開催日：2003/11/23
レポーター：海老原
課題：テッド・チャン「あなたの人生の物語」(『あなたの人生の物語』)
RESUME
Over the Linearity: Ted Chiang’s Short Story,"Story of Your Life."
[Summary and Comments]
All human languages have one common linguistic feature, which is at the same time very restricted against language use of human beings, that is “linearity.” Linearity means that we can understand any utterances or text only by listening or reading them along time like a linear line. This typical characteristic of human languages forces us to think about things or comprehend in a particular way. Most of us are not aware the restraint of thinking because we have already been bound to recognize the world by linearity. Ted Chiang, who is one of the most famous young science fiction writers in America, writes a short story, “Story of Your Life,” to present us whether it is possible or not to perceive surroundings without a linear restriction by means of describing aliens called Heptapod and their language that is perfectly unfamiliar and strange to all human beings. Not only this but also Chiang succeeds in narrating like aliens lead “Story of Your Life” to be a great science fiction. On purpose, I’ll explore how Chiang destroys linearity and reconstructs our narrative manner as well as how it proves to be a very impressive short story.
The narrator, Louise Banks, who is a linguist, is required to learn alien’s language unknown to humans by the government. The aliens named heptapod because of their appearance abruptly appear in front of people all over the world and through special devise called “looking glass” people can see them and have contacts with. Trying some ways to grasp the rule of heptapod’s language with help of one of her fellows, Gary Donnelly, who is a physicist, she finds that Heptapods have two completely different grammar: one writing system, Heptapod A, another speaking system, Heptapod B, which has peculiar characters, “semagraph,” neither logogram nor phonogram. Although semagraph denotes it’s meaning like logogram, which shows one meaning by one word as ideogram, traffic sign, Chinese character, it is more complicated enough to be “meaningful on its own,” and “in combination with other semagrams” to “form endless statements” (143). Lastly Louise comes to almost gain proficiency in Heptapod B and then can tell heptapods whatever she wants to transmit. Heptapods, however, only repeat what humans are doing and give nothing useful for human beings. They disappear with leaving one gift as suddenly as they appeared. The gift is their language, Heptapod A and B. Before the summary ends, I have to point out a special narrative manner found throughout the story. This story consists of two aspects of narration. One is narrated as present and events are ordered along time there, so to say, there is linearity, and another is about the future and is narrated by using auxiliary will. Louise narrates her unborn daughter many episodes about herself in future parts. Whole story advances with alternating present parts and future parts.
Louise’s acquisition of Heptapod B greatly changes how she recognizes the world and how to narrate. Heptapod B has no linearity as a heptapod looks like “a barrel suspended at the intersection of seven limbs” (126) and “any direction might as well be ‘forward’” (127). They have evolved themselves with unique body shape and got linguistic competence that is also influenced by their appearance. Heptapod already know what would happen next and “what would be said in any conversation” because they have no “forward,” but this is not identical that they have free will to change the future they already know. They must repeat what they know “in order for their knowledge to be true, the conversation would have to take place” (173). Therefore Heptapod B is the language that is not affected any limitation by linearity and highly performative one. After learning Heptapod B, she occasionally has “glimpses when Heptapod truly reigns” and she experiences “past and future all at once” so her consciousness “becomes a half-century-long ember burning outside time” (176). This causes her to narrate in two distinct ways: presents part and future parts.
Though future parts and present parts seem unrelated to one another and to be scattered, they are carefully placed to have transparent connections with one another. For example, in a present part after Louise explains a classic anecdote about linguistic filed works to her students, in a future part right after that she describes one episode about language acquisition, particular her daughter’s. Another example is that she says that patience is necessary to learn an unknown language afterwards she narrates her daughter’s impatience. She wants to go to Hawaii, where her father has a conference to attend, as soon as possible. To explain performativity of Heptapod B effectively, she imagines an episode that her daughter asks her to read a book, whose content she has learned, before her going to bed.
