Introduction: Sincerity, Language Change and Medieval Literature

Chapter
Part of the New Approaches to English Historical Linguistics book series (NAEHL)

Abstract

This chapter introduces sincerity at a conjunction of language history and the history of emotions. Sincerity is defined as an ideal that morally links inward affectivity with outward expression in a way that bears profoundly on English pragmatic and literary-stylistic history.

References

Primary Sources (by original author or title)

  1. Bede. Historiam ecclesiasticam gentis Anglorum. Ed. Charles Plummer. 1896. Clarendon: University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Bede. The Old English Version of Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of The English People, Ed. Thomas Miller. 1890. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Kempe, Margery. The Book of Margery Kempe. 1997 (reprint). Ed. Sanford Brown Meech. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden Monachi Cestrensis; Together with the English Translations of John Trevisa and of an Unknown Writer of the Fifteenth Century. 1865. Ed. Churchill Babington. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

  1. Arnovick, Leslie K. 1999. Diachronic Pragmatics: Seven Case Studies in English Illocutionary Development. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  2. Bamberg, Michael. 1997. “Language, Concepts and Emotions: The Role of Language in the Construction of Emotions.” Language Sciences 19(4): 309–340.Google Scholar
  3. Benveniste, Émile. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Éditions Gallimard.Google Scholar
  4. Bray, Joe. 2014. “Speech and Thought Presentation in Stylistics.” In The Routledge Handbook of Stylistics, edited by Michael Burke, 222–236. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Bryan, Jennifer. 2008. Looking Inward: Devotional Reading and the Private Self in Late Medieval England. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  6. Burnley, David. 1998. Courtliness and Literature in Medieval England. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  7. Claridge, Claudia, and Leslie Arnovick. 2010. “Pragmaticalisation and Discursisation.” In Historical Pragmatics, edited by Andreas Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen, 165–192. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  8. Cohn, Dorrit. 1978. Transparent Minds: Narrative Modes for Presenting Consciousness in Fiction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Culpeper, Jonathan, and Jane Demmen. 2011. “Nineteenth-Century English Politeness: Negative Politeness, Conventional Indirect Requests and the Rise of the Individual Self.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 12(1–2): 49–81.Google Scholar
  10. Fitzmaurice, Susan. 2016. “Sincerity and the Moral Reanalysis of Politeness in Late Modern English: Semantic Change and Contingent Polysemy.” In Studies in the History of the English Language VII, edited by Don Chapman, Colette Moore, and Miranda Wilcox, 173–202. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  11. Fitzmaurice, Susan, Justyna A. Robinson, Marc Alexander, Iona C. Hine, Seth Mehl, and Fraser Dallachy. 2017. “Linguistic DNA: Investigating Conceptual Change in Early Modern English Discourse.” Studia Neophilologica (online access).Google Scholar
  12. Fludernik, Monika. 2011. “Through a Glass Darkly; or, the Emergence of Mind in Medieval Narrative.” In The Emergence of Mind: Representations of Consciousness in Narrative Discourse in English, edited by David Herman, 69–100. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  13. Grady, Joe. 1998. “The ‘Conduit Metaphor’ Revisited: A Reassessment of Metaphors for Communication.” In Discourse and Cognition: Bridging the Gap, edited by Jean-Pierre Koenig, 205–218. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
  14. Guay, Manuel. 2009. “Du consentement à l’affectio maritalis: quatre mariages princiers (France-Angleterre, 1395–1468).” Revue Historique 311(2): 291–319.Google Scholar
  15. Jaeger, C. Stephen. 1985. The Origins of Courtliness. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  16. Jager, Eric. 1988. “Tempter as Rhetoric Teacher: The Fall of Language in The Old English Genesis B.Neophilologus 72: 434–448.Google Scholar
  17. Jager, Eric. 1990. “Speech and the Chest in Old English Poetry: Orality or Pectorality?” Speculum 65(4): 845–859.Google Scholar
  18. Jager, Eric. 1993. The Tempter’s Voice: Language and the Fall in Medieval Literature. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Joseph, John E. 2005. “The Tongues of Men and of Angels: Knowledge, Inner Speech and Diglossia in Medieval Linguistic Thought.” In Flores Grammaticæ: Essays in Memory of Vivien Law, edited by Nicola McLelland and Andrew R. Linn, 119–139. Münster: Nodus Publikationen.Google Scholar
  20. Jucker, Andreas H. 2010. “‘In Curteisie Was Set Ful Muchel Hir Lest’: Politeness in Middle English.” In Historical (Im)politeness, edited by Dániel Kádár and Jonathan Culpeper, 175–200. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  21. Jucker, Andreas H. 2014. “Courtesy and Politeness in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 49(3): 5–28.Google Scholar
