H. P. GRICE E J. L. SPERANZA: LA CONVERSAZIONE -- I VERBALI: GA
Catalogue
Raisonné of J. L. Speranza’s Publications – H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La
Conversazione – I Verbali: GA
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gaetani – ossia: Grice e Gaetani: la ragione conversazionale
e ’implicatura convesazionale di Catullo -- APVD NEAPOLIM. Salvatore Gaetani
(Martano, Campania): la ragione conversazionale e ’implicatura convesazionale
di Catullo -- APVD NEAPOLIM. A productive way of comparing Grice
and Salvatore Gaetani in relation to reason-governed conversational meaning is
to see Grice as offering a formal, analytical reconstruction of what Gaetani
approaches historically and philologically through classical texts. Grice’s
theory of conversational implicature famously distinguishes between what is
said and what is meant, grounding meaning in a cooperative rationality governed
by maxims of quantity, quality, relevance, and manner, where departures from
literal clarity are themselves intelligible because interlocutors presume
rational cooperation. Gaetani, working within a Crocean framework and through
close engagement with Catullus, Villon, and nineteenth‑century culture “apud
Neapolim,” treats conversational reason less as an abstract logical apparatus
and more as an historically sedimented practice, in which meaning emerges from
shared cultural forms, literary allusion, and stylistic implication. Where
Grice theorizes implicature as a cancellable, context-sensitive inference
licensed by general principles of rational exchange, Gaetani reads something
like conversational implicature in Catullus as inseparable from poetic
tradition, genre, and the ethical–aesthetic horizon of the Ottocento as read by
Novecento eyes. In short, Grice supplies the universal pragmatics of
conversational reason, while Gaetani exemplifies how such reason is always
already inflected by history, literature, and cultivated style; the former
articulates the logic of implicature, the latter shows how that logic lives, and
sometimes playfully misbehaves, in classical and modern conversation alike.
Grice: “I like G., for one, he is a duke – and kept beautiful gardens at
Martano – he philosophised on the ‘ottocento’, as any philosopher from the
Novecento would!” Si dedica alla FILOSOFIA. segue
lo schema tracciato da CROCE, Villon (Napoli); “Un carteggio inedito di F.
Bozzelli (G.), L'Aquila, Masseria, Martano Un bilancio letterario” (Roma); “Per
onorare un maestro: il Torraca, Napoli); “Catullo” L'Ottocento” (Napoli); “La
bancarotta del rosso: commedia in tre atti (Lecce); “Per la venuta del Duce”
(Lecce); “Bernardo Bellincioni, Galatina Il benedettino-cistercense d. Mauro
cassoni nel Tempio, nella scuola, negli studi Ricordi di Croce” (Napoli);
Vicende tipi e figure del Casino dell'Unione” Napoli ieri e oggi: passeggiate e
ricordi” (Milano-Napoli); “Apud Neapolim” Fonti storiche e letterarie intorno
ai Studi Paolo Fedeli, Introduzione a Catullo, Roma-Bari, Laterza, Ferguson,
Catullus, Oxford, Schimdt, Catull, Hidelberg, . F. Della Corte, Due studi
catulliani, Genova, Neduling, A Prosopography to Catullus, Oxford, Braga,
Catullo e i poeti greci, Messina-Firenze, Hezel, Catull und das griechische
Epigramm, Stuttgart, Newman, Roman Catullus and the Modification of the
Alexandrian Sensibility, Hildesheim, Wheeler, Catullus and the Tradition of
Ancient Poetry, Londra-Berkeley, Moellendorff, Catullus hellenistische
Gedichte. in Hellenistische Dichtung in der Zeit des Kallimachos, II, Berlino,
Rapisardi, Catullo e Lesbia. Studi, Firenze, Succ. Lemonnier, Marmorale,
L'ultimo Catullo. Napoli, 1952 Giancarlo Pontiggia, Maria Cristina Grandi,
Letteratura latina. Storia e testi. Vol. 2, Milano, Principato, Kaggelaris,
Wedding Cry: Sappho (Fr. LP, Fr. 104a LP)- Catullus - modern Greek folk songs,
in E. Avdikos e B. Koziou-Kolofotia (a cura di), Modern Greek folk songs and
history. Catullo, APVD NEAPOLIM, l’implicatura di croce. Croce, Catullo. Grice:
Caro Gaetani, ho letto che hai filosofato sull’Ottocento tra i giardini del tuo
Martano. Dimmi, ma Catullo preferisce passeggiare tra le rose o scrivere versi
tra i cactus? Gaetani: Grice, se Catullo avesse visto i miei giardini, avrebbe
scritto un epigramma sulle lumache più che sulle rose! E ti dirò: tra Croce e
Catullo, l’implicatura è sempre nascosta sotto le foglie. Grice: Ah, le
lumache! Da noi in Inghilterra si usano per la filosofia lenta, ma voi italiani
sapete dare più sprint anche al trivio latino. Catullo sarebbe felice di sapere
che il suo amore resiste come un cespuglio sempreverde. Gaetani: Grice, a
Napoli il latino si mescola col dialetto, e il cactus diventa metafora per le
passioni pungenti. D’altronde, meglio una spina di Catullo che una bancarotta
di implicature! Gaetani, Salvatore (1921). Villon. Napoli: Ricciardi.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gagliardi – ossia: Grice e Gagliardi: la ragione
conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale. Domenico Gagliardi
(Marino, Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura
conversazionale. In Grice’s theory, conversational meaning
is explained through a rational, explicitly articulated framework: speakers are
understood as reasoning agents who cooperate by following, and at times
exploiting, general principles of rational conduct in conversation, so that
implicatures arise from recognizably reason-governed departures from what is
strictly said, justified by shared assumptions about rationality and mutual
understanding. Gagliardi’s treatment of conversation and implicature-like
phenomena, by contrast, is embedded in a moral–educational and empirical
context rather than in an abstract theory of rational inference: he treats
discourse, especially in medical and pedagogical settings, as governed by
habits of moral upbringing, parental instruction, and socially inculcated
practices, where saying more than is said is less a matter of calculated
inference than of character formation and accepted norms of conduct. Where
Grice asks the distinctively philosophical question of why conversational
principles ought to be followed and answers it by distinguishing between
empirical adherence and deeper rational justification, Gagliardi largely
remains at the level of the “is”: he shows that communicative and moral norms
are in fact learned early, enforced through education and professional
practice, and sustained by warnings against deception and charlatanism. Thus,
while both converge on the idea that meaning in conversation is not exhausted
by literal content, Grice theorizes implicature as a product of practical
reason operating under a cooperative ideal, whereas Gagliardi treats the same
surplus of meaning as arising from morally informed social practice, where
rationality is inseparable from ethical formation and lived custom. Grice: “I
like G.; I spent some time with medics at Richmond, talking Greek! Anyhow, G.
shows why the Angles prefer physician – since ‘medicare’ is such a trick!
Philosophically interesting bit is that Gagliardi applies ‘medico’ and
qualifies it with ‘morale’! I like G. In honest prose, he manages to write a
treatise for the week: the first giornata and so forth: an empirical ethical
treatise along Lizio lines of the type I classify as ‘is’ rather than ‘ought’.
Recall that the fundamental question I pose for pragmatics is why the principle
ought to be followed rather than being, as it is, mainly and caeteris paribus
followed! My answer to that is in three stages. The first answer, dull and
empirical, is that the principle IS, as a matter of EMPIRICAL fact, followed.
This far G. goes, and succeeds! He philosophises extensively, knowing British
parents, how a father must take care of his son, or at least find him a good
tutor! A dull, f at a certain level adequate, answer to the fundamental
question about the conversational categoric imperative; mos educazione “We
learn not to tell lies from our parents” Hardie, Ethica Nichomachaea,
formazione del carattere. “Empirical fact we’ve learned since
childhood and it would be difficult to diverge from the practice. This is a dull empirical fact.” educazione morale. Da anche ammonimenti
contro i guaritori ciarlatani e fornì alcuni suggerimenti
deontologici.L'infermo istruito nelle scuole, Consigli preventivi e curativi in
tempo di contagio dati in forma di dialogo, L'educazione morale” Grice: “Live,
and let live, if not necessarily amongst me!”. “è legato dire altro intorno al
morale? Sem. Non altro certamente intorno a questo, e credo di avere
udito tanto, che se me ne approfitterò saprò scegliere la noglie approposito,
ed allevare nel buon costume anche i miei figliuoli, che nasceranno. Mi rimane
solamente di sentire dal dottore, quali vantaggi potrebbe apportare
all'educazione la filosofia, e specialmente in quei figliuoli, che ricalcitrano
nello approfittarfi de buoni documenti morali. FIL. Di questo ne
tratteremo domani. – “I have a train to catch.” Grice: Caro Gagliardi, mi
colpisce come tu riesca a rendere la medicina una questione morale. Da noi,
“medicare” è un vero rebus, ma tu metti ordine persino tra i medici e i
moralisti! Gagliardi: Grice, è vero! In Italia il medico non cura solo il
corpo, ma educa anche lo spirito: tra consigli empirici e precetti morali,
spesso si rischia di confondere la terapia con la filosofia. Del resto, se non
impariamo dai genitori a non mentire, chi ci salva dai ciarlatani? Grice:
Giusto! Da bambino, ho imparato a dire la verità più per paura che per virtù. E
confesso: tra un empirico e un moralista, preferisco quello che mi prescrive
una cura, anche se la filosofia a volte serve più della medicina! Gagliardi:
Grice, allora la prossima volta ti prescrivo una giornata di buon umore e una
dose di dialogo: se non guarisci, almeno avrai educato il carattere... e,
magari, trovato il tempo per prendere il treno! Gagliardi, Domenico (1688). De
structura glandularum conglobatarum. Roma: Mascardi.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gaio – ossia: Grice e Gaio: la ragione conversazionale e
l’accademia a Roma Gaio (Roma, Lazio): la ragione conversazionale e l’accademia
a Roma. In
comparing Grice with Gaio, the contrast turns on how reason governs
conversational meaning in an institutional versus a theoretical register.
Grice’s account of conversational meaning is explicitly analytical: implicature
arises because speakers are rational agents who reason about one another’s
intentions under shared conversational principles, and meaning beyond what is
said is recovered through structured inference grounded in cooperation and
practical rationality. Gaio, by contrast, appears as a figure of the Roman
Academy for whom conversational reason is inseparable from scholarly ethos and
institutional practice rather than from a formal theory. His near-invisibility,
the mediation of his Platonic commentaries by a pupil, and the emphasis on tacit
authority suggest a model in which meaning circulates through academic
transmission, restraint, and pedagogical hierarchy, rather than through overt
maxims and calculable inference. Where Grice problematizes why conversational
norms ought to be followed and isolates the reasoning that makes implicature
intelligible, Gaio exemplifies a setting in which conversational reason is
already normalized within the Academy, embedded in shared philosophical
commitments and disciplinary continuity. Thus, Grice theorizes reason-governed
conversation as an object of philosophical explanation, while Gaio represents a
historically earlier mode in which conversational meaning is governed by reason
as an academic virtue, manifested in silence, commentary, and collective stewardship
of doctrine rather than in explicit principles of conversational logic. A
member of the Accademy. Although he appears to have enjoyed a significant
reputation, next to nothing is known about him. Porfirio mentions commentaries
on Plato by G. that may have been edited by his pupil Albino. GRICEVS:
Salve, Caie; audio te in Academia floruisse, sed de te paene nihil sciri—tam
clarus ut invisibilis fias. CAIVS: Salve, Grice. Fama mea adeo pura est ut ne
biographum quidem contaminaverit; hoc est summum invidia carere. GRICEVS: At
Porphyrius te commemorat commentarios in Platonem scripsisse—an vera gloria est
librum scribere quem discipulus emendat? CAIVS: Certe;
Albino emendavit, ego tacui: sic uterque victor est—ille textum servavit, ego
modestiam. Gaio (a. u. c. CMXIV). Institutiones. Roma: Typis
Publicis.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Galetti – ossia: Grice e Galetti: la ragione conversazionale
e l’implicatura conversazionale -- Roma – filosofia italiana (Roma). Filosofo italiano. Filosofo. Emporium. In Grice’s theory
of reason-governed conversational meaning, communication is understood as a
rational, cooperative activity in which speakers and hearers implicitly rely on
shared principles to infer meanings that go beyond what is explicitly said,
with order emerging not from rigid rules but from the rational expectation that
contributions will be relevant, informative, truthful, and clear. When this
framework is set beside Galetti’s pedagogical stance in Elementi di filosofia,
a contrast yet partial harmony appears: Galetti treats rational order as something
that must be explicitly imposed in advance to prevent intellectual confusion,
especially in an instructional setting, whereas Grice locates order within the
dynamic practice of conversation itself, where apparent disorder or indirection
is often meaningful because it invites inference. The imagined exchange
highlights this difference: Galetti writes to clarify and stabilize reason
through systematic exposition, while Grice speaks to suggest, relying on the
interlocutor’s capacity to reconstruct meaning through rational cooperation.
