Jenny Grimaldi and Jacques Derrida

[alixtii]

How is it that I never knew that Jenny Grimaldi was in Serenity?

"You will notice that we now say chora and not, as convention has always required, the chora, or again, as we might have done for the sake of caution, the word, the concept, the significance or the value of 'chora.' This is for several reasons, most of which are no doubt already obvious. The definite article presupposes the existence of a thing, the existent chora to which, via a common name, it would be easy to refer."--Jacques Derrida, "Chora" (trans. Ian McCloud)

The definite article presupposes the existence of a thing: Is there some new rule of French grammar of which I am unaware, or is Derrida just making stuff up? Because I know which option I find more likely. Sheesh. (And is the indefinate article okay? Am I still allowed to speak of "a chora" if I wish?)

Why is it that whenever theorists try to turn to grammar in order to make a point, they always end up saying something stupid? Mary Daly's "God the Verb" metaphor really should be "God the Gerund." Being an action or a process doesn't make something not a noun--as evidenced by the fact that both "action" and "process" are themselves nouns. Of course, Daly is only perpetuating R. Buckminster Fuller's lunacy. And a google search for "not a noun" shows this sort of idocy is alive and well, with claims (amongst genuine mistakes like Jon Stewart's claim that terror isn't a noun and actual cases where the noun-ness is in despute) that love, marriage, cheese, science, divorce, journalism, leadership, knowledge, nature, mind, and information are all not nouns, and I've only gone through a small fraction of the hits. I'm glad I knowlegde that now; I'll have to information it when I'm leadershipping (Bush/Cheny OTP?) and especially when I am marriaging.

A noun is a grammatical category. Taking an article is a grammatical characteristic. Neither signals anything important about the essential qualities of the signified on a metaphysical level, just how it is being used in a sentence.

Comments

[nwhepcat.livejournal.com]

Oh wow, I didn't know that either!

And what a name she's got! Demetra Raven.

[thelastgoodname.livejournal.com]

I haven't read Chora, but I think what he's referring to isn't the grammatical construct of the noun (plus definite article), but the presence of a single referent: the general category chora is being placed against an individual example of a single specific chora (that we could also call that chora). I would understand the operative sentence to read, "The definite article presupposes the existence of a thing", not just "presupposes the existence of a generalized category of things."

In other words, he's saying writer (a generalized set), rather than the writer (of that particular story).

But like I said, I haven't actually read the whole thing, so I might completely wrong.

[inalasahl]

I'm glad I knowlegde that now; I'll have to information it when I'm leadershipping (Bush/Cheny OTP?) and especially when I am marriaging.
Not to make light of your point, but that was the funniest thing I've read in weeks. Thank you.