The main point is that there's a fundamental distinction to be made
between Spottiswoode's use of the term 'film language' and Metz's
semiotic studies of film. We also need to take into consideration the
French distinction between langage, langue, and parole. And then
there's terms like film discourse, film text, the various discussions
of inner speech, etc.
Haim's comments made me realize that this discussion could perhaps be
conducted using Wittgenstein's later philosophy - his description of
(appropriately enough) 'language-games'.
Several language-games may use the same word, but with different
(incompatible, contradictory, or overlapping) meanings and truth
values. Several distinct meanings of the same term therefore exist, and
confusion or conflict between different language-games results from
their different use of the same terms. Wittgenstein's solution to
resolving conflicts involved developing a philosophy to describe
precisely the diverse uses of specific terms in different
language-games.
In his book *Projecting a Camera* Edward Branigan uses Wittgenstein's
method to describe the multiple, contradictory, literal and
metaphorical meanings of fundamental concepts used to talk about films
- terms such as 'movement', 'point of view', 'camera', 'frame', and
'causality'. We could also add 'language' to this list.
Warren Buckland
Latest book: "Directed by Steven Spielberg:
Poetics of the Contemporary Hollywood Blockbuster"
Editor, New Review of Film and Television Studies:
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/17400309.asp
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|