Both, however, assume that reason is operative even amid indirection or
simplification—Galetti at the level of didactic structure, Grice at the level
of conversational practice—so that understanding ultimately depends not on explicit
rules alone, but on shared rational competencies that make both philosophy
manuals and everyday talk intelligible. GRICE: Caro
Galetti, nei tuoi Elementi di filosofia tutto è così ordinato che mi
chiedo se la ragione segua le regole o se siano le regole a rincorrere la
ragione. GALETTI: Amico Grice, io ho messo ordine per disperazione didattica,
perché lo studente confuso è più pericoloso del filosofo astratto. GRICE:
Comprendo benissimo, del resto anche in conversazione si coopera soprattutto
per evitare il caos, non per amore della verità assoluta. GALETTI: Allora siamo
d’accordo: io scrivo per chiarire, tu parli per alludere, e insieme facciamo
impazzire i lettori con metodo. Galetti (1842). Elementi di filosofia. Modena:
Società Tipografica Modenese.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Galli – ossia: Grice e Galli: la ragione conversazionale e
l’implicatura conversazionale Celestino Galli (Carru, Cuneo, Piemnote). In
Grice’s theory of reason‑governed conversational meaning, understanding arises
from the rational assumption that participants are cooperating according to
shared principles, so that even irony, understatement, or indirectness can be
meaningfully interpreted through conversational implicature. When this
framework is placed alongside the conversational sensibility attributed to G.,
a revealing contrast emerges: Grice conceptualizes conversational order as an
abstract rational structure that operates beneath the surface of everyday talk,
while G.treats conversation itself as an embodied, social practice in which
meaning is co‑created through shared wit, tone, and cultural habit. The
imagined exchange portrays Galli as emphasizing the communal and affective
dimensions of dialogue, where irony and humor are not deviations from
rationality but its natural vehicles, especially in informal settings. Grice,
by comparison, abstracts these same phenomena into a theoretical account,
explaining how rational inference allows interlocutors to move from what is
said to what is meant. Both perspectives converge on the idea that conversation
is not chaotic but intelligible because of reason, yet they diverge in
emphasis: Grice formalizes conversational reason as a set of inferential
expectations, while Galli embodies it as a lived, shared activity in which
understanding is achieved as much through social rhythm and irony as through
logical inference. Interesting philosopher. Not to
be confused with Galli. Grice: Caro Galli, ogni volta che penso alla ragione
conversazionale, mi chiedo se in Italia non sia più un gioco che una teoria.
Dalle tue parti, si discute filosoficamente anche al bar? Galli: Grice, hai
colto nel segno! Da noi la filosofia è come il caffè: se non la condividi,
perde sapore. Anche il più semplice dialogo può diventare una ricerca del vero,
soprattutto quando si parla con ironia. Grice: Ben detto! Forse dovrei
importare la tua implicatura conversazionale a Oxford: almeno lì, ogni discorso
sarebbe meno “implicito” e più “espresso”, magari con meno formalità e più
risate. Galli: Grice, non c’è dubbio! In Italia, la conversazione è una danza:
a volte si inciampa, altre volte si ride, ma alla fine, se il pensiero non si
muove, è il cuore che rimane fermo. E come diceva mia nonna: “Meglio una
battuta che una verità troppo seria!” Galli, Celestino (1829). Favole in prosa
ed in verso. Paris: Librairie des Langues Étrangères.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Galli – ossia: Grice e Galli: la ragione
conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale dell’amore. Gallo Galli (Montecarotto, Ancona, Marche). Grice’s theory of
reason‑governed conversational meaning and G.’s philosophical treatment of love
converge on a shared conviction that rationality is not opposed to affectivity
but articulated through structured, intelligible practices, while differing
sharply in method and level of abstraction: for Grice, conversational meaning
is governed by principles of rational cooperation, where implicatures arise
because speakers are taken to be reasonable agents oriented toward mutual
understanding, and even domains such as love can be accommodated within
philosophical psychology as instances where intentions, recognition, and
responsiveness are normatively ordered; for Galli, by contrast, love is treated
within a speculative, metaphysical framework—explicitly drawing on Plato’s
Phaedrus, Bruno’s One and the Many, and Rosminian and idealist traditions—where
sentiment is not merely compatible with reason but is itself a formative
exercise of the spirit, a disciplined and sometimes agonistic education of the
self that binds feeling and reflexivity in a dialectic exceeding empirical
psychology; thus, while Grice explains the intelligibility of love‑talk by
embedding it in the same reason‑governed conversational economy that
underwrites ordinary communication, Galli elevates love to a metaphysical and
ethical principle, one that tests unity and multiplicity, sacrifice and self‑mastery,
in a way analogous to but far more ontologically ambitious than Grice’s
pragmatic account of implicature, so that their apparent affinity—the idea of a
“conversational reason” hospitable to love—marks less a shared doctrine than a
productive contrast between analytic pragmatics and Italian speculative
idealism. Grice: “Like G.’s, my method in philosophical psychology has room for
love!” Si laurea a Roma sotto Varisco e Barzellotti con SERBATI.
Insegna a Bologna. G. esordisce con una ricerca sullo sviluppo della filosofia
di SERBATI. Studia BRUNO L'uno e i molti certifica la teoria. Gli procura
l'interesse di larga parte del mondo filosofico italiano per le conclusioni sui
rapporti tra il sentimento e la reflessivita. Ampie le discussioni, e talora
vivacissime, su autori contemporanei, dai quali esige rigore, chiarezza e
intransigenza speculativa. La filosofia teoretica dei manuali, dimostrazione
dell'esistenza del mondo esterno e il valore pratico delle qualità sensibili La
legge del numero, 'esistenza di Dio, La dottrina del metodo, Dall'essere alla
coscienza, sofisti, Socrate, Carlini da Talete al Menone accademia; concreto
immanentismo, lizio Da Talete al menone di Platone, pensiero ed esperienza,
persona, su Dio e sull'immortalità, Socrate dialoghi accademia Apologia,
Convito, Lachete, Eutifrone, Liside, Jone, a lotta educazione guerriera ha un
contenuto superior a quello della fisica; accentare agli sports, in quanto non
svirtuosismo, o abilita tecniche e capacita fisiche prese fine a se stesse, ma
si dispongano nel quadro stimolo allo sviluppo dell’uomo. Sono il naturale
sbocco dell’educazione fisica, l’educazione fisica nella pienezza della sua
attuazione; accentuano il momento del rischio e del dominio di se. Non bisogna
esagerare riguardo al valore degli sports in ordine all’educazione guerriera.
Questa ha il suo fondamento in un mondo ideale che a quelli e compiutamente
estraneo; e si riferisce ad una condizione di cose in cui ben altro sir ischia
che non qualche slogatura ed ammaccatura, e in cui l’eroe non attende il plauso
ma si vota sereno e deciso al sacrifizio che anche, rimane oscuro. Fedro
metafisica dell’amore fisiologia dell’amore dialoghi dell’amore dialoghi
sull’amore bello l’uno e i molti aporia Pears, Universals in Flew ermetico,
BONAIUTO idealismo critico dialettica dello spirito educazione guerriera,
Sparta dorio guerriero sacrifizio. Grice: Caro Galli, la tua filosofia
dell’amore mi ricorda la metafisica di Fedro: tra uno e i molti, il sentimento diventa
quasi un esercizio fisico... come una partita di rugby tra filosofi, ma senza
rischio di slogature! Galli: Grice, in effetti, se l’amore è un esercizio,
allora la lotta guerriera dello spirito serve più a domare i cuori che i
muscoli! D’altronde, anche il sacrificio, a volte, resta oscuro... tranne
quando il cuore si storta come un ginocchio! Grice: Ecco, proprio come nei
dialoghi di Platone, dove l’amore è bello ma anche una vera aporia! Forse la
vera educazione del filosofo è imparare a non prendere troppo sul serio le
slogature sentimentali… magari con una buona dose di ironia. Galli: Hai
ragione, caro Grice! L’importante è mantenere il rigore speculativo, senza
perdere il sorriso: che sia un amore guerriero, un amore aporico o
semplicemente una partita a carte filosofica, l’essenziale è non rinunciare mai
a qualche battuta (e magari a un buon caffè)! Galli, Gallo (1905). Teoria della
conoscenza. Milano: Società Editrice Libraria.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Galluppi – ossia: Grice e Galluppi: la ragione
conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale. Pasquale Galluppi (Tropea, Vibo Valentia, Calabria). In the
comparison between Grice and G., the contrast turns on how each understands the
relation between signs, reason, and communicative cooperation. Galluppi,
working within an Enlightenment semiotic framework, treats language as an
extension of natural and instituted signs, moving genealogically from gesture,
cry, and pain to conventional and finally arbitrary signs, with communicative
success resting on shared habits of sign use and a gradual stabilization of
meaning within social practice; conversational understanding, on this view, emerges
from a minimal taxonomy of signs and from the mutual recognition that certain
expressions have come to stand for certain thoughts or situations. Grice, by
contrast, relocates the explanatory burden from signs themselves to the
rational structure of conversational activity: meaning and implicature do not
arise merely because expressions are instituted or arbitrary, but because
speakers and hearers treat one another as reason‑governed agents who aim,
ceteris paribus, at truthfulness, relevance, and intelligibility. Where
Galluppi emphasizes semiotic genesis and the parola as segno del pensiero,
Grice emphasizes the motivational rationale behind utterances, explaining
communicative phenomena through intentions and shared rational expectations
rather than through an inventory of sign types. Thus Galluppi offers a
historically sensitive semiotics of communication, while Grice provides a
normative pragmatics in which conversational meaning is anchored in rational
cooperation rather than in the taxonomy or origin of signs themselves. Grice:
“There was I at Brighton, preparing for the lecture, and came across G., so I
thougt to myself: Great tribute! meaning, segno, di padre siciliano, G. is a
great one; and much can be philosophised about his philosophy of the ‘parola
come segno del pensiero. On top, he was a Baron! Eessential Italian
philosopher!” Si laurea a Napoli sotto Conforti. sintesi ed analisi. Insegna a Napoli. Critica. Le Lettere filosofiche sono
definite il primo saggio in Italia di una storia della filosofia. Memoria
apologetica” (Napoli, Vincenzo Mozzola-Vocola); “Grice, ovvero, Sull'analisi e
motivational rationale – a ‘semantic’ freedom – or ‘prammatica’ as he would
say. Since
he is an illuminista, he is only concerned about this in terms of a minimal
taxonomy of signs. So between the signs used in communication he distinguishes
three types: the imitative, the indicative (different criteria) and the figured
sign – not figurative – ‘segno figurato’ – when a lot of pantomime takes place.
