Page 85 - Oswald Ducrot, Slovenian Lectures, Digitalna knjižnica/Digital Library, Dissertationes 6
P. 85
Lecture V
tentions, we represent a risk as worth taking and we have consideration for
the person who takes it and at others, on the contrary, in our discourse, we
represent the fact of taking risks as a bad thing. If one accepts the existence
of those two different topoi, one can already see how those four adjectives
might be classified: two of them implement topos T1 and the other two, to-
pos T2. Which? I hope that you have the same feeling as I do about this.
Courageous implements topos T1: when one says that someone is coura-
geous, one is praising him, and one is praising him, because he dares to take
risks, or has dared to do so sometimes in his life; what you have in the ad-
jective courageous is a positive valorization of risk-taking. In the case of the
adjective timorous, I would say that the topos used is still topos T1, the to-
pos which values risk-taking positively. When I say that someone is timor-
ous, I am blaming him. I am blaming him, because he does not dare take a
risk, or has not dared to: which, according to me, implies that risk-taking is
good, at least in certain circumstances. Courageous and timorous are there-
fore based on the same topos T1, but courageous is used to praise those who
dare take risks and timorous is used to criticize those who do not manage
to do so.
Let us now take the two remaining adjectives: prudent and rash. As you
expect, I am going to say that they both implement the same topos, this time
topos T2, a topos which depreciates risk-taking. When I say that someone is
prudent, except if I do so ironically, I ascribe a certain quality to that per-
son, and I praise him because he can keep away from risks: in that way, I
consider risk-taking as an evil. So, here we have topos T2. In the case of rash,
the topos used is the same again. But this time, when I describe someone as
being rash, I am criticizing him, I am blaming him for taking risks in an un-
acceptable and unjustified way. So, I am blaming him for not implementing
topos T2, just as I am congratulating the prudent person for implementing
that topos. But, in either case, I am referring to topos T2.
Now, after that first classification of the four adjectives, I must distin-
guish courageous and timorous on the one hand and prudent and rash on the
other. I have two groups but I must make subdivisions within each of those
two groups. To obtain those subgroups, I am going to bring in the topical
forms. Each topos can, as we have seen, be implemented as two converse
topical forms.
Let us write those topical forms down: as far as topos T1 is concerned,
I have two topical forms: TF1’ and TF1’’; and similarly, as far as T2 is con-
cerned, we have TF2’ and TF2’’. What are those topical forms? TF1’ will be
tentions, we represent a risk as worth taking and we have consideration for
the person who takes it and at others, on the contrary, in our discourse, we
represent the fact of taking risks as a bad thing. If one accepts the existence
of those two different topoi, one can already see how those four adjectives
might be classified: two of them implement topos T1 and the other two, to-
pos T2. Which? I hope that you have the same feeling as I do about this.
Courageous implements topos T1: when one says that someone is coura-
geous, one is praising him, and one is praising him, because he dares to take
risks, or has dared to do so sometimes in his life; what you have in the ad-
jective courageous is a positive valorization of risk-taking. In the case of the
adjective timorous, I would say that the topos used is still topos T1, the to-
pos which values risk-taking positively. When I say that someone is timor-
ous, I am blaming him. I am blaming him, because he does not dare take a
risk, or has not dared to: which, according to me, implies that risk-taking is
good, at least in certain circumstances. Courageous and timorous are there-
fore based on the same topos T1, but courageous is used to praise those who
dare take risks and timorous is used to criticize those who do not manage
to do so.
Let us now take the two remaining adjectives: prudent and rash. As you
expect, I am going to say that they both implement the same topos, this time
topos T2, a topos which depreciates risk-taking. When I say that someone is
prudent, except if I do so ironically, I ascribe a certain quality to that per-
son, and I praise him because he can keep away from risks: in that way, I
consider risk-taking as an evil. So, here we have topos T2. In the case of rash,
the topos used is the same again. But this time, when I describe someone as
being rash, I am criticizing him, I am blaming him for taking risks in an un-
acceptable and unjustified way. So, I am blaming him for not implementing
topos T2, just as I am congratulating the prudent person for implementing
that topos. But, in either case, I am referring to topos T2.
Now, after that first classification of the four adjectives, I must distin-
guish courageous and timorous on the one hand and prudent and rash on the
other. I have two groups but I must make subdivisions within each of those
two groups. To obtain those subgroups, I am going to bring in the topical
forms. Each topos can, as we have seen, be implemented as two converse
topical forms.
Let us write those topical forms down: as far as topos T1 is concerned,
I have two topical forms: TF1’ and TF1’’; and similarly, as far as T2 is con-
cerned, we have TF2’ and TF2’’. What are those topical forms? TF1’ will be