  22. Kádár, Dániel Z. 2013. Relational Rituals and Communication: Ritual Interaction in Groups. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  23. Kohnen, Thomas. 2008. “Linguistic politeness in Anglo-Saxon England? A Study of Old English Address Terms.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 9(1): 140–158.Google Scholar
  24. Kövecses, Zoltán. 1990. Emotion Concepts. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  25. Lazikani, Ayoush S. 2015. Cultivating the Heart: Feeling and Emotion in Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Religious Texts. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
  26. Lockett, Leslie. 2011. Anglo-Saxon Psychologies in the Vernacular and Latin Traditions. Toronto: Toronto University Press.Google Scholar
  27. López-Couso, María José. 2010. “Subjectification and Intersubjectification.” In Historical Pragmatics, edited by Andreas Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen, 127–164. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  28. Magill, R. Jay, Jr. 2012. Sincerity: How a Moral Ideal Born Five Hundred Years Ago Inspired Religious Wars, Modern Art Hipster Chic, and the Curious Notion That We All Have Something to Say (No Matter How Dull). New York/London: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  29. Martin, John Jeffries. 2004. Myths of Renaissance Individualism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. McEntire, Sandra. 1990. The Doctrine of Compunction in Mediaeval England: Holy Tears. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
  31. McNamer, Sarah. 2010. Affective Meditation and the Invention of Medieval Compassion. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  32. Myhill, John. 1997. “What Is Universal and What Is Language-Specific in Emotion Words? Evidence from Biblical Hebrew.” Pragmatics and Cognition 5(1): 79–129.Google Scholar
  33. Portalupi, Enzo. 2006. Sincerus, sinceritas e lemmi affini da Tertulliano a Tommaso d’Aquino. Padova: Il Poligrafo.Google Scholar
  34. Reddy, Michael. 1979. “The Conduit Metaphor: A Case of Frame Conflict in Our Language About Language.” In Metaphor and Thought, edited by Andrew Ortony, 284–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Reddy, William M. 2012. The Making of Romantic of Love: Longing and Sexuality in Europe, South Asia and Japan, 900–1200 CE. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Rosenwein, Barbara H. 2006. Emotional Communities in the Early Middle Ages. Ithaca/London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Scaglione, Aldo. 1991. Knights at Court. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  38. Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Searle, John R. 1979. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Smith, James K. 2016. You Are What You Love: The Spiritual Power of Habit. Ada, MI: Baker Publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Spearing, A.C. 2005. Textual Subjectivity: The Encoding of Subjectivity in Medieval Narratives and Lyrics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Steenbrugge, Charlotte, and Graham Williams. (eds.) Forthcoming. Cultures of Compunction in the Medieval World: Emotion, Contrition and Penitence in the Middle Ages. London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
  43. Traugott, Elizabeth. 1989. “On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change.” Language 65(1): 31–55.Google Scholar
  44. Traugott, Elizabeth. 2010. “Revisiting Subjectification and Intersubjectification.” In Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, edited by Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte, and Hubert Cuyckens, 29–70. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  45. Traugott, Elizabeth, and Richard Dasher. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Trilling, Lionel. 1972. Sincerity and Authenticity. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  47. von Contzen, Eva. 2014. “Why We Need a Medieval Narratology: A Manifesto.” DIEGESIS 3. https://www.diegesis.uni-wuppertal.de/index.php/diegesis/issue/view/7.
  48. von Contzen, Eva. 2015. “Why Medieval Literature Does Not Need the Concept of Social Minds: Exemplarity and Collective Experience.” Narrative 23(2): 140–153.Google Scholar
  49. Walker, A. D. M. 1978. “The Ideal of Sincerity.” Mind 87(348): 481–497.Google Scholar
  50. Whelan, Fiona. 2017. The Making of Manners and Morals in Twelfth-Century England: The Book of the Civilised Man. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Wierzbicka, Anna. 2006. English: Meaning and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Williams, Graham. 2012. “‘that thought never ytt entered my harte’: Rhetoricalities of Sincerity in Early Modern English.” English Studies 93(7): 809–832.Google Scholar
  53. Williams, Graham. 2017. “wine min Unferð: Courtly Speech and a Reconsideration of (Supposed) Sarcasm in Beowulf.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 18(2): 175–194.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EnglishUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations