While reading this chapter, I became very intrigued at what the author, Jonathan Culler, had described language as. A lot of the things he pointed out have been my perception on language and what people actually mean, as well. What stood out to me was his mention of the correlation between language & the people who put the words together…the mention that when analyzing any writing it’s very important to understand the background of the piece, like where the person is from, how they view life, asking yourself what is the true meaning behind a particular word or sentence even beyond what it SEEMS to mean on the outside, etc…I think meaning behind language is very important to catch on to, so you can have a better interpretation of the hidden message.

I paid particular attention to Culler’s mention of rhetorics being seen as the element that most readers, myself included, write off as pretty, but ultimately pointless wordplay. Quote, “When poetry has been attacked or denigrated, it has been as deceptive or frivolous rhetoric that misleads citizens and calls up extravagant desires.”(pg70)  However, he does remind me that poetry does allow writers an attempt to express their thoughts and emotions better than if they were simply writing them down in descriptive, yet dull, context. Culler specifically mentions four “master tropes” that allow rhetoric figures to have a semblance of disciplined language, albeit with a figurative structure, and therefore permit these literary devices to have relevance and substance. Metaphor and metonymy are two such tropes and both are prevalent in Adrienne Rich’s poem “Diving into the Wreck”.

I read this poem about four times before making my annotation. I tried to remember what Culler said about interpreting poems; to assume it’s a structure in itself, and use the imagery to see the world differently including “appreciating what other observers would be trivial or oppressive”. Initially, it sounded of someone “waxing poetic” about their wreck-diving trip. I noticed the use of metonyms such as her description of the wreck and the laid open bare hull with its contents left to rot. And then I began to think of this detailed wreck, “whose breasts still bear the stress whose silver, copper, vermeil cargo lies obscurely inside barrels half-wedged and left to rot”, as a metaphor for a person’s introspection. Broken, weighed down, scattered, suppressed, and silenced “whose drowned face sleeps with open eyes”, completely aware of the pain, lack of freedom to express the rich character of their gold-filled hold. This person could be a stand-in for women’s rights or it could just be one individual feeling “trapped beneath the waves”. Either way, this certainly envokes more attention, more emotion, than had the author simply wrote down that they felt trapped, or held back.

When we get emotional we get invested, and that is what poetry does for us. If we do not dismiss it out of hand, it gives us the potential to see things through other eyes, in a way we can yet understand what they are going through.

Through reading, I summarized some of the things I learned, and I feel very useful to myself. In this chapter, Culler aims to define poetry and rhetoric by quoting the difference and connection between poetry and rhetoric. He first praised Aristotle for being the first to separate the two, rhetoric is the art of persuasion, and poetry is the art of imitating. The two forms were integrated and separated several times in history, and it was not until the late twentieth century that rhetoric began to be used as a “study of the structural force of discourse.” On the other hand, poetry is considered “a language that makes full use of powerful and persuasive speech and language. Poetry is a medium through which the poet aims to express this meaning. As Culler defines, poetry can pass many Viewed in a different way, poetry can be viewed through the relationship between the author and the speaker. As mentioned earlier, rhetoric and poetry are closely linked. In poetry, rhetoric is used to exaggerate and sometimes exaggerate human experience. Culler means to Different levels of rhetorical forms treat poetry. Poetry is just a “poetic exploration” through the use of these rhetorical devices, and in their basic sense, they are an attempt to create meaning from our experience. The definition can also be through speech The relationship between the reader and the reader

In Jonathan Culler’s Chapter “Rhetoric, Poetics, and Poetry” The two figures that really stand out to me was metaphor and metonymy. He states “Metaphor is thus a version of a basic way of knowing: We know something by seeing it as something” I think most people are familiar with what a metaphor is because its not only in poems but its in everyday life . In everyday life we use a metaphor to understand and see things better. In the other hand Culler also states ” Metonymy produces order by linking things in spatial and temporal series, moving from one thing to another within a given domain” This basically is a figure of speech where one thing along with another is associated. In the poem “Diving into the Wreck” By Adrienne Rich one place i identified a poetic technique is when she says “And i am here, the mermaid whose dark hair streams black, the merman in his armored body” In this sentence i was able to identify both metonymy and a metaphor. Identified metonymy because as she states a mermaid she then states hair and when she states a merman she then states his armored body, when you think about it those things are associated with each other because when you think of a mermaid you think of long hair and when you think of a merman you think about a man’s body strength. I also believe that the author is using a metaphor because as she is progressing in the poem she then becomes a male and a female. Here we are seeing a diver become something more than when the poem started. This technique is important to me because i was able to understand the poem more. It helped shaped the meaning of the poem more because i was able to understand growth which is what i think the poem is about.