It is only THEN that he explores the arbitrariness: one loses one’s compagno,
and utters, “Where are you?” – so since this worked, they agree that ‘Where are
you’ will mean, “I lost you – where are you?” --. And then we have a full lingo
– or semiosis. He rightly thinks that his is an improvement over
Lucrezio!” gesto, grido, gemito, moto del
ditto, dolore, causa del dolore, circustanza, segno naturale, segno istituito,
segno commune (istituito per la comprensione mutua), segno arbitrario, segno
artificiale, segno imitative, segno indicatore, segno figurato, segno
analogico, segno figurativo -- gesto della mano, lo sguardo, communicare,
sentire, volere, Gentile, il canone nella storiografia filosofica italiana,
Gentile su Galluppi. Corpus, Mchaelmas 1930. After a
tete-a-tete-a-tete. Shropshire: You
look as if Hardie has just tutored you in silence again. Grice: He hasn’t tutored me in silence. He
has tutored me in yawns. Silence would have been an improvement. Shropshire:
Yet you return as if you have been fed.
Grice: I have been fed, in the Oxford way. With a problem and no
dessert. Shropshire: Then you need a
diversion. Grice: You need a diversion.
I need a definition. Shropshire: I have
one. Italian. Grice: Italian at Corpus
is always a symptom. What is the book.
Shropshire: Galluppi. Grice:
South of Italy. Shropshire:
Tropea. Grice: Different world.
Different weather. Different fathers.
Shropshire: You don’t know his father.
Grice: I know the type. The biographer always gives you a father when he
wants to explain a philosopher’s itinerary. Shropshire: It says he goes to
Naples. Grice: How far. Shropshire: Four hundred and something
kilometres. Grice: In miles, then, for
our sins. Shropshire: About two hundred
and fifty. Grice: Two hundred and sixty
if you want to sound more heroic. Shropshire: He goes for law. Grice:
Giurisprudenza. Shropshire: Not Lit.
Hum. Grice: Wrong faculty. Shropshire: Wrong by whose lights. Grice: By mine. I am permitted to be
provincial. Shropshire: He is trained
before Naples. Grice: By his father,
you said. Shropshire: No. By four men.
Ruffa, Barone, Ragno, Santacolomba.
Grice: Four is already a committee.
Shropshire: I like the names. They sound like an opera. Grice: They sound like four ways of saying
do as you are told. Shropshire: You are
implying that they were all priests.
Grice: I am implying nothing. I am guessing, which is worse. Shropshire: Then Naples, law, and then he
comes back. Grice: Returns to
Tropea. Shropshire: 1794. Grice: He anchors himself in his own town
and then causes trouble. Shropshire:
Tropea has an academy. Grice: With a
ridiculous name. Shropshire: Accademia
degli Affatigati. Grice: The
fatigued. Shropshire: He reads a
dissertation. Grice: On the virtues of
pagans. Shropshire: And then
apologises. Grice: Memoria apologetica.
A defence brief masquerading as philosophy.
Shropshire: You see, it is like us.
Grice: Like us. Not really. We do not get denounced to the Holy Office.
We get denounced to the Dean.
Shropshire: Yet the mechanism is the same. A young man speaks, an
authority disapproves. Grice: And the
young man writes an apology. In Oxford it is called a revised essay. Shropshire: You are enjoying the Catholic
machinery. Grice: I am enjoying the
clarity of the machinery. England hides its machinery under politeness. Shropshire: You mean fathers. Grice: I mean fathers too. The Italian
biography gives you fathers and institutions with a frankness our biographies
lack. Shropshire: You keep saying
father as if you had one advantage.
Grice: I had an advantage. My father taught me to take rationalism
seriously. Shropshire: Your father
taught you Herbert Spencer. Grice:
Among other sins. Shropshire: My father
taught me nothing of the kind. Grice:
Your father taught you to be Shropshire, which is already a philosophy. Shropshire: Then why did you come to Lit.
Hum. Grice: Scholarship. Shropshire: That is your Midlands
boast. Grice: It is not boast. It is
arithmetic. I came because someone paid for it. Shropshire: And I did not. Grice: Exactly. You came because you were
already destined to. Shropshire:
Destined by whom. Grice: By the
invisible committee that produced you: schooling, accent, expectation, and the
quiet belief that Oxford is where you belong.
Shropshire: That is not clever.
Grice: It is not meant to be clever. It is meant to be true. Shropshire: Galluppi’s four names then,
Ruffa, Barone, Ragno, Santacolomba, are his committee. Grice: Yes. Four local instillers. Shropshire: Instillers. Grice: They pour a habit into him before
Naples pours a degree into him.
Shropshire: And yet he goes to Naples for law. Grice: Because fathers like law. Law looks
safe. Philosophy looks like weather.
Shropshire: And he returns to Tropea and reads theology to his
friends. Grice: Or reads it to
scandalise them. Either way it becomes biography. Shropshire: You call it divertimento. Grice: You called it divertimento. I call it
risky. A divertimento does not summon the Inquisition. Shropshire: He was twenty-four when he
returned, twenty-five when he spoke.
Grice: And already old enough to be held responsible for his sentences. Shropshire: That is the point. You like
responsibility. Grice: I like it in
others. Shropshire: Hardie likes it in
nobody. Grice: Hardie likes it in
Aristotle, and even there with reservations.
Shropshire: So what is Galluppi, really. Philosopher of sorts. Grice: Philosopher of sorts is the correct
English category. It saves us from admiration.
Shropshire: Yet he becomes a canon.
Grice: Italians have a taste for canons. We have a taste for
footnotes. Shropshire: You are jealous
of Tropea. Grice: I am jealous of the
biography. It has better props. An academy called the Affatigati is more
interesting than a College meeting.
Shropshire: You would prefer to be denounced. Grice: No. I would prefer to be taken
seriously by the right people and ignored by the wrong ones. Shropshire: And you think Galluppi was. Grice: He was taken seriously enough to be
denounced. That is a kind of recognition.
Shropshire: You keep coming back to fathers. Grice: Because fathers are the first
institutions. And institutions are what make a man travel. Shropshire: So Galluppi’s father sends him
to Naples. Grice: Perhaps. Or perhaps
Naples is the father in another costume.
Shropshire: And your father sends you to Corpus. Grice: My father paid for me to go, which is
a quieter kind of sending. Shropshire:
And Hardie sends us nowhere. Grice:
Hardie sends us back to our essays, which is worse. Shropshire: Then what is the moral of
Galluppi for us. Grice: That a
philosopher can be made by local men with operatic surnames, by a distant
faculty with the wrong subject, and by an academy with a ridiculous name. Shropshire: And that he can still become a
philosopher. Grice: Yes. Even if he
starts as a jurist. Even if his first public act is an apology. Shropshire: And the four names again. Grice: Ruffa, Barone, Ragno,
Santacolomba. Shropshire: You
remembered. Grice: I remember because I
am fastidious. And by that I imply that I am easily amused by lists. Shropshire: You are implying we should have
four mentors. Grice: No. I am implying
that we already do: Hardie, the syllabus, our fathers, and Oxford itself. Shropshire: That is five. Grice: Oxford always overdoes it. Shropshire: And Galluppi goes to Naples for
the love of it. Grice: Less love than
parental pressure, if you want a father in the picture. Shropshire: You can’t
help yourself. Grice: No. Fathers are
my favourite explanatory device, after implication.Grice: Caro Galluppi, ogni
volta che cerco di capire i segni, mi perdo tra gesti, grida e moti del dito.
Dimmi: la parola è davvero un segno del pensiero, o a volte è solo un modo per
sfuggire al dolore di un esame a Brighton? Galluppi: Grice, credimi, il mio
segno preferito è il gesto della mano quando l’alunno non capisce nulla! Ma tra
segni imitativi, indicatori e figurati, l’unica cosa certa è che ci serve un
po’ di pantomima per sopravvivere a una lezione a Napoli. Grice: Ah, la
pantomima! Da noi in Inghilterra, si rischia che il segno diventi una domanda
filosofica e che nessuno trovi il compagno… “Where are you?” diventa una
metafora esistenziale e l’aula si trasforma in teatro! Galluppi: Grice, alla
fine, il vero segno comune è quello che ci fa ridere insieme, anche se abbiamo
perso il compagno e il senso. Meglio un gemito condiviso che una definizione
troppo seria. Come diceva mia nonna: “Se il segno è arbitrario, almeno che sia
divertente!” Galluppi, Pasquale (1794). Giurisprudenza. Napoli.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Galvano – ossia: Grice e Galvano: la ragione conversazionale
e l’implicatura conversazionale dell’arte naturale. Albino Galvano (Torino, Piemonte). In comparing Grice with G., the
contrast concerns how conversational meaning is grounded either in rational
norms or in the expressive power of gesture and nature–artifice continuities. Galvano’s
aesthetics and philosophy of art treat gesto as a privileged bridge between the
concrete and the abstract: a meaningful act that reveals spirit through
material form, whether in natural expression, artistic making, or culturally
sedimented signs, so that communicative force often resides in the expressive
gesture itself and in its capacity to embody meaning without discursive articulation.
Grice, by contrast, abstracts gesture into a special case of non‑linguistic
communication and explains its significance through the same reason‑governed
framework that applies to speech: by performing a gesture, the agent means that
p insofar as she intends the audience to recognize that intention and reason
from it. Where Galvano emphasizes the quasi‑aesthetic immediacy of gesture and
the continuity between nature, artifice, and understanding, Grice insists that
even the most concrete or “natural” gesture derives its communicative content
from rationally structured intentions and shared expectations. Thus Galvano’s
conversational reason is expressive and interpretive, rooted in lived,
aesthetic disclosure, while Grice’s conversational meaning is normative and
teleological, locating implicature not in the sensuous force of the gesture
itself but in the rational cooperation that makes that force intelligible as
meaning. Grice: “I often use ‘gesto’ when I want to explain communication
teleologically, and so did Cicero! I like Galvano; he has philosophised on
aesthetics, on ‘spirit and blood,’ and on polytheism, citing Sallustio! I don’t
see why Italians are obsessed with art, but Speranza is Italian, so let it be.