Performativity of Heptapod B gives the narration of Louise such a strong will that readers may see her firm preparation there. As I mentioned earlier, to know the future in Heptapod B and to have a free will to change the future is incompatible. No linearity and high performativity of Heptapod B allow readers to not to change the future even if something bad or tragedy would happen. Louise knows her daughter will die in her twenties, readers also notice that in the very early part of the story. She, however, cannot help stopping talking about episodes of her daughter. This is one of reasons for the story to become an impressive one. Louise’s first husband, who is of course the father of her unborn daughter, is Gary. Louise meets Gary for the first time when he asks her to help contacts with heptapods and throughout the mission they are getting closer and closer. But in the future, they’ll divorce. Louise herself narrates this like the death of her daughter. In spite of such sadness, she never complains about Heptapod B and thinks: “working with the heptapods changed my life. I met your father and learned Heptapod B, both of which make it possible for me to know you now, [. . .] many years from now, I’ll be without your father, and without you. All I will have left from this moment is the heptapod language. So I pay attention, and note every detail” (181). She never stops narrating.
“Story of Your Life” clearly shows us the situation in which we have a language with no linearity and grasp the surroundings very differently. Heptapod B has two dimensions that it allows its users to know about the future and it simultaneously prohibits us to change it. Louise never loses her love to her daughter in between allowance and prohibition. Readers may find her genuine love there so we can say that “Story of Your Life” is a wonderful science fiction.
[Discussion Points]
(1)Can we acquire the language completely different from human beings’ like Heptapod B? And how?
(2)Can we develop our languages to ones without linearity or invent quite new ones like that?
(3)How much are our thought and behavior influenced by language?
(4)Do you know any other SF related to language?
[Notes]
(1)The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society. It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection. The fact of the matter is that the ‘real world’ is to a large extent unconsciously built upon the language habits of the group. No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same world with different labels attached... We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation. (Edward Sapir, ”The Status of Linguistics as a Science” (1929))
(2)Definitions
Logogram= [n] a single symbol that represents an entire word or phrase.
Ideogram=[n] a graphic character used in ideography.
Phonogram=[n] any written symbol standing for a sound or syllable or morpheme or word.
[Favorite Parts]
(1)Your father is about to ask me the question. This is the most important moment in our lives, and I want to pay attention, note every detail. Your dad and I have just come back from an evening out, dinner and a show; it’s the full moon; then I told your dad I wanted to dance, so he humors me and no we’re slow-dancing, a pair of thirtysomethings swaying back and forth in the moonlight like kids. I don’t feel the night chill at all. And then your dad says, “Do you want to make a baby?” (120)
(2)The request for that meeting was perhaps the second most moment phone call in my life. The first, of course, will be the one from Mountain Rescue. At that point your dad and I will be speaking to each other maybe once a year, tops. After I get that phone call, though, the first thing I’ll do will be to call your father. (124)
(3)And after graduation, you’ll be heading for a job as a financial analyst. I won’t understand what you do there, I won’t even understand your fascination with money, the preeminence you gave to salary when negotiation job offers. I would prefer it if you’d pursue something without monetary rewards, but I’ll have no complaints. My own mother could never understand why I couldn’t just be a high school English teacher. You’ll do what makes you happy, and that’ll be all I ask. (144)
(4)I thought to myself, The ray of light has to know where it will ultimately end up before it can choose the direction to begin moving in. I knew what that reminded me of. I looked up at Gary. “That’s what was bugging me.” (158)
(5)The physical universe was a language with a perfectly ambiguous grammar. Every physical event was an utterance that could be parsed in to entirely different ways, on causal and the other teleological, both valid, neither one disqualifiable no matter how much context was available. (168)
(6)Similarly, knowledge of the future was incompatible with free will. What made it possible for me to exercise of freedom of choice also made it possible for me to know the future. (172)
(7)“Well if you already know hot the story goes, why do you need me to read it to you?”
“Cause I wanna hear it!” (174)
(8)Working with the heptapods changed my life. I met your father and learned Heptapod B, both of which make it possible for me to know you now, here on the patio in the moonlight. Eventually, many years from now, I’ll be without your father, and without you. All I will have left from this moment is the heptapod language. So I pay close attention, and note every detail. From the beginning I knew my destination, and I chose my route accordingly. But am I working toward an extreme of joy, or of pain? Will I achieve a minimum, or a maximum? (181)
[Work Cited]
Chiang, Ted. “Story of Your Life.” Year’s Best SF 4. Ed. David G. Hartwell. NY: Harper Prism, 1994.
COMMENTS