On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:59:13 -0800, Carol DeVolder wrote: >I can't help but wonder though, where you would put someone >who refused to assimilate or accommodate, and simply said, >"It wasn't poetry."
Indeed. If you were to ask a poetry naive person to judge which of the following is part of a poem, I think that the answer is pretty obvious: (1) Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker (2) I should have been a pair of of ragged claws Scuttling across the floors of silent seas. If the instance doesn't match the prototype that one has for the category, then the question of schema modification is irrelevant. If the category of poetry is a single instance (i.e., lines that rhyme), then all other forms of poetry will not be recognized. Think back to Wittgenstein's question of what defines a game? Are there any criteria common to all games? A person with novice experience with games is likely to "yes". Wittgenstein and people with expert level knowledge of games are likely to say "no", that the category of games has graded membership with some games being more prototypical than others (but what is prototypical depends upon one's experience with games). I think a similar situation exists with poems and poetry (I'm not really sure the poetry should be thought of as a schema but a category). -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
