The Anti-intentionalism Fallacy

Abstract

The modem conception of literature idealized literary language as a language game different from others, a "poetic" dimension of sense, non-paraphrasable in its figurative senses, incommensurable as regards the ordinary language. Romanticism sets as its central value an idea of authenticity, founded on an introspective mentalism. As a counterpoint to the concept of language as mentalist expression, present in romanticism, many formalists thought meaning as intrinsic to the structure of language, ascribing a peculiar polissemic character to the literary use of language. It is as if, in order to reject the classic mimesis of the duplication of nature as points of the defence of literary language's autonomy through the avowal of its peculiar polissemy has been the refutation of the applicability of the notion of intentionality. However, these are diverse questions. A counter argument is offered to the central thesis of Wimsatt and Beardsley's "The Intentional Fallacy" (1949). The Gedankenexperiment of the poem found on the beach sand is not adequate as an illustration of an anti-intentionalist argument because it presupposes what it sets itself to deny, veiling the criteria of application of communication verbs (such as reading, interpreting, certain senses of bearing, etc.). These criteria point to intentionality, and to the extra-textual space.