Speranza thinks conceptual artists are the only ones – such as Arnatt – worth
analysing. In his more snobbish ways, he thinks to mould the male body was
Pliny’s idea of art – bronze statuary of the ‘nudo maschile’ – Painting comes
only second or third, and only because of the desegno – i.e . the line of
beauty, which is – as shape, where ‘kallon’ resided for the Greeks!” --” il
lavoro svolto per ricordare l'artista torinese G. è stato importante. La Fondazione Amendola ha ritenuto opportuno offrire alla città di Torino e
non solo, la possibilità di accedere gratuitamente all'incontro con
l’opera artistica e intellettuale di una delle figure di spicco del
panorama artistico italiano della seconda metà del novecento. L'iniziativa, di
rilievo nazionale, ha permesso di raccogliere artisti e intellettuali di
tutta Italia che hanno collaborato con G. e che tuttora ricoprono un
ruolo fondamentale nella produzione culturale del nostro Paese. Cerabona
Presidente della Fondazione Amendola Studi, Convegni, Ricerche della
Fondazione Amendola e dell’Associazione Lucana Levi Presidente
Fotografie delle opere PROSPERO CERABONA CORONGI Curatore mostra e
catalogo Direttore Responsabile MANTOVANI CERABONA Scritti di
Redazione MANTOVANI, MOTTO, BOTTA, ADRIANO OLIVIERI DOMENICO CERABONA,
FERRARI Progetto ed allestimento MANTOVANI MOTTO, IL RINNOVAMENTO
olio su tela 80x80 cm arte naturale, Gallupi, Peirce, Grice. By
uttering x (gestus), U means that p” gesto, gestus, Grice’s use of gesture. il
concreto, l’astratto, Sraffa’s gesture. Il gesto di Sraffa, l’implicatura di Sraffa. implicatura concreta. Grice:
Galvano, sai, ogni volta che rifletto sulla distinzione tra “naturale” e
“non-naturale”, mi accorgo che il tuo modo di parlare di “natura” e “artifizio”
ha una eleganza tutta italiana. Lo trovo assai più chiaro e meno arzigogolato
delle mie definizioni inglesi! Galvano: Caro Grice, è vero: in Italia, l’arte,
che sia natura o artifizio, è sempre vista come un gesto che svela qualcosa di
profondo. Da Sallustio a Plinio, ci piace pensare che il bello nasca
dall’incontro fra ciò che è dato e ciò che è creato! Grice: Mi affascina il
modo in cui il tuo concetto di “gesto” riesce a legare il concreto e
l’astratto: è quasi una implicatura viva. In Inghilterra, non ci fermiamo
abbastanza a percepire il gesto, e perdiamo la sua forza comunicativa. Galvano:
Grice, ciò che hai detto mi lusinga. Credo che arte naturale e artifizio siano
due facce della stessa medaglia: il gesto, come dicevi tu, è un ponte tra idee
e materia. E se il gesto di Sraffa può diventare filosofia, allora la
conversazione tra natura e artifizio sarà sempre aperta! Galvano, Albino
(1940). Arte e conoscenza. Torino: Edizioni di Filosofia.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gamba – ossia: Grice e Gamba: la ragione conversazionale. Bartolomeo Gamba (Bassano del Grappa, Veneto). In comparing Grice
with G., the contrast again lies in the shift from a rhetorically embodied
conception of conversational reason to a normatively articulated one. Gamba,
through his recovery and republication of Guidotto da Bologna’s Fiore di
rettorica and the vernacular Rhetorica ad Herennium tradition, understands
conversational rationality as inseparable from the art of proffering: meaning
is conveyed through voice quality, bodily movement, facial expression, and
gesture, all governed by classical virtues such as prudence, justice,
fortitude, and measure, and oriented toward advising, praising, or blaming
effectively within civic life. On this view, the handwave that stops a cart,
the furrowed brow, or the firm voice are not ancillary to meaning but
constitutive of it, since rational persuasion is transmitted through a
calibrated fusion of verbal and non‑verbal signs. Grice shares Gamba’s
attention to gesture and bodily movement but reinterprets them within a more
abstract framework: a handwave or frown counts as meaningful only insofar as it
is embedded in a structure of recognized intentions and rational expectations
between speaker and audience. Where Gamba’s conversational reason is grounded
in the rhetorical tradition’s practical arts of counsel and display, Grice’s
theory of conversational meaning explains even those arts by appeal to reason‑governed
cooperation, treating gestures and tones as vehicles whose communicative force
ultimately derives from implicature and shared norms rather than from
rhetorical tradition itself. Grice: “I love G.! Profferere “My ‘utter’!
movimenti del corpo My handwave, the policeman stopping a car with it, e della
deva del voltoL My frown, my cutting soomeone in thre street!” Il Fiore di
rettorica: Guidotto da Bologna’s most famous and only credited work. a
vernacular Italian adaptation of classical rhetorical theory. re-discovered and
republished by G. His primary source is the Rhetorica ad Herennium, a
manual of rhetoric attributed to CICERONE in the context of other contemporary
Italian volgarizzamenti, such as those by LATINI. a landmark publication
revitalised interest in Italian vernacular rhetoric. rescues a foundational
text of the Italian rhetorical tradition from obscurity. It serves as a primary
resource scholars studying the development of the Italian language and the art
of speaking effectively. a significant contribution to the knowledge base of
Italian civilization, making a formerly rare artifact accessible to the
public. While G.'s edition is a breakthrough, that by
SPERONI -- highlight that G. relies on a specific branch of the
tradition that differs from other manuscripts, allowing researchers to trace
how Guidotto’s adaptation of pseudo- CICERONE’s’Rhetorica ad Herennium
evolves. Utterer: profferitore voci voce
ferma molle quelle cose che fanno bisogno al consigliatore di sapere quanti
modi sono da consigliare e quali in che modo si trova la cagione della cosa di
che si consiglia come si conosce l’utilità della cosa di che si consiglia
quando l’utilità della cosa, sopra alla quale si piglia consiglio, è che sia
più sicura come si può consigliare quando l’utilità della cosa sopra la quale
si piglia consiglio è che stia bene e dirittamente, per quante vie si può
consigliare per quanti modi si consiglia per via di prudenzia giustizia
fortezza misura quando l’utilità della cosa sopra alla quale si piglia
consiglio j è che sia lodata dalle genti come si può consigliare per quante vie
e modi si può dire bene e male di alcuna persona di che può essere alcuno
lodato di prudenzia per quanti modi si può lodare di giustizia per via di
fortezza misura. Grice: Caro Gamba, ogni volta che vedo un vigile sventolare la
mano, mi domando se stia profferendo una teoria o solo cercando di salvare la
giornata! In Inghilterra, per fermare una macchina basta un cenno… ma nessuno
capisce mai se è un gesto filosofico o solo disperazione. Gamba: Ah, Grice, in
Italia il movimento del corpo è come il condimento sulla pasta: senza, manca il
sapore! Noi adoriamo profferire, sia con la voce sia con la fronte aggrottata –
Guidotto da Bologna ci insegna che un buon consiglio parte sempre da un gesto
deciso (ma mai troppo teatrale, altrimenti si rischia il carnevale!). Grice:
Gamba, mi piace il tuo stile! Da noi, la retorica si studia a tavolino, ma voi
italiani la fate anche col movimento delle sopracciglia. Forse dovrei
aggiungere una massima: “Non c’è implicatura senza almeno un pizzico di
mimica!” Gamba: Grice, hai colto il punto! In Italia, la conversazione è come
una partita a carte: prudenza, giustizia, fortezza e misura... ma se non
sorridi almeno una volta, perdi anche il jolly. E poi, diciamolo, tra una
implicatura e un consiglio, ci scappa sempre una battuta! Gamba, Bartolomeo
(1805). Della letteratura italiana. Venezia: Albrizzi.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gangale – ossia: Grice e Gangale: la ragione conversazionale
e l’implicatura conversazionale del dia-letto e la dia-lettica – Giuseppe
Tommaso Saverio Domenico Gangale (Cirò Marina, Crotone, Calabria). In comparing Grice with G., the contrast centers on the locus of
conversational rationality: for Gangale it is distributed across dialects,
idiolects, and ethnolects within a semiotic–dialectical field, whereas for
Grice it resides in the normative structure of rational cooperation that
underwrites mutual understanding across such variations. Gangale,
drawing on Hjelmslevian glossematics and a richly stratified semiotics, treats
meaning as emerging from systematic oppositions—expression versus content,
system versus process, denotative versus connotative—situated within concrete
linguistic communities, so that implicature and understanding are deeply shaped
by dialectal shifts, cultural identity, and the movement from idiolect to
dialect. Grice does not deny this plurality of linguistic forms, but he
abstracts from it: dialectal variation and shifts of code affect interpretation
only because interlocutors assume a shared, reason-governed framework in which
speakers select utterances to be intelligible, relevant, and purposive to
others. Where Gangale’s conversational reason foregrounds the socio-semiotic
dynamics of language varieties and their dialectical interrelations, Grice’s
theory explains how implicature survives such variability by appeal to
intentions and rational expectations that transcend particular dialects. Thus
Gangale situates conversational meaning within a layered semiotics of
linguistic life, while Grice offers a unifying pragmatic account of how reason
governs conversation across differences of dia-letto and dia-lettica alike.
Grice: “I distinguish three brands of dialectic in Athens – Socrates’s,
Plato’s, and Aristotle’s – never mind that it all originates in what Italians
call ‘Velia,’ south of Rome! I like G.; the fact that I taught for years
in front of the martyrs memorial helps! I like G. Of course, the Italians adore
him because he gets Danish citizenship, and because he understands Hjemlslev as
nobody does! G. is practical; he is into his ethnic minority. He forms good
philosophical bond with Gobetti, against Croce and Gentile. It is obvious that
those who know the G. of the Albanian studies won’t make a connection with his
fight for protetantism and his adventures with Italian philosophy, with Doxa
and Conscientia, but he got his doctorate and was able to immerse in
Hjelmslev’s glottology like nobody else does!” Si laurea a Firenze colla probabilita rivoluzione protestante
protestantesimo dio straniero Marca utopia. semiotics a hierarchy
split into dichotomies expression-content, system-process,
denotative/non-denotative, metasemiotics/connotative-semiotics. Semiotics,
a field of study in which we formulate a method for analysing a signifying
phenomenon, comprehensive synchronic panchronic cultural connotators for a
comprehensive linguistic analysis. These two perspectives are compatible in
glossematics and are even seen to be complementary, to the benefit of
semiotics. il dia-letto e la dia-lettica, idiolect, dialect, ethno-lect,
idio-letto, dia-letto, ethno-letto, dall’idioletto al dia-letto. Grice: Caro Gangale, quando sento parlare di dia-lettica e dia-letto, mi
viene in mente Oxford nelle giornate di pioggia: ogni professore ha il suo
accento, e se non capisci il dialetto rischi di prendere il tè con la persona
sbagliata! Gangale: Ah, Grice, in Italia il dialetto è come il parmigiano sulla
pasta: se non lo usi, ti accusano di essere forestiero. Tra idioletto,
etnoletto e dia-letto, mi sento a volte come un turista in casa propria! Grice:
Gangale, tu che hai studiato Hjelmslev meglio di chiunque, dimmi: se cambi
dialetto a metà frase, l’implicatura diventa come la pizza con l’ananas? Cioè,
tutti sorridono, ma nessuno la digerisce davvero! Gangale: Grice, proprio così!
