle characteristics that are found in the whole of the cube can begin to give shape to the object, the cube, through a visualized form of lines that connect the cubes bottom and top referred to me as the ethnology. To me this begins to make sense because it is what language acts as, when objectified symbolically. It's features allow critical thinkers to create a shared reality with langue though “languaging”. In examining these instances of text, I am able to focus on the writing through a form of interaction. Thinking of Silverstein’s notion of indexicality in terms of critical heuristics analysis allows me to reflect on language and notice how the writer is interacting with his thoughts through language and, then, in turn, persuading his audience/readers. This is valuable information to distinguish between discourse adaptation and discourse strategies which can be a combination of modes used by writers to inform their audience about, linguistically speaking, meaning.

Foot notes

[1] 1. “The meaning of the text is what the speaker means. 2. The meaning of the text is what the text itself means. 3. The meaning of the text is what its meaning to its audience. 4 the meaning of a text is in all these places” (Johnstone, 2008, 263).

[2] i.e. a noun 1976 first appeared in E. Bates’ Language and Context

[3] i.e., The term pragmatics first appeared in 1937 quoted by C. Morris Logical Positivism in relation to Semiotics and Linguistics. A secondary definition found in the OED defined pragmatics as “(The study of) the practical aspects of human action and thought” (OED).

[4] Fist appeared in 1787 in The Monthly Review, London.