DSC 301. Richards. Chp 34.

Chapter 34: The Two Uses of LanguageScientific vs. Emotive Language: Richards famously splits language into two distinct functions:Scientific (Reference): Used to communicate factual statements, logical data, and verifiable truths where literal correctness is vital.Emotive: Used in poetry and art to evoke feelings, attitudes, and emotional orientations, regardless of literal or factual truth.Value of Poetry: A poetic statement does not need scientific truth; its value is measured by how effectively it organizes and supports valuable human attitudes and emotional responses.

The opening line of the chapter “The Two Uses of Language”, Richards declares that there are “two totally distinct uses of language”. However, the two uses have so far remained undistinguished because the theory of language is the most neglected area of all studies. It should be understood that for the explanation of a theory of poetry and for the parochial aim of understanding what is said about poetry, a clear grasp of the differences between these two uses of language is necessary. The mental processes which accompany the uses of language must also be looked into. In psychological terms, the terms ‘knowledge’, ‘belief’, ‘assertion’, ‘thought’ and ‘understanding’ are used ambiguously, and that results in failure to record the exact distinctions between the terms. Richards uses words like causes, characters and consequences while analyzing mental activity, in place of thought, feeling and will. Richards distinguishes between two kinds of causation for mental activity. The first kind is represented by the stimuli affecting the mind through the senses immediately and also by combining what survives from comparable stimuli in the past. The second kind of causation lies in the mind itself, its needs, its receptiveness and the readiness with which it responds to the external stimuli. The impulses which originate take their character and course from the interaction between these two groups. However, these two categories have to be clearly distinguished. The importance of these two factors could be explained by considering a factor like hunger. While a hungry man would eat almost anything which can be chewed or swallowed, he would not bother about the nature of the substance and it will have little effect upon his reaction to the food he eats. In contrast, a person who has had his fill would be selective and eat such things that would be beneficial for health. So far as the character of an impulse depends on its stimulus it would be called reference, which would stand for thought or cognition. The mental condition of a person usually interferes to distort reference to a certain degree. Individual needs can be satisfied only if the impulses are left undistorted. The behaviour of a person can be distinguished with regard to the stimuli received and the way in which it could be put into use. The reaction to a stimuli and its nature is almost independent of external stimuli.

perceived as they are and whenever there is error it does not deprive the persons of

advantages. It is impossible for anyone to secure an exact impression of personal

experience.

Truth has claims prior to all other considerations. A feeling like love, for instance

should be grounded upon knowledge; otherwise, it could be rendered worthless. A

person ought to love his mistress not for beauty but for other reasons because beauty is

an internal quality while goodness is an abstract idea that cannot be measured. Both are

part of our impulses by habits ultimately derived from desire. The concepts of beauty and

good in a thing give immediate emotional satisfaction but they cannot satisfy individual

impulses. Goodness or beauty is not necessary to refer to anything. The term ‘thinking’

would cover mental operations in which the impulses are completely governed by internal

factors and so it is considered out of control of stimulus. The definition of ‘thinking’ would

differ, depending on the reference.

The scientific use of language relies on reference, which is undistorted by the

receiving mind. Science is the organization of references that has advanced because of

the rejection of religion. There are different principles upon which impulses may be

organised and an examination of them would make one realise that such organisation is

inevitable. Many have tried to explain that science depends on some instinct, emotion, or

desire and termed it curiosity. Curiosity is a special passion for knowledge that has never

been thought of. All the passions and instincts, human needs and desires may influence

science. Every human activity would have required the need for undistorted reference at

least on one occasion. The essential point is that science is autonomous. The impulses

developed in science are modified by other impulses with a view to systematise and

arrive at a conclusion to facilitate further references.

To recognise science to be autonomous is different from subordinating all other

activities to it. There are innumerable human activities that require undistorted references

if they are to be satisfied. Fiction is a form of distorted reference. The use of fiction is not

a process of pretention or the world of make-believe. This state is aroused by statements

or by analogous things in other arts and are used in many ways. For example, one could

say that fiction is used to deceive; however, this cannot be a characteristic feature of

poetry. A statement which may be used for the sake of reference, true or false, is the

scientific use of language. When the reference is used for the sake of arousing emotions

and attitude, it is called emotive use of language.

The distinction between these two uses of language is simple. Words could be

either used for the sake of references they point to or for attitudes and emotions which

arise. Many arrangements of words evoke attitudes without reference being made, like

the phrases in musical compositions. Usually, references are recognised as conditions for

or stages in the ensuing development of attitude, for the attitudes are more important

than the references. The outcome is to bring about attitudes which do not require truth or

falsity of the references.