In Calabria diciamo che la lingua è come il vino: più varia, più si ride. Ma
attenzione, che tra dia-lettica e dia-letto, rischiamo di finire in una
discussione infinita, come quei pranzi domenicali dove si parla di tutto…
tranne che del dessert! Gangale, Giuseppe Tommaso Saverio Domenico (1910). Il
pensiero filosofico in Calabria. Catanzaro: Tipografia Municipale.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Garbo – ossia: Grice e Garbo: la ragione conversazionale e
l’implicatura conversazionale e la fisiologia dell’amore Aldobrandino del Garbo (Firenze, Toscana). In comparing Grice with G., the contrast lies between a
medieval-Aristotelian integration of reason, passion, and physiology and a
modern pragmatic reconstruction of meaning as rationally governed interaction. Garbo,
trained in Bologna’s medical–philosophical milieu, explains love, friendship,
and desire through the interplay of appetitus sensitivus and reason, treating
speech, poetry, and interpersonal recognition as expressions of embodied
passions that move the will and shape understanding; conversational meaning
here is inseparable from the physiological and affective conditions of human
life, and implicature often arises from what is felt, suffered, or desired
rather than from what is coolly intended. Grice, while deeply attentive to the
historical and literary richness of talk about love and friendship,
deliberately brackets physiology and passion in his theory of conversation:
implicature is not grounded in eros or appetite but in the rational
expectations speakers and hearers bring to cooperative exchange. Where Garbo
sees love-talk as a site where reason negotiates with passion, illness, and
bodily disposition, Grice treats such talk as intelligible only insofar as
interlocutors can recognize intentions and reason about what is meant beyond
what is said. Thus Garbo’s conversational reason is thick, historically
embedded, and affect-laden, while Grice’s reason‑governed conversational
meaning is thin, normative, and abstract, explaining even discourse about love
and friendship not by physiology but by the rational structure that makes
mutual understanding possible. Grice: “Aristotle found friendship a puzzle, and
so do I! love, amore, amicizia. I like G.; for one I like Firenze, for
another I like a Renaissance man – I’m one! G. is extremely interesting at a
time when physis did mean ‘nature’ – the physicist and the physician were the
natural philosophers! At Oxford Transnatural philosophy was created against
Natural Philosophy, G. made the greatest comment on “Love unrequited” by
G&S – by focusing on a ditty by Cavalcanti – Boccaccio loved the
pretentious prose by G. on ‘eros,’ ‘amore,’ and ‘cupidus’! So here is charming
Cavalcanti and his charaming love lyrics, Donna mi preigha, and G, in his worst
lizio jargon destroying it. I deal with Blake, love that never told can be, and
the best thing is to leave poetry to poets, Austin rebuffing Nowell-Smith’s
inability to understand Donne. The physiology of love is beyond philosophy. But
in philosophy, unlike any other discipline, we respect history, and the
longitudinal history of philosophy ensures that every philosopher will be
familiar with the idiocies Plato makes Socrates says in Convito about cupido,
cupidine, amore, eros, erote, anterote, and Marte, qua symbol of maleness. In
Italy they are concerned about astrology. Since the future queen of Naples had
been born under the House of Marte, she will possibly be a whore!” Si laurea a Bologna sotto Alderotti. Insegna a Bologna. Saltuariamente si
recasse a Bologna nonostante la scomunica. commento su una parte felt, an
interpretation which develops the potential in the understanding of the role of
the will. A
transition seems to take place in the years of the Decameron. Grice: appetitus, appetitus sensitivo spiegatura dell’amore in termine
aristotelichi amare sentire patico fornicazione latino/volgare Boccaccio
Petrarca Alighieri Cavalcanti de militia complexionis diversae eros amore
malattia lizio passione ragione appetite sensitive amore re-cognosenza da parte
dell’amato dell’amore dell’amante via senso? Marte self-love other-love amore proprio
amore a se stesso amore all’altro passione. Grice: Garbo, sai, ogni volta che
rifletto sull’amore e l’amicizia, mi trovo in un labirinto filosofico degno di
Aristotele! Eppure, la tua prospettiva sulla fisiologia dell’amore mi
incuriosisce molto: in Inghilterra ne parliamo poco, mentre voi italiani lo
intrecciate con la storia, la poesia e persino l’astrologia! Garbo: Caro Grice,
è vero: da noi, amore e amicizia sono più che concetti filosofici, sono
esperienze che attraversano la carne e lo spirito. Da Cavalcanti a Boccaccio,
abbiamo sempre pensato che il sentimento sia un ponte tra appetito sensitivo e
ragione, e che la passione – talvolta malattia, talvolta virtù – abbia un ruolo
centrale nella nostra vita. Grice: Mi affascina il modo in cui la vostra
tradizione riesce a dare dignità filosofica persino alla fisiologia dell’amore.
Da noi spesso ci fermiamo alla teoria, ma la vostra capacità di intrecciare
storia, poesia e sentimento rende il discorso sull’amore davvero ricco. Forse
dovremmo imparare a dare più spazio al pathos, non solo al logos! Garbo: Hai
ragione, Grice. In Italia, lasciamo che il sentimento illumini la riflessione.
La filosofia, soprattutto quella sull’amore, deve essere dialogo tra passione e
ragione. E se qualche volta siamo troppo lirici o astrologici, pazienza! Come
si dice da noi: “Amore non è bello se non è litigarello.” Garbo, Aldobrandino
del (1300). De decoratione. Firenze: Officina Medicea.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gargani – ossia: Grice e Gargani: la ragione conversazionale
e l’implicatura conversazionale d’Eurialo e Niso; ovvero, dell’empatia. Aldo Giorgio Gargani (Genova, Liguria). Grice’s account of
reason‑governed conversational meaning and Gargani’s development of “ragione
conversazionale” converge on the idea that understanding in dialogue exceeds
what is explicitly said, but they differ in emphasis and philosophical
temperament: for Grice, implicature is primarily a rational, intention‑based
mechanism grounded in cooperation, shared expectations, and the recognition of
communicative intentions, so that conversation is governed by principles that
make it possible to mean more than one says without abandoning clarity or
normativity; Gargani, shaped by his Pisa training and his sustained engagement
with Wittgenstein, Pears, and the philosophy of complexity, reorients this
Gricean framework toward empathy, shared organization, and lived experience,
reading implicature not merely as an inferential product of maxims but as an
expression of a deeper, narrative and ethical coordination among speakers,
exemplified by the figure of Eurialus and Nisus as a paradigm of mutual
understanding without full explicitness; where Grice stresses rational
accountability, cancellability, and the discipline of intention (summed up, as
he liked to say, by Cicero’s condivisio), Gargani foregrounds the role of
contingency, rare events, and the constructive power of dialogue in shaping
common sense and collective meaning, thus extending implicature from a theory
of communicative reasoning to a broader philosophy of shared life and
intellectual courage in which saying, not saying, and understanding are bound
together by empathy as much as by reason. Grice: “Some – especially a Taffy At
Queen’s and his tutee – like Vitters, but Moore ain’t my Main either!” --
Grice: “There is a word that Cicero uses that quite summarises my views on
conversation: condivisio! I like G.; many of
his essays are pretty interesting: he’s written on the ‘sense’ of ‘true,’ and
on la frasse infinita – which according to Griceian principles, must rely on
implicature, since it involves a communicational impossibility!” -- «È un fatto
che gli uomini hanno prodotto assai più cose di quanto siano propensi ad
ammettere; ma ciò che essi hanno eretto nella forma di costruzioni concettuali
elevate e sublimi, come se fossero separate dal caso e dal disordine,
corrisponde ad un uso che essi hanno fatto della propria vita.” Si laurea a
PISA sotto BARONE. Studia Pears. filosofia della lingua, estetica,
epistemologia scrittura filosofica narrativa, come in Sguardo e destino L'altra
storia Il testo del tempo” Esperienza Il sapere senza fondamenti. La condotta
intellettuale come strutturazione dell'esperienza commune” (Lo
stupore e il caso” (Il coraggio di essere Stili di analisi” “L'organizzazione
condivisa. Comunicazione, invenzione, etica” (Guerini, Milano); “Il pensiero
raccontato” “Una donna a presente e invenzione del futuro/Il ruolo della
diversità e degli eventi rari Conclusione Possibilità e realtà tra fisica e
biologia di Angelo Marinucci Introduzione/Fisica classica La meccanica
quantistica La biologia Scienza e filosofia della complessità: Studi in memoria
di G., a cura di: Marinucci, Salvia, Bellotti, Carocci, Roma, Il volume
raccoglie i contributi, ampiamente elaborati, presentati al convegno
Possibilità al di là della determinazione. Matematica, fisica e filosofia della
complessità, tenutosi all’Università di Pisa in memoria di G.. Del filosofo
sono ben noti gli interessi filosofici per la questione, nata nella fisica
moderna e in altri saperi, dell’emergere – in sistemi complessi – di
possibilità che vanno, irriducibilmente, al di là della determinazione. Eurialo
e Niso; ovvero, dell’empatia, scambio, organisazzione condivisa communicazione
implicatura come condivisa empatia pears Mcguinness ragione Treccani. Vitters. St John’s SCR, Michaelmas 1966. A conversation. Hacker: Mr
Grice. Grice: If you insist on it. The College insists on it more than I
do. Hacker: I’ve just come from town. I
brought you something to look at.
Grice: A bill, I take it. Or worse, a book. Hacker: A book. Gargani.
Wittgenstein. Grice: Ah. Vitters,
then. Hacker: I beg your pardon. Grice: Austin pronounced it that way, and I
have never recovered. Hacker: You don’t
sound as if you approve. Grice: I
approve of many things. I merely have a small allergy to canonisation. Hacker: It’s from Firenze. La Nuova Italia.
1966. Grice: La Nuova Italia. That
sounds like a newspaper and behaves like a publishing house. Hacker: Gargani is not a newspaper. He’s
serious. Grice: I’m told newspapers are
sometimes serious too, if you catch them on the wrong day. Hacker: You don’t like Wittgenstein. Grice: That is too explicit. If you are
implying that, why say it. Hacker: Then
let me imply it differently. You list him with Bosanquet and Wollaston. Grice: I list many people. Lists are not
tribunals. Hacker: They look like
tribunals to the listed. Grice: And by
that I imply that the listed are vain.
Hacker: Gargani treats him as central. He reads him as the hinge for a
new sort of philosophical writing.
Grice: A new sort. Oxford has always preferred the old sort: numbered
propositions and boys who can be made to defend them. Hacker: Gargani isn’t doing numbered
propositions. Grice: No. He is doing
what Italians do when they get bored with numbers: they tell a story and call
it method. Hacker: You’re being
unfair. Grice: I’m being English. There
is a difference. Hacker: He ties
Wittgenstein to experience, empathy, forms of life, shared organisation. Grice: Empathy is what people invoke when
they don’t want to specify an inference.
Hacker: You think he is avoiding the hard work. Grice: I think he is relocating it. He is
doing ethics by talking about language, which is not the worst trick. Hacker: He also engages Pears. Grice: Pears is always being engaged. It is
his natural state. Hacker: He studied
at Pisa under Barone. Grice: Pisa. That
is already a different weather system from Oxford. Hacker: You keep making Italy into weather.
Grice: It is safer than making it into metaphysics. Hacker: He writes about Eurialus and Nisus
as a paradigm of mutual understanding.
Grice: That is a Virgilian way of doing pragmatics. Hacker: And you object. Grice: I don’t object. I merely note that
Oxford would rather have Marmaduke Bloggs than Nisus. Hacker: You say this to provoke. Grice: I say it to see whether you notice
I’ve said it. Hacker: I’ve noticed. I
still like Wittgenstein. Grice: I can see that you do. It’s in the way you hold
the book, as if it were a passport.
Hacker: Perhaps it is. Grice:
You have lived in too many places, then. Passports become philosophy if you let
them. Hacker: I lived in Haifa for a
time. Grice: Haifa. That will do
it. Hacker: It makes Wittgenstein feel
less exotic. Austrian, religious, foreign, yet oddly at home in English. Grice: Ah. The old romance of the foreigner
who becomes more English than the English.
Hacker: Like your own conversion of Anscombe into an Englishwoman, you
mean. Grice: That is a cheap shot.
Hacker: It’s a fair one. Grice: She did do the hard work of translating him
into our idiom, yes. And she is Professor, if the University is being sensible.
Hacker: Gargani, though, isn’t Austrian.
