Interpretation and Deconstruction: Iterativity and Iterability

Abstract

The article analyses the impact of Derridean deconstruction on our attitudes towards interpretation and interpretation methods. In the past, theoreticians of interpretation such as W. Kayser (werkimmanente Interpretation) and J.-P. Richard (analyse thématique) started from the tacit or explicit assumption that the repetition of semantic units increases or consolidates the coherence of literary texts. In a radical critique of Austin’s and Searle’s speech act theory and of J.-P. Richard’s method, Derrida propounds the opposite point of view, arguing that repetition leads to the disintegration of meaning because it is impossible to repeat a semantic unit without operating a semantic shift, i.e. a change of meaning brought about by the new context. Applying this idea in his deconstructive analyses of English and American literary texts, J. Hillis Miller gives it a certain amount of plausibility and concreteness. It can nevertheless be argued that the deconstructivist approach is one-sided, as it disregards the fact that repetition or redundance not only causes semantic shifts (Derrida, différance,), but also tends to consolidate the meaning(s) of a text. The author therefore pleads in favour of a continuing dialogue between deconstruction and semiotics.