The differences between the mental processes involved in the scientific use of

language and the emotive one are different. Whereas the scientific use of language

should avoid ambiguity and have a fixed single meaning, the emotive use encourages

mul

Richards views the poem as a response to a stimulus, which could render the

reader to be important. But this subjectivism leads him to the conclusion that all poetic

language is ambiguous and open to different meanings. In this context, David Daiches

points out that Richards investigates what imaginative literature is, how it employs

language, how its use of language differs from the scientific use of language, and what

is its special function and value.

Richards, in “Principles of Literary Criticism” expounds a theory of language, and

distinguishes between the two uses of language – the referential or scientific, and the

emotive. A statement may be used for the sake of reference, which may be verified as

true or false. This is the scientific use of language. A statement used for the sake of the

effects in emotions and attitudes produced by the reference is the emotive or poetic use

of language. The poet uses words emotively for the purpose of evoking emotions and

attitudes considered valuable by him. For instance, the word ‘fire’ has only one definite

scientific reference to a fact in the real world. When poetry uses a phrase such as ‘heart

on fire’ the word, ‘fire’, in relation to ‘heart’ evokes an emotion, that of excitement.

While science makes statements, poetry makes pseudo-statements that cannot

be empirically tested and proved true or false. A statement is justified by its truth or its

correspondence with the fact it points to. On the other hand, the pseudo statement of

poetry is justified in its effect of releasing or organising our impulses or attitudes.

Richards says, “The statements in poetry are there as a means to manipulation and

expression of feelings and attitudes.” Poetry communicates feelings and emotions.

Hence, poetic truth is different from scientific truth. It is a matter of emotional belief

rather than intellectual belief.

Poetry cannot provide knowledge, and intellectual doctrine in poetry does not

exist. Poetry speaks not to the mind but to the impulses. Its speech, literal or figurative,

logical or illogical is faithful to its experience as long as it evokes a similar experience in

the reader. Thus, a poem, as Richards defines it, is a class of experiences “composed of all experiences, occasioned by the words”, which are similar to “the original experience of the poet.

A. Richards, born in 1893, is one of the great critics of the modern age, and has influenced a number of critics on both sides of the Atlantic. He and T.S. Eliot are pioneers in the field of New Criticism, though they differ from each other in certain important respects. He is the first-rate critic, since Coleridge, who has formulated a systematic and complete theory of poetry, and his views are highly original and illuminating. In his “Principles of Literary Criticism” chapter 34, he discusses the most neglected subject, i.e. the theory of language and the two uses of language. To understand much the theory of poetry and what is said about poetry, a clear comprehension of the differences between the uses of language is indispensable. David Daiches says, “Richards conducts this investigation in order to come to some clear conclusions about what imaginative literature is, how it employs language, how its use of language differs from the scientific use of language and what is its special function and value.”

According to I.A. Richards language can be used in two ways, i.e. the scientific use and the emotive one.

It is only in recent years that serious attention is given to the language as a science. In the scientific use of language, we are usually matter of fact. All the activities covered by this use require undistorted references and absence of fiction.

We may use a statement, true or false, in a scientific use of language, but it may also be used to create emotions and attitudes. This is the emotive use of language. We use words scientifically or for emotional attitudes when words are used to evoke attitudes without recourse to references like musical phrases. References are conditions for developing attitudes and hence the attitudes are more important, without carrying for the true or false references. Their sole purpose is to support the attitudes. Aristotle wisely said, “Better a plausible impossibility than an improbable possibility.”

In the scientific use of the language, the difference in reference is fatal (a failure) but in the emotive language it is not so. In the scientific use of language, the references should be correct and the relation of references should be logical. In the emotive use of language, any truth or logical arrangement is not necessary – it may work as an obstacle. The attitudes due to references should have their emotional interconnection and this has often no connection with logical relations of the facts referred to.

Richards goes on to examine different uses of the word ‘truth’. In the scientific use, the references are true and logical there is very little involvement of arts. Richards says that the term ‘true’ should be reserved for this type of uses – the scientific use. But the emotive power of the word is far too great for this. The temptations are there for a speaker who wants to evoke certain attitudes.

So Richards goes on to consider the connotations of the word ‘truth’ in criticism. In literary criticism, the common use is ‘acceptability’ or ‘probability’. For example, Robinson Crusoe is true in the sense of the acceptability of things we are told, in the interest of the narrative whether or not such a person existed in real life is not relevant to the ‘truth’ of the novel. A happy ending to Lear or Don Quixote would be false because it would be unacceptable. In this sense ‘truth’ is equivalent to ‘internal necessity’ or ‘rightness’. That is ‘true’ which accords with the rest of the experience and arouses our ordered responses. Keats uses ‘truth’ in a confused way. He said, ‘What the imagination seizes as beauty must be truth.” Sometimes it is held that all that is unwanted or redundant is false; as Walter Pater says, ’Surplusage! The artist will dread that, as the runner on his muscles’. But then superabundance is common in all great art, and is much better than contrived economy. The essential point is whether this so-called surplusage interferes or not with the rest of the responses.