Grice: Exactly. So your Haifa explanation will not quite do. Hacker: Then why do I like him. Grice: Because he is offering you a way of
reading Wittgenstein that feels like a life rather than a set of
reminders. Hacker: And you think that
is a weakness. Grice: I think it is a
temptation. Temptations are not always weaknesses. Sometimes they are your
curriculum. Hacker: Then why your
resistance. Grice: Because I have watched the enemies I was trained to resist
become the canon with a vengeance.
Hacker: Enemies. Grice: That is
also too explicit. If you are implying that, why say it. Hacker: Then I’ll say it less explicitly.
You’re worried you’re becoming a reactionary.
Grice: I’m worried I’m becoming a footnote. Hacker: Gargani makes Wittgenstein central.
You make conversation central. Grice: I
make rational accountability central. Conversation is only the habitat. Hacker: Gargani says conversation is also
empathy. Grice: Empathy may be the
background condition, but it isn’t the mechanism. That is my fussiness. Hacker: You called yourself fastidious
earlier. Grice: I know I can be
fastidious. And by that I imply that I may be wrong. Hacker: What do you want
me to do, then. Not read him. Grice: Read him. I am not a censor. I am merely a
nuisance. Hacker: You are also the senior tutor. Grice: Senior only by age, not by
virtue. Hacker: We should discuss the
division of labour. Grice: Yes. Mabbott
has left you his moral and political territory like a small kingdom. Hacker: And you keep the lower divisions. Grice: I keep the boys who think “logic” is
a kind of gymnasium. Hacker: And the pastoral duties. Grice: Yes. The College
has discovered that philosophers are cheap chaplains. Hacker: Two tutors now.
Division of labour. Grice: The division
is simple. You will do the whole thing.
Hacker: And you. Grice: I shall
relieve you of the burden by offering comments. Hacker: That is not relieving. Grice: It is Oxford relief. We relieve by
adding. Hacker: Will you lecture
less. Grice: I will lecture as much as
the University insists and as little as my conscience permits. Hacker: And what about Wittgenstein on the
reading list. Grice: Put him on. But do
not let him swallow the rest. Hacker:
He will. Grice: Only if you feed
him. Hacker: You keep calling him
Vitters. Grice: It is a small refusal
to be reverent. Hacker: You do it to protect yourself. Grice: Naturally. Reverence is
expensive. Hacker: And Gargani. Grice: Gargani can stay too. Let the
Italians have their way of being serious. It may even teach us something.
Hacker: Such as. Grice: That what is not said may be understood not only by
inference but by sympathy. Hacker: That
sounds like a concession. Grice: It is
a concession with conditions. And by that I imply that it is not a full
concession. Hacker: You’re worried the canon is changing. Grice: The canon always changes. I’m worried
I’m staying still. Hacker: Then walk.
Grice: I do. It is the only exercise Oxford approves, apart from rowing and
disapproval. Hacker: Shall we plan the
term. Grice: Yes. You take Vitters.
I’ll take the boys who think Aristotle is a brand of cigarette. Hacker: And if someone brings you Gargani
and asks why empathy matters. Grice: I
will say the weather has been lovely for this time of year. Hacker: That’s evasion. Grice: That’s charity. Hacker: You are implying something. Grice: Of
course. Hacker: And you won’t say
it. Grice: If I said it, it wouldn’t be
an implicature.Grice: Caro Gargani, ti confesso che ogni volta che penso
all’implicatura, mi viene in mente il coraggio di Eurialo e Niso: comunicare
senza dire tutto, ma capirsi lo stesso. In fondo, la vera conversazione non è
sempre anche un po’ avventura? Gargani: Grice, hai colto nel segno! La
conversazione è un ponte sospeso tra due rive: ci si lancia, magari si
traballa, ma senza un po’ di empatia si casca giù come certi filosofi alle
prime armi. E come diceva tua nonna, meglio una parola condivisa che cento
taciute! Grice: Appunto! Eppure, in Inghilterra, tanti preferiscono il
silenzio, come se parlare troppo facesse spuntare le ortiche in salotto. Invece
voi italiani fate delle parole un’arte, e persino il caso diventa un’occasione
di festa. Forse dovrei importare un po’ della vostra “organizzazione condivisa”
anche a Oxford! Gargani: Caro Grice, sarebbe un colpo di teatro! Ma non temere:
basta una buona conversazione, un pizzico di umorismo e magari un caffè, e
anche la filosofia più astratta si trasforma in esperienza vissuta. Come
direbbe il mio barista: parlare è umano, fraintendere è filosofico! – Gargani,
Aldo Giorgio (1966). Wittgenstein. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Garin – ossia: Grice e Garin: la ragione conversazionale e
l’implicatura conversazionale del rinascimento. Eugenio Antonio Garin (Rieti, Lazio). Grice’s theory of
reason‑governed conversational meaning and G.’s historical account of
Renaissance intellectual culture meet on the idea that conversation is a
rational, normative practice, but they diverge sharply in method, scope, and
philosophical intent: Grice develops implicature as a formal-pragmatic mechanism
internal to communication itself, governed by shared intentions, cooperation,
and rational accountability among speakers conceived as persons, where meaning
emerges from what is mutually recognized as said and meant within a
conversational exchange; Garin, by contrast, approaches what may be called
conversational reason genealogically and culturally, reading Renaissance
humanism as a long, civil conversation among rhetoricians, philosophers,
scientists, and moralists, in which meaning, persuasion, and implication are embedded
in historical practices of eloquence, civic life, and humanist education rather
than articulated as explicit rules or maxims, so that implicature appears not
as a technical device but as the lived operation of rhetoric, allusion, and
shared intellectual horizons; where Grice abstracts from history to secure a
universal account of rational communication, Garin insists on the longitudinal
unity of Italian thought, seeing reason as cultivated through humanistic
discourse, Ciceronian rhetoric, and the humus of culture that shapes how
humans, as Homo sapiens before becoming philosophically “persons,” understand
one another; in this sense, Grice’s conversational rationality can be read as a
modern, analytic humanism of communicative norms, while Garin’s Renaissance-oriented
work shows how such norms historically arose within concrete traditions of
learning and civic speech, making Gricean implicature appear, retrospectively,
as the formal echo of a much older humanist practice of meaning beyond what is strictly
said. Grice: “I only knew, and I only formed an interest, in one short period
in the history of philosophy: post-war Oxford philosophy. G.’s interests have a wider scope! storia della filosofia. G. is a
serious student of what we may call the longitudinal, rather than latitudinal,
unity of Italian philosophy! If ever there is one! Don’t expect philosophical
insight from G.. He is at most an amanuensis. But like Gentile, it is is
helpful, if you are into minor philosophers, or minor figures, to go through
the indexes of his many compilations. As with Gentile’s Storia della filosofia
italiana, G.’s is just as boring. G. makes it more difficult in that he uses
two or three words which we don’t use at Oxford: ‘pensiero’ for philosophy,
‘intellectual’ (‘intelletuali italiani del novecento’) and ‘culture’ (cultura
italiana del ottocento’). By these monickers, he is attempting to include as
philosophers people who we should not!” La cultura filosofica del rinascimento italiano.” L’umanesimo italiano”
Grice is Lit. Hum. Oxon, so I know. Si laurea a Firenze sotto Limentani.
Insegna a Firenze. Pico: vita e dottrina”; “Gl’illuministi Moralisti; “Il
rinascimento ITALIANO”; “L'Umanesimo ITALIANO”; “Cronache di FILOSOFIA
ITALIANA”; “La filosofia nel Rinascimento ITALIANO”; “La cultura ITALIANA”;
“Scienza e vita civile nel Rinascimento ITALIANO”; “Storia della FILOSOFIA
ITALIANA”; “FILOSOFI ITALIANI”; “ “L’Ermetismo del Rinascimento”; “Gli editori
ITALIANI”; “La cultura del Rinascimento”. lincei cicerone umanista retorica
castelli le griceianisme est un humanisme!” humus umano homo sapiens sapiens
umano vs. person sapientia. Grice: Ah, Garin, sai, ogni tanto mi sorprendo a
pensare che Oxford — Vadum Boum, come la chiamano i latinisti — avrebbe bisogno
di un vero storico della filosofia, proprio come Firenze ha avuto te! In
Italia, e specialmente in Toscana, la tradizione filosofica è viva,
stratificata e raccontata con una profondità che noi, a Oxford, spesso ci
sogniamo. Garin: Caro Grice, mi lusinga sentire queste tue parole! In effetti,
la storia della filosofia italiana è un mosaico ricco di voci, pensieri e
umanità. Ho sempre creduto che raccontare il pensiero dei nostri filosofi sia
come coltivare un humus umano per le generazioni future. Grice: Già, il vostro "humus
umano" è qualcosa che invidio! Mi piacerebbe che anche a Oxford si potesse
parlare di “pensiero” e “cultura” con la stessa ampiezza, includendo figure
minori e intelletuali come fai tu. Il vostro modo di vedere la filosofia è
molto più inclusivo e, se posso dirlo, più umano. Garin: Hai ragione, Grice.
Forse il segreto sta proprio nel guardare la filosofia come una lunga
conversazione tra uomini e idee, dove anche i dettagli minori possono
illuminare un’epoca. Sarebbe bello vedere Oxford abbracciare questa visione,
perché alla fine la storia della filosofia è storia della vita civile. Garin,
Eugenio Antonio (1937). Medioevo e Rinascimento. Bari: Laterza.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Garroni – ossia: Grice e Garroni: la ragione conversazionale
e l’implicatura conversazionale di Pinocchio. Emilio Garroni (Roma, Lazio). Grice’s theory of reason‑governed
conversational meaning and Emilio Garroni’s readings of language, lying, and
sense—most vividly crystallized in Garroni’s analyses of Pinocchio—intersect on
the idea that meaning arises from rational norms rather than from mere semantic
content, yet they diverge in philosophical register and aim: for Grice,
conversational implicature is a calculable, intention‑based product of
speakers’ rational cooperation, where maxims such as sincerity can be flouted
in systematic ways that listeners are expected to recognize, as when
Pinocchio’s lies violate the maxim of quality while remaining communicatively
intelligible; Garroni adopts this Gricean insight but reworks it within a
broader semiotic, aesthetic, and epistemological horizon, treating Pinocchio not
simply as a case of maxim‑flouting but as an emblem of semantic crisis,
indeterminacy, and paradox inherent in all linguistic use, where lying exposes
the structural openness of meaning rather than a local pragmatic maneuver;
while Grice seeks to preserve rational control and accountability in
conversation despite indeterminacy, Garroni emphasizes that such indeterminacy
is not a defect but a constitutive feature of sense itself, grounded in
perception, imagination, and judgment, so that implicature becomes inseparable
from the aesthetic–noetic dimension of experience; in this way, Garroni extends
Gricean conversational reason beyond analytic pragmatics into a philosophy of
sense in which saying, meaning, misleading, and understanding form a dynamic
continuum, and Pinocchio’s lies reveal not only how we communicate rationally,
but how language, ethics, and imagination jointly construct our horizon of
sense. Grice: “Pinocchio flouts the maxim of sincerity!” conversational maxim.
I like G.; he writes very Griceianly: on lying, on Pinocchio, on semiotics, on
Kant – ‘quasi-Kant’ --, and on sense perception (‘senso e paradosso’,
‘immagine, figura, communicazione!” Insegna a Roma.
