Home Wolfgang Iser’s conception of indeterminacy: An integrational critique
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Wolfgang Iser’s conception of indeterminacy: An integrational critique

  • Theodore Tsz Hang Tam EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: October 4, 2019
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Adopting the perspective of a “Harrisian” integrational linguist, this article identifies two conflicting ways in which Wolfgang Iser describes “indeterminacy” and its implications on the act of reading in his “reception theory”. It will be argued that while his understanding of contextualisation and recontextualisation is markedly similar to the integrational idea of the radical indeterminacy of the sign, he is not an “integrational literary theorist” since he ultimately sees literary works as comprising determinate, intersubjective segments and indeterminate links supplied by the reader. Iser’s significance for integrationism lies mainly in the directions he provides for the development of “integrational literary criticism”, the practitioners of which would be “cultured readers” who appreciate the impossibility of “correct” analyses and recognise indeterminacy as an integral part of the reading process.

References

Carey, J. 2005. What good are the arts? London: Faber and Faber.Search in Google Scholar

De Bruyn, B. 2012. Wolfgang Iser: A companion. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110245523Search in Google Scholar

Fish, S. 1970. Literature in the reader: Affective stylistics. New Literary History 2(1). 123–162. http://doi.org/10.2307/468593.10.2307/468593Search in Google Scholar

Fish, S. 1980. Is there a text in this class? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Harris, R. 1980. The language-makers. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Harris, R. 1981. The language Myth. London: Gerald Duckworth and Company Ltd.Search in Google Scholar

Harris, R. 1996 Signs, language and communication: Integrational and segregational approaches. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Harris, R. 1998. Introduction to integrational linguistics. Oxford: Pergamon Press.10.1163/9789004454057_003Search in Google Scholar

Harris, R. & C. Hutton. 2007. Definition in theory and practice: Language, lexicography and the law. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Iser, W. 1971. Indeterminacy and the reader’s response in prose fiction. In J. H. Miller (ed.), Aspects of narrative, 1–45. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Iser, W. 1972. The reading process: A phenomenological approach. New Literary History 3(2). 279–299. http://doi.org/10.2307/468316.10.2307/468316Search in Google Scholar

Iser, W. 1975. The reality of fiction: A Functionalist approach to literature. New Literary History 7(1). 7–38. http://doi.org/10.2307/468276.10.2307/468276Search in Google Scholar

Iser, W. 1978. The act of reading: A theory of aesthetic response. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Iser, W. 1980a. Texts and readers. Discourse Processes 3. 327–343. http://doi.org/10.1080/01638538009544496.10.1080/01638538009544496Search in Google Scholar

Iser, W. 1980b. The indeterminacy of the text: a critical reply. In E. Shaffer (ed.), Comparative criticism: A yearbook, vol. 2, 27–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Iser, W. 2000. Do I write for an Audience? PMLA 115(3). 310–314. http://doi.org/10.2307/463451.10.2307/463451Search in Google Scholar

Iser, W. 2006. How to do theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Jones, P. E. 2007. Why there is no such thing as “critical discourse analysis”. Language & Communication 27(4). 337–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2006.08.001.10.1016/j.langcom.2006.08.001Search in Google Scholar

Pablé, A. & C. Hutton. 2015. Signs, meaning and experience: Integrational approaches to linguistics and semiotics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781501502286Search in Google Scholar

Priestley, J. B. 1945. An inspector calls. New York, NY: Dramatists Play Service.Search in Google Scholar

Ransom, J. C. 1968. The World’s Body. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana University Press. (Original work published 1938).Search in Google Scholar

Taylor, T. J. 1982. Communication and literary style: The principle of inter-subjectivity. Poetics Today 3(4). 39–51. http://doi.org/10.2307/1771989.10.2307/1771989Search in Google Scholar

Taylor, T. J. & M. Toolan. 1984. Recent trends in stylistics. Journal of Literary Semantics 13(1). 57–79. http://doi.org/10.1515/jlse.1984.13.1.57.10.1515/jlse.1984.13.1.57Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-10-04
Published in Print: 2019-10-25

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 24.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jls-2019-2012/html
Scroll to top button