In the chapter Rhetoric, poetics, and poetry, Poetry is closely associated to rhetoric, the consider of the persuasive and expressive resources of language. Culler points to characterize both poetry and rhetoric, citing both their contrasts and the ways in which they are associated. He specified that rhetoric being the art of persuasion and poetry being the art of imitation. He goes on to the list of couple rhetorical figures such as metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony. These are the most basic structures by which we make sense of experience. Poetry as Culler characterizes can be seen in numerous distinctive ways such as either a structure (the real words on a page implied to be studied) or an occasion (the act of the writer or the experience of the reader). Culler implies to treat poem on a different level than other shapes of rhetoric. I think in the poem “The sea is history” by Derek Walcott, I found metaphor as a main rhetoric technique and this is the interesting for me. In the middle line of poem, Walcott says that sad and mournful songs could be heard from the seabed and the mournful songs have been sung by the slave women. The poet answers himself that the history is hidden in the sea sands where the bodies of African slaves reside now. African slaves must have commitment towards the journey for history and as it were at that point the poet will offer assistance them to find it. This is why this poem can be visual metaphor for the societies and battles that have shaped as a result of slavery.

After reading chapter 4 of “Literature, Meaning and Interpretation” by Jonathon Culler, I have discovered the relationship between language and the context of the book. Language can be various based on different contexts and contexts are limitless as well. Every write uses different contexts to portray their message in a better way and they use different languages with different meanings. One of the things that really stood out to me was how the words can have different meanings and connotations based on the context of the story and how they convey different messages in the story.

In chapter 4 “Language, Meaning, and Interpretation” by Jonathan Culler, I have noticed that language is the key that connects people. In this chapter, I find Language and Thought are very interesting. It has shown how language is the medium for expressing the actual thought of the people. Language differs from people to people according to the surrounding. I speak Nepali and it is just the way to express my thought. So, I know that it does not matter at all what medium you choose, the only matter is thoughts. But ‘natural’ or ‘normal’ language we choose, where we don’t need to make more effort to express our thought but if it is different, then it is difficult in expressing actual thoughts. Language may be different, but the thought is centered and willing to express within the same set of surroundings. Hence, Literature is so important and make people active and educate in the different setting of the language in expressing the actual thought of people in a different surrounding.

In chapter 4 Language meaning and interpretation, I learned that meaning can be understood by the author’s intention, the text itself and the content or the reader. The most interesting part of this chapter for me is language and thought. I found this section very interesting because like Culler says “language offers ways of expressing pre-existing thoughts” I relate to this statement because my first language is spanish, I was taught spanish at home from my parents then learned english in school. As a person whos first language was spanish I mostly have thoughts in spanish first. Culler also mentions that “speakers and readers can be brought to see through and around the settings of their language, so as to see a different reality” I agree with this statement because with different languages we can learn other’s cultures and see things different then what we are used to, it makes it more interesting to read.

What caught my attention the most was actually the correlation Culler made between language and thought. Specifically, the “extreme view” that comes from the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, that states what we think is governed by what language we speak. When he mentions, “Whorf argued that the Hopi Indians have a conception of time that can’t be grasped in English”(pg60), I was baffled. How hard could it be to translate seconds, days, and years?

Just after that, Culler says that the French have no corresponding word to English’s “pets”. Does this mean that French people lack animal companions, furry and otherwise? Of course not! (I know, I’ve seen it.) Fun fact: the closest translation you can get in French would be “animal de compagnie”. Which when literally translated into English becomes “animal of company”; I personally find this a far more fitting description of, say, a dog. And there it is! To some, the term “pet” may seem demeaning – just some thing you own. In this context, it might appear odd to view “man’s best friend” as something you just happen to buy at the local pet store; like buying a t.v. from Best Buy. “Animal of company”, now there is a term that commands respect and shows appreciation. I’m beginning to understand exactly why translators often say “there’s no word for it in English”, or, “the closest it comes to is/ a rough translation is”. Language is heavily influenced by the speaker’s view of the world. I’m reminded of my frustration with Spanish, and its insistence of assigning genders to inanimate objects. Is a bicycle called a “bicicleta” (“a” being female) because it looks feminine?