Interpretation and the Problem of Authorial Intention

Dissertation, The Catholic University of America (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The dissertation shows that the arguments advanced by E. D. Hirsch for authorial intention as the criterion of interpretation do not provide a basis for validity in interpretation because the subject-object ontology underlying those arguments is incompatible with the idea of the identity of a text's meaning. The dissertation argues that, inasmuch as Hirsch's model of interpretation presupposes the total separation of meaning and significance and restricts the meaning of the text to the author's intention, it establishes an insurmountable gap between text and interpreter. This dissertation will attempt to show that H.-G. Gadamer's approach to interpretation succeeds where Hirsch's fails in providing a basis for a legitimate and true interpretation. ;For Gadamer, we can only understand a text by assuming that we share a common linguistic horizon. The horizon itself, however, is grounded in the ontological features of the subject-matter of the text. These ontological features, he maintains, manifest themselves in the dialogical character of language and provide a transcendental ground for the possibility of giving a true interpretation of a text. The meaning of a text thus retains an identity, in Gadamer's view, but it is also capable of assuming an indefinite variety of finite expressions for its content. Gadamer accordingly argues that the meaning of a text cannot be legitimately equated with the intentions of its author. ;In Chapter One, the problem of relativity and objectivity in interpretation is presented. In this context, the problem of method and subject-object ontology is discussed. Chapter Two turns to the problem of the identification of meaning with authorial intention. The intentionalist approaches of Knapp, Michaels, Juhl, and Hirsch are criticized. It also delineates Gadamer's approach to the identification of the author. In Chapter Three, the problem of textual identity is discussed in terms of Hirsch's and E. Betti's distinction between meaning and significance. After presenting the dynamic identity of the text in Gadamer, it is argued that textual identity reveals itself in the truth-claim of the text. Chapter Four attempts to articulate how the ontological characteristics of textual meaning can, as Gadamer argues, provide a basis for truthfulness in interpretation

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,998

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Text and its Authenticity in Hermeneutics.Musa Seyed Dibadj - 1994 - Dissertation, The Catholic University of America
A Critical View on Pol Vandevelde’s "A Critique of Gadamer's Critical Pluralism".Alireza Azadi - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 21:5-13.
Can Our Understanding of Old Texts be Objective?C. Behan McCullagh - 1991 - History and Theory 30 (3):302-323.
Historical interpretation, intentionalism and philosophy of mind.Vivienne Brown - 2007 - Journal of the Philosophy of History 1 (1):25-62.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-05

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Burhanettin Tatar
19 Mayis Uni. Faculty of Theology

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references