La crisi semantica. Croce, Critica della facoltà di giudizio (l’estetico) ed
epistemologiche (il noetico). Cura Mannoni, Brandi,.Cura Benedetto,
Bottari, Melis, Fieschi, Vacchi, Greco L’estetica è una filosofia
non speciale il cui compito non si limita allo studio dell’espressione
artistica, bello, arte, natura, ma ad una costruzione del mondo sull'esperienza
del senso sensibile, sentire, sensate. Ciò che va rivendicata è la portata
iudicativa e non solo volitiva della critica, che trascende lo stato empirico e
vivono operanti nel meglio degl’indirizzi inconsapevoli. L’orizzonte di senso. Il
mito negativo Semiotica ed estetica. L'eterogeneo della lingua e la lingua
cinematografica uno e bino Estetica epistemologia. lingua Senso e paradosso
estetica, filosofia non speciale Uno sguardo-attraverso” mentare e mentire
altro dall'arte. Senso e storia dell'estetica: Interpretare Il testo Istruzioni
per l'uso, Critica della facoltà di giudizio” Immagine e figura” pubblicati
negativo, nell’esclusione che principi e metodi possano essere qualcosa
di assoluto e unilaterale, si ispirino poi alla indeterminatezza Ciò pare
plausibile se essa fa emergere più nettamente la coscienza implicita che
ogni nostro uso della lingua non è solo un uso particolare ma contiene
una componente di indeterminatezza che lo fa essere paradossalmente proprio quell’uso
e permette di descriverlo proprio come quell’uso determinato nello
stesso uso effettivo, in tutti i sensi. contributo etico e politico,
L’indeterminatezza INDETERMINACY OF IMPLICATURE semantica implicatura di
Pinocchio Sinn *not* via Latin cognate sentire senso Do not multiply senses
mentire mentare meinen mean messagio message semiotic sender recipientemittente
mittente, recipiente emission utterance emitire utter out ex-press Lorenzini.
Grice: Garroni, ogni volta che penso a Pinocchio e alla sua abilità di “sgusciare”
fuori dalla verità, mi chiedo se Lorenzini abbia letto la mia massima di
sincerità! In fondo, Pinocchio è il re dell’implicatura conversazionale: dice
una cosa, ne intende un’altra, e nel mezzo ci cresce il naso. Garroni: Caro
Grice, Pinocchio è una metafora perfetta per la crisi semantica: ogni bugia è
un piccolo paradosso della lingua! D’altronde, chi non ha mai mentito almeno
una volta per salvarsi dalla fata o dalla scuola? Grice: Se avessi avuto
Pinocchio nei miei seminari a Oxford, sarebbe stato il caso studio ideale.
Avrebbe confuso Strawson e fatto ridere Austin… Ma forse avrebbe anche
insegnato a tutti che l’uso della lingua è sempre un po’ indeterminato: tra il
“mentire” e il “mentare”, c’è tanto spazio per il senso. Garroni: Grice, dici bene!
Pinocchio ci ricorda che ogni comunicazione è una danza tra emittente e
destinatario: a volte il messaggio arriva dritto, altre volte si perde tra le
bugie e il paradosso. Ma senza un po’ di indeterminatezza, la conversazione
sarebbe piatta come un pezzo di legno… e Pinocchio non sarebbe mai diventato un
vero bambino! Garroni, Emilio (1964). La crisi semantica delle arti. Roma:
Officina Edizioni.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Garrucci – ossia: Grice e Garrucci: sul ‘stress’ a Roma ed
Oxford. Raffaele Garrucci (Napoli, Campania): sul ‘stress’ a Roma ed
Oxford. Grice
and G. converge on a strikingly similar insight about meaning as something
governed by rational uptake rather than mechanical rule-following, but they
approach it from different scholarly traditions: Garrucci as a philologist and
epigrapher attentive to how accentual marks and stress-functioning signs in
Roman inscriptions mediate understanding beyond literal letters, and Grice as a
philosopher of language analyzing how conversational meaning arises from
intentional yet non-codifiable features such as stress, accent, and prosody.
For Garrucci, ancient inscriptions that appear to carry accentual or stress
marks show that Romans already exploited phonetic emphasis as a meaningful cue
without treating words themselves as signs; rather, it is the accentual
modification that does the communicative work within a historically grounded rational
practice of reading. Grice generalizes this phenomenon into his theory of
reason-governed conversational meaning by arguing that particularized
implicatures depend precisely on such non-rule-governed but intelligible
deviations—like designed stress—that rational hearers are expected to recognize
as intentional. Both resist a semiotic model in which meaning is reducible to
fixed signs: Garrucci insists on parsimony with written markers and attention
to exemplary usage in antiquity, while Grice insists that implicature cannot be
rule-bound without collapsing its very function. In this convergence, accent
and stress emerge as rational instruments of meaning that operate neither by
convention alone nor by brute causality, but by a shared background of linguistic
competence and historically sedimented expectations, from Roman bronze
inscriptions to Oxford seminar rooms. Grice: “In my seminars at Oxford, I
introduced the ‘accent’ to explore what I meant by implicature of the
conversational, particularized type. There cannot be a RULE for it, since it’s
a spontaneous stressing – but when DESIGNED to stress, the implicature IS
communicated. More formally, the very idea of a phoneme relies on its
realisations as allophones, and the Italians have been fighting with this
since, well, Roman times!” accento,
stress, implicatura. Chi scrive N E/ACVLÀ sembra certo che l' abbia voluta
dedurre questa voce da quella radice ove la lettera “a” è lunga, wtne ; chi
LU3ER , intende [IMPLICATES – Grice] certamente di ricordare che anticamente si
scrive LEIBER come in un frammento assai arcaico di bronzo del museo
kircheriano. Cosi scrivendo “FVTIVS” si accenna alla radice FVTVM, in VTIVS ad
OITI, OlTILE, in ORNAMENTA ad venustà, in VEKTI 1 al più antico VEITI se vale
il YEITVRIVS cosi scritto nella lamina di bronzo sui confini tra i genuati e i
veturii -- Orelli. Generalmente si fard assai bene ad esser parchi e seguendo
come G. dice i migliori esemplari. Con ciò G. pone fine alla sua discussione,
nella quale esamina l’iscrizioni latine che PORTANO DEI SEGNI – Grice: “Words
are not signs, but accents are” – STRESS -- creduti comunemente
d’accentuazione. MARINI crede questo un esempio del sicìlico di
Mario Vittorino, allegando che questa voce trovasi ancora scritto VETTI [Ari.).
IMPRIMATUR Butlaoni 0. P. S. P. A. Magister. IMPRIMATUR Fr. Aut. Ligi Bussi
Archiep. Icon. Vicesgcrcns. C. Grice: Caro Garrucci, ti confesso che all’Oxford
quando parliamo di “accento” rischiamo sempre di scatenare discussioni più
accese di una partita di rugby tra college rivali! Ma in fondo, l’accento è
come il sale sulla zuppa: basta un pizzico e tutto cambia sapore. Garrucci: Hai
ragione, Grice! A Roma diciamo che chi sbaglia l’accento può passare in un
attimo da filosofo a comico involontario. E poi, le iscrizioni antiche ci
insegnano che persino i bronzi avevano il loro modo di farsi capire: un segno
qui, uno stress là, e la storia prende una piega tutta nuova. Grice: Proprio
così, caro! Da noi l’accento non segue regole ferree, è più come un colpo di scena:
se lo metti dove serve, illumini la frase; se lo sbagli, rischi di ottenere
implicature degne di un romanzo giallo. Gli italiani però lottano con gli
allofoni fin dai tempi degli antichi Romani, quasi fosse uno sport nazionale!
Garrucci: Eh già, Grice! Come diceva mia nonna: “Meglio essere parsimoniosi con
gli accenti, che generosi con i segni.” In fondo, la vera filosofia è capire
quando un accento diventa un messaggio, e quando invece è solo un modo per non
prendere troppo sul serio la conversazione. Così, tra un sorriso e una battuta,
anche il latino diventa compagnia! Garrucci, Raffaele (1844). Antiquitatum
salernitanarum disquisitiones. Napoli.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gatti – ossia: Grice e Gatti: la ragione conversazionale
dell’implicatura conversazioale. Pasquale Gatti (Milano, Lombardia). Grice and G.
converge on a conception of meaning that is fundamentally governed by reason as
it operates within lived linguistic practice, yet they articulate this
convergence from complementary directions. Gatti, writing from the Italian
philosophical tradition shaped by Vico and in polemical tension with Croce,
insists that language cannot be split into two autonomous systems—one of
feeling and one of intellect—because even when language is imaginative and
aesthetic, it remains subject to law and concept, and thus to rational
structure; for him, the enigma of language is precisely how expression is at
once fantasia and intelletto, intuition and concept, within a single act of
consciousness. Grice’s theory of conversational meaning radicalizes this
insight by relocating rationality from abstract linguistic form into the
practices of speakers, showing that meaning is not exhausted by what is said
but is completed by what a rational hearer is entitled to infer under shared
expectations of cooperation. Where Gatti argues that language is never merely
poetry nor merely logic, Grice explains how this duality is enacted moment by
moment through implicature, which depends on the speaker’s reasoned
exploitation of linguistic norms and the hearer’s equally reasoned recognition of
that exploitation. Both therefore reject a purely expressive or purely formal
account of language: Gatti by defending the law‑governed, conceptual dimension
of language against Croce’s aesthetic reduction, and Grice by showing that even
the “non‑said” in conversation is regulated by rational principles rather than
psychological spontaneity. In this sense, Grice’s conversational implicature
can be read as the analytic counterpart to Gatti’s philosophical intuition:
reason is not external to language, but immanent in its use, binding
imagination and intellect together in dialogue. Grice: “I love G.!” lingua. SAGGIO SULL’ORIGINE, ESSENZA, E SVILUPPO
DELLA LINGUA. La grandezza delle statue diminuisce
allontanandosene, quella degl’uomini avvicinandoci ad essi. Quale
necessità di DUE DIVERSE LINGUE, l'una del sentimento e l’altra dell’inteletto,
per esprimere il COMUNE CONTENUTO della coscienza? Altro è LA LINGUA COME
LINGUA, come fatto estetico, afferma CROCE, e altro LA LINGUA COME
ESPRESSIONE logica, nel quale caso rimane bensì sempre lingua soggetto
alla legge, la tesì che noi opponiamo a quella di CROCE con VICO,
siamo stati costretti a mostrare, altresì come CROCE non è
riuscito a comprendere affatto affatto quel pensiero nell’intimo, suo
significato. Onde, ad un tempo, ed è ciò che a noi essenzialmente preme,
l’ abbagliante fascio di luce, che, sprigionandosi della dottrina di VICO,
riesce ad illuminarla,, A più che lingua. Ora, delle due, l'una: o esso,
rimanendo sempre lingua e soggetto alla legge, non può, per ciò stesso,
non rimanere sempre ed unicamente intuizione e immaginazione, e, quindi,
sola fantasia e poesia; ovvero è, anche, che lingua, e cioè
concetto, e, allora, come dirlo, più, sola fantasia e poesia, e non anche
d' intelletto. Il scoppio di dello spirito come spiegare che nel mondo egli é
ritenuto, intanto, addirittura della classe più alta dei filosofi; e cioè
filosofo di natura e vocazione, ragione per cui le sue opere, e
l’estetica proprio più di ogni altra. Questa disfatta del pensiero di CROCE s'è
visto, ex ore suo stesso per essersi immesso in una via senza uscita, bene
può dirsiuna disfatta in gloria, più superba di tanti trionfi, in quanto
coll’ammonirci che ogni tentativo di ricalcare quelle orme sarebbe non
altro che un vano sacrilegio, sia pur da parte di gente inconscia, ci fa
ritenere esecrabile e sacra quella via. Tale, almeno, essa rimane per noi,
che da essa la via che abbiam preso a seguire, coll’intento di
raggiungere quel segreto connesso col più oscuro, insieme, dei selle
eriomi della vita universa, l’enigma concernente l’origine del pensiero,
lingua. Grice: Caro Gatti, ogni volta che mi immergo nei tuoi scritti rimango
