Skip to main content

What Is Pretty Cannot Be Beautiful? A Corpus-Based Analysis of the Aesthetics of Nature

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The aphorism ‘what is pretty cannot be beautiful’ was written by Wittgenstein (1942/1977) and belongs to his reflections on reality in its various manifestations. Also, this statement is consonant with the reasoning of the Austrian philosopher: apparent contradictions can lead to enlightening conclusions. This aphorism, however, seems to contradict what scholars from various disciplines have traditionally accepted: the true opposite terms in aesthetics are ‘beautiful’ versus ‘ugly’. To delve into what is, or what can be considered ‘beautiful’ and ‘ugly’ we may consider two opposite views: the first relies upon a universalistic ethnological idea by which all humans have similar essential conceptions of both concepts (Cunningham et al. 1995; Dutton, 2009). This approach is related to Wierzbicka´s proposal (1993) who defends the existence of a universal hardwired set of shared perceptions and emotions in humans. The second theoretical tradition considers that the notions of ‘beautiful’ and ‘ugly’ are more dependent upon the cultural and cognitive interpretation of the individuals (Fenko et al. 2010; Majid and Levinson 2011), with clear implications on a potential individual variation in the conceptualization of these features. In this article we are going to concentrate on the notion of beauty represented by the adjective “beautiful”, therefore leaving the concept of “ugliness” for a future study. For this purpose we will use the Natural Semantic Metalanguage theory as the theoretical foundation for the analysis in the Corpus of Language and Nature- CLAN Project (Romero-Trillo 2013). The methodology used for the analysis follows the recent corpus-based pragmatic tradition (Romero-Trillo 2008, 2013, 2014) in an attempt to combine empirical and theoretical approaches to the analysis of data to obtain reliable conclusions, as described in Grisot and Moeschler (2014).

We would like to thank the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad of Spain (Project: FFI2016-75160-R) for its support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    MS 125 58r, in G.H. von Wright’s volume Culture and Value, p. 48.

  2. 2.

    For a complete discussion on the ethnopragmatics of ‘beauty' see Gladkova and Romero-Trillo 2014.

References

  • Barocas R, Karoly P (1972) Effects of physical appearance on social responsiveness. Psychol Rep 31:495–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins Cobuild Dictionary (1987) William Collins Sons & Co Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham M, Roberts A, Barbee A, Druen P, Wu C-H (1995) Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours. J Pers Soc Psychol 68(2):261–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton D (2009) The art instinct: beauty, pleasure and human evolution. Bloomsbury Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenko A, Otten JJ, Schifferstein HNJ (2010) Describing product experience in different languages: the role of sensory modalities. J Pragmat 42:3314–3327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladkova A, Romero-Trillo J (2014) Ain’t it beautiful? The conceptualization of beauty from an ethnopragmatic perspective. J Pragmat 60:140–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goddard C (2006) Ethnopragmatics: a new paradigm. In: Goddard C (ed) Ethnopragmatics, understanding discourse in cultural context. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 1–30

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Goddard C (2013) The semantic roots and cultural grounding of ‘social cognition’. Aust J Linguist 33(3):245–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goddard C, Wierzbicka A (eds) (2002) Meaning and universal grammar: theory and empirical findings, vol 2. John Benjamins, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Goddard C, Wierzbicka A (2014) Words and meanings. Oxford University Press, Croydon (UK)

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Bernáldez F (1985/2011) Invitación a la ecología humana: la adaptación afectiva al entorno. Fundación Interuniversitaria Fernando González Bernáldez para los Espacios Naturales, Madrid

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisot C, Moescher J (2014) How do empirical methods interact with theoretical pragmatics? The conceptual and procedural contents of the English Simple Past and its translation into French. In: Romero-Trillo J (ed) Yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics 2014: new empirical and theoretical paradigms. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 7–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Leibniz GW (1987[1678]) The analysis of languages. In: Dascal M (ed) Leibniz, language, signs and thought: a collection of essays. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 161–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Majid A, Levinson SC (eds) (2011) The senses in language and culture [Special Issue]. Senses Soc 6(1):5–18

    Google Scholar 

  • N-gram Viewer Google Books. Accessed 13 Mar 2014

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero-Trillo J (ed) (2008) Pragmatics and corpus linguistics, a mutualistic entente. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero-Trillo J (2013) Corpus of language and nature: a tool for the study of the relationship between cognition and emotions in language. In: Romero-Trillo J (ed) Yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics 2013: new domains and methodologies. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 203–222

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Romero-Trillo J, Espigares T (2012) The cognitive representation of natural landscapes in language. Pragmat Cogn 20:168–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero-Trillo J, Espigares T (2015) Cognitive and linguistic factors affecting the selection of landscapes in the corpus of language and nature. J Res Des Stat Linguist Commun Sci 2:157–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker J (1841) A critical pronouncing dictionary. Thomas Tegg, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Walster E (1974) Physical attractiveness. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 1:157–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Wierzbicka A (1996) Semantics: primes and universals. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • von Wright GH (ed) (1977) Ludwig Wittgenstein, culture and value. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jesús Romero-Trillo or Violeta Fuentes .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Romero-Trillo, J., Fuentes, V. (2017). What Is Pretty Cannot Be Beautiful? A Corpus-Based Analysis of the Aesthetics of Nature. In: Blochowiak, J., Grisot, C., Durrleman, S., Laenzlinger, C. (eds) Formal Models in the Study of Language. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48832-5_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48832-5_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48831-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48832-5

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics