Paul Ricoeur’s theory of Textual Interpretation According to Ricoeur Interpretation is possible because of the gap between what a speaker meant in saying something and what her statements mean outside of her intentions. As an attempt to make sense out of a written discourse Ricoeur formulates a theory of textual interpretation. The key concepts of his theory are distanciation, explanation, understanding and appropriation. He considered textual interpretation as the primary aim of hermeneutics. A text is a discourse fixed in writing. When a discourse fixed in writing there is a kind of distanciation. Distanciation The notion of distanciation is discussed in four forms: (a) text as a relation of speech to writing, (b) text as a structured work, (c) text as the projection of a world and (d) text as the mediation of selfunderstanding. Transition
from s p e e c h t o writing: A triple distanciation
is fixed in writing. (I) distanciation
happens when speech discourse
from the author (2) from the context or world of
speech discourse (3) from the original audience. Text as a structured work: A textual work is a sequence longer than a sentence, having a literary genre with some unique style of belonging to an individual. This makes the selective reading of text complex. Text as the projection of a world: Speech refers to a world which is common to speaker and the original audience. A text is distanced from this common world. Interpretation is not to recapture this common world of the past but to understand a new world ie., interpreters inner world meeting the world of text. Text as the mediation of self-understanding: Understanding is not grasping of a past world expressing itself through writing. While engaging with the world projected by the text the reader understand herself which leads to a self transformation. This leads to his concept of appropriation. Once a spoken discourse is made text it acquires a semantic autonomy and speaks to the reader in her own existential situation. Thus the author’s intention or original dialogical situation is not the determining factor of the meaning. But the text itself reveals. Thus the text means more than the author meant. Multiple interpretations are possible.
1
Hermeneutic circle Ricoeur’s method of interpretation is comprised of a hermeneutic triad of explanation and understanding and appropriation. While Dilthey limited explanation sciences and understanding to the human
sciences,
Ricoeur
to brings
the
natural
about
bridge
between them and highlighted the dialectical relationship between them. While is more
concerned w i t h
the
semiological system, understanding focuses
semantic system. Ricoeur thought that unl ess pole onto the s e m i o t i c
explanation
there
is a g r a f t i n g
of
on
the
the semantic
pole, interpretation will be incomplete.
By trying to reconcile explanation (the epistemological pole) and understanding (the ontological pole) Ricoeur tries to bridge the gap between the epistemological strand of Dilthey and ontological strand of Heidegger. He develops this dialectics in two movements: (1) from understanding to explanation (2) from explanation to understanding. Understanding to Explanation The methodology of understanding is guessing and validating the guess. And the methodology of explanation is stating hypotheses, collecting data, analyzing and conclusion. Understanding begins with a guess or expectation of meaning, which may or may not be confirmed. It is only a guess because the author’s intented meaning is beyond our reach. Correct understanding can no longer be reached by a simple return to the intention of the author. Three principles to guide the process of guessing 1. Construe the verbal meaning of the text as a whole. Why the text as a whole? Because text as a work is more than a collection of sentences. Therefore a specific structure cannot be derived from a single sentence. 2. Construe verbal meaning of the text as an individual based on the generic concept. 3. A literary text involves horizon of meanings because of the metaphoric and symbolic meaning . Validation of Guess Validation is not verification but argumentation by falling back to the text (similar to the judicial procedure used in legal interpretation). The explanation validates the readers guess. In this way, interpretive understanding goes forward in stages with continual movement between the parts
2
and the whole (the hermeneutic circle), allowing understanding to be enlarged and deepened. It requires time and repeated engagement with the text. Explanation is directed toward analysis of the internal relations of the text (the parts), while understanding is directed toward grasping the meanings the text discloses (the whole in relation to its parts). Explanation to Understanding At first, the interpreter's understanding is still fairly superficial. However, readers continue to explore the text, they begin to take into account a number of other factors and raise questions to the text. In the reading of text, two specific faces exist: one is the text with its autonomous nature along with its context, author and other baggage. On the other hand, reader with specific questions and interests from a different social, cultural background and language. In this engagement reader gains a specific interpretation of the text according to the question he raises. On the other hand, while reading the text, the text also will transform the reader's assumptions and initial conditions. This leads the reader to the third element in the triad, appropriation. This concept is more close to our participation in the tradition in which we live. Tradition is not alien; it is something into which we have grown, something we have appropriated through engaged living. Appropriation of textual meaning is the same. When interpreters appropriate the meaning of a text, it is no longer alien, it becomes familiar. Two things happen. Appropriation bridges the alienation of the discourse by making it more familiar. Secondly it leads to self understanding. According to Ricoeur hermeneutic activity is intimately related to self understanding. In Ricoeur’s own words “to make one’s own what was previously foreign is the ultimate aim of all hermeneutics.
To conclude: I Phase: Understanding is guessing the meaning of text and validating the guess thorough various explanatory procedures (knowledge of author, or secondary notes about the context of the text, literary genre etc.) II Phase: Understanding is appropriation through which distanciation is overcome and it ultimately leads to self transformation of the reader. Explanation is mediation between the two stages of understanding. Antony Puthussery 3