colpito dalla tua acutissima capacità di cogliere le sfumature più profonde
della comunicazione. La tua riflessione sulla doppia natura della lingua –
sentimento e intelletto – è davvero illuminante! Gatti: Che onore, Grice! Ma
vedi, sono proprio le tue teorie sull’implicatura conversazionale ad avermi
ispirato. Penso che la lingua sia sempre sospesa tra immaginazione e concetto,
e che solo nel dialogo si riveli la sua vera essenza. Grice: Proprio così, caro
amico. Ammiro la tua capacità di riconoscere quanto ogni parola sia, insieme,
regola e creazione. Saper vedere nell’espressione linguistica sia poesia che
logica è segno di rara sensibilità filosofica! Gatti: Grazie, Grice. Credo che
solo chi, come te, analizza con attenzione il “non detto”, possa comprendere il
mistero della lingua. In fondo, la comunicazione è quell’enigma che ci
avvicina, e ci spinge sempre a cercare nuove vie di senso. Gatti, Pasquale (1906). Esposizione del
sistema filosofico di Leopardi.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gatti – ossia: Grice e Gatti: la ragione conversazionale e
l’implicatura conversazionale poetica. Stanislao Gatti
(Napoli, Campania). Grice and G. converge on a view of meaning as governed
by reason, but they articulate this convergence at different levels and with
different emphases: Gatti, formed in Naples under Puoti and working within the
Italian idealist horizon shaped by Vico, Hegel, and aesthetics, conceives
reason as a universal law that simultaneously governs the development of
individual consciousness and the historical unfolding of culture, so that
language, art, and philosophy are modes through which rational spirit manifests
itself within concrete history; hence his idea of a poetic conversational
implicature, where meaning exceeds literal statement because art and discourse
imitate not empirical nature but the supersensible, noetic idea, allowing truth
to emerge indirectly and belatedly, as in Vico’s own fate of unrecognized
glory. Grice, by contrast, strips this metaphysical picture down to a rational
mechanics of use: conversational meaning is governed by reason not because it
expresses an objective historical spirit, but because speakers and hearers
orient themselves to shared norms of rational cooperation, exploiting and
recognizing departures from literal content to convey what is meant rather than
merely said. Where Gatti reads poetic, aesthetic, and historical distance as
intrinsic to how reason communicates itself—often through polemic, irony,
grading of predecessors, and a cultivated literary voice—Grice provides a
minimal, analytic account in which implicature arises from rational
expectations about relevance, quantity, and intelligibility in dialogue. Yet
the affinity is real: both reject a view of language as mere mimesis or neutral
medium, both insist that meaning is inseparable from rational activity, and
both understand implication as something earned rather than encoded, whether
through the historical-poetic circuit of Gatti’s Vichian aesthetics or through
the situational logic of Grice’s conversational practice. Grice: “When
Hampshire wrote an essay on Vico we thought he had lost his reason! At Oxford,
G. is mainly associated with a music-hall that was once popular at London! I
like G.. G. is a good’un. For one, he philosophises on Aristotle’s Poetics,
something we hardly do at Oxford! And many other things, too!! G. is a
difficult one to catalogue, not at Oxford! He is a man of letters and action,
by man of letters we mean Lit. Hum. And G., being the snob he is, would rather
be seen dead than referred to as merely a ‘philosoopher.’ He edits the Museo di
FILOSOFIA e letterature – and his passion, if he has one, is VICO, and more, to
criticse others. He would not speak of ‘italian philosophy,’ but of ‘philosophy
in Italia’! He philosophises on Rovere, and other philosophers, and is always
ready to grade them: ‘GENOVESI, infinitely inferior to VICO’. Incredibly that
this philosopher is talking the same lingo as Machiavelli or
Alighieri! His exegesis of VICO is good, he refers to the BRUNO,
CAMPANELLA, and TELESIO as the celebrated triunvirato, and there are references
to some obscure philosophers in his prose, about whom he writes little to
enthusiase his reader!” Si laurea a Napoli
sotto Puoti. Idealista. lo sviluppo della coscienza e l'evolversi della storia
provengono entrambe d’un principio comune: la legge universale della ragione,
attuabile solo all'interno della realtà storica in quanto è la scienza generale
di tutto l'esistente. Si indirizza verso l'estetismo e critica la dottrina
lizia dell'arte come riproduzione e mimesi della natura, contrapponendole
l’idealismo che ritiene l'arte riproduzione mimesi del sovra-sensibile, dell’idea,
del noetico, l’estetico, mimesi del noetico. VICO autore di un sistema che i
suoi contemporanei non poteano intendere come quello che dovea esse re la
scienza di un'altra età, e il frullo di nuovi germogliamenti dello spirito, non
avea per questa ragione potuto raccogliere in vita il premio di quella gloria
implicatura. Grice: Caro Gatti, ti confesso che a Oxford, parlare di poetica è
come proporre una partita di calcio in un convento. Ma tu, con quella passione
per Vico e Aristotele, sembri sempre pronto a scardinare qualche regola! Gatti:
Grice, a Napoli ci insegnano che la ragione è come la pizza: ognuno la fa a
modo suo, e la poesia è il pomodoro sopra. L’arte non è solo imitazione, ma il
frullo dello spirito, come diceva Vico… e pure il pizzaiolo sotto casa! Grice:
Vico e la pizza, che combinazione! Da noi, quando qualcuno cita la mimesi, si
pensa subito a Shakespeare che sbaglia scena. Tu invece sostieni che l’arte
deve imitare il sovra-sensibile. Sarebbe come dire che una poesia può essere più
vera di un manuale d’istruzioni! Gatti: Esatto, Grice! E poi, la filosofia in
Italia non è mai solo filosofia… è conversazione, critica, e ogni tanto una
bella polemica. Ma se mi paragoni a Machiavelli, ti offro un caffè: almeno
così, nella conversazione, siamo entrambi più svegli! Gatti, Stanislao (1838).
Di una risposta di Cousin ad alcuni dubbi intorno alla sua filosofia. Il
progresso delle scienze, delle lettere e delle arti. Napoli.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gaudenzio – ossia: Grice e Gaudenzio: la ragione
conversazionale e il portico romano – Gaudenzio (Brescia, Lombardia). A fruitful comparison between Grice and G. turns on their shared
commitment to reason as a normative, action-guiding faculty, even though they
operate in very different idioms and institutional contexts. Gaudentius,
bishop of Brescia at the end of the fourth century, consciously retrieves the
Stoic legacy of the Porch in his treatment of lex naturae and moral obligation,
arguing that through the proper exercise of reason any person can come to know
what is required of them morally; obligation is not imposed externally by fiat,
but becomes intelligible as something epistemically accessible to rational agents,
a point emphasized in modern scholarship by Carlo Truzzi’s study of northern
Italian Christian thinkers, which situates Gaudentius as a Stoic without pomp
or dogmatic rigidity, reactivating the Portico rather than abandoning it after
the advent of Christianity. Grice’s theory of reason-governed conversational
meaning echoes this Stoic posture at a different level: where Gaudentius holds
that desire, when brought under the scrutiny of reason, yields knowledge of
duty, Grice maintains that utterer’s meaning and conversational obligation
arise from rational norms governing what it is to intend, infer, and cooperate
in talk. In both cases, reason does not override human desire but disciplines
and interprets it: Gaudentius rejects a crude “I want, therefore I must” in
favor of “I want, therefore I ask what I ought to do,” grounding obligation in
rational reflection; Grice likewise resists psychologism by insisting that
conversational meaning is constituted by rationally recognizable intentions
operating within shared norms. Seen this way, Grice’s conversational
rationality can be read as a modern, secular analogue of Gaudentius’s
resuscitated Portico: both treat reason as a public, norm-giving power that
survives historical discontinuities and continues to regulate obligation—moral
in Gaudentius, communicative in Grice—without appeal to mere authority or brute
convention. Grice: “People tend to think that after the birth of Christ, The
Porch became relevance-less: Truzzi proves the opposite in his apt study of Gaudenzio
(Brescia, Lombardia). a rationalist in the best tradition of the porch, in his
analysis of ‘lex naturae’ and ‘moral obligation’ as ‘epistemically’ derivable
from desires!” Keywords: porch. Filosofo italiano. The philosophical interest
of G.’s essays lies in his discussion of natural law – lex naturae --, for
which he borrows from the Porch. G. argues that through the use of reason
anyone can come to a knowledge of his moral obligations. GRICEVS:
Gaudenti, aiunt Porticum post Christum natum iam nihil ad rem pertinere; tu
autem eam resuscitas quasi fumum thuris in foro. Quid agis? GAUDENTIVS: Ago
hoc: ostendo Porticum non esse “relevance-less,” sed relevantiorem; Truzzi enim
probat me Stoicum esse sine superciliis. GRICEVS: At tu dicis lex naturae et officium
morale ex desideriis “epistemice” deduci. Nonne hoc est: “Volo, ergo debeo”?
GAUDENTIVS: Minime: “Volo, ergo cogito quid debeam”; et si quis me rogat unde
obligatio, respondeo: ex ratione—quae, ut Porticus docet, numquam natalicia
Christi oblita est. Gaudenzio (387). Sermo ad
episcopos in ordinatione sua. Brescia.
Speranza, J. L.
(n. d.). ‘Verbali: Gauro – ossia: Grice e Gauro: la ragione conversazionale a
Roma antica -- filosofia italiana (Roma). Both Grice and G. treat
reason as something exercised in and through public linguistic practice rather
than as a purely private faculty, but they situate this insight in very
different historical idioms. In the Gauro–Porphyry setting, conversational
reason is explicitly Roman in its audience and social uptake: although Porphyry
is Hellenic in doctrine, his categories are heard, judged, and accepted in a
Roman forum where philosophical terms must “wear the toga,” functioning as
instruments of shared understanding and civic recognition even when full
technical mastery is absent. Gauro’s stance foregrounds this pragmatic
accommodation: concepts like categoria succeed because they are intelligible,
or at least respectfully acknowledged, within Roman norms of discourse. Grice’s
theory of reason‑governed conversational meaning abstracts this same phenomenon
into a general account: meaning is not guaranteed by semantic form alone but by
speakers’ rational intentions operating under publicly recognizable norms that
guide inference, uptake, and cooperation. Where Gauro emphasizes cultural
translation and audience—Greek philosophy becoming Roman sense—Grice
systematizes the mechanism itself, explaining how conversational reason governs
what is said, what is meant, and what is inferred across contexts. The
continuity lies in the shared claim that philosophy lives or dies in
conversation; the difference is that Gauro locates this claim historically in
Rome’s linguistic life, while Grice renders it a universal principle of
rational discourse. Grice: “We seem to consider Porfirio an Hellenic, but his
audience was Roman to the backbone!” Keywords: categoria. Filosofo italiano. He
appears to have been a pupil of Porfirio, who may have dedicated one of his
essays to him. GRICEVS: Gauro, audivi te Porphyrio studuisse; sed dic
mihi, Romanusne eras an Graecus? GAVRVS: Discipulus fui, sed auditor meus
Romanus usque ad ossa; Graece lego, Latine rideo. GRICEVS: Ita ergo: Porphyrius Hellenicus videtur, sed in foro Romano
“categoria” melius sonat quam in schola. GAVRVS: Recte; apud Romanos etiam
categoria togam induit—et si quis non intellegit, saltem reverenter nutat.
Gauro (a. u. c. MXXIII). Categoriae.
Roma.
Commenti
Posta un commento