Fac. Lett. Rev.（30）, Otemon Gakuin Univ., 30, Dec. 1994

Alice's Adventures in Wordland

An Analysis of Conversations -

Akiko Inaki and Tomoko Okita

Introduction

The Alice books by Lewis Carroll－ Alice'sAdventures in Wonderland and Through the

Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There 一一were originally written for young chil-

dren. But they seem to fascinate everyone, regardless of age or sex, with their wit and

style. This fascination needs some explanation, one aspect of which is of linguistic

interest. A linguistic approach to these books will surely lead us to understand some

of their significant charm. In fact they have already been investigated by scholars

from the most diverse perspectives linguistically. This paper is an attempt to add to

this body of work by dealing with Alice'sAdventures in Wonderland from ａ discourse

perspective, by presenting an analysis of conversations between Alice and other char-

acters in Wonderland.

　　Discourse consists of some utterances which are integrated into ａ unified whole.

To be cohesive, a discourse needs ａ main theme. On this theme, speakers or writers

have to connect utterances organically, so that there is ａ smooth transition from one

to the next. They also have to employ devices to convey theirideas effectively. These

devices are necessary forａseries of utterances to comprise normal discourse.

　　When we consider the curious conversations between Alice and the inhabitants in

Wonderland, we sometimes find it necessary to analyze them on the discourse level.

They almost seem to invite misinterpretation because of the oblique ways the partici-

pants interact. To understand the conversational ｅχchanges appropriately, the follow-

ing elements, for example, should be taken into consideration : the cognitive meaning,

which is the literalmeaning ；the implicature, which is the meaning suggested extralin-

guistically；the presupposition, which is the participants'common understanding ；the

149－

Alice's Adventures in Wordland

place where the conversation takes place；the speaker's intention and feelings；and the

participants'social status. These elements function synthetically in the process of con-

versation. Furthermore some other basic rules of conversation are sometimes involved

which suggest how complicated the status ofａ conversation is｡

　　Basically speaking, there are two different meanings for words : the cognitive

meaning, as defined in the dictionary, and the conteχtual meaning, as defined by the

situation. Broadly speaking. the contextual meaning is supposed to be unique, ac-

tivated in the context. Even if we know the cognitive meaning, when we failto get

the appropriate ｃｏｎtｅχtualmeaning, misunderstandings will arise which will result in

the obstruction of the smooth flow of the discourse.

　　To use ａcommon analogy, we might callａ normal conversation ａ play of catch. If

we catch a ball well and throw it back well, our play is enjoyable, which means our

communication is well done. If we failto catch a ball but then chase it and pick it up,

there is a probability of happy communication. If we failto catch or to chase ａ missed

ball,our communication is blocked.

　　Devices for the successful eχchange of conversation include such factors asａ posi･

tive mental attitude and manners motivated by the desire to cooperate. We need

“tact" both to handle and to return the curves which are sometimes thrown in the

course of ordinary conversation, not to mention the ｅχtraordinary ones Alice is fre-

quently engaged in. We also require sincerity as ａ mutual conversational postulate.

And we probably need the desire to communicate economically or simply｡

　　Considering all these things, we will 100k at three conversations from Alice's Ad-

ventures in Wonderland and examine the ways in which they represent discourse gone

awry.　This will serve, as ａ way to investigate what normal conversation is and what

constitutes normal discourse.

The Mouse's Tale

Urged by Alice, the Mouse starts its history after giving an exaggerated sigh. Catch-

ing Alice's words 'your history'. the Mouse starts with 'Mine'. It is quite easy to see

what “Mine" refers to grammatically, and it is quite natural to substitute “tale" for

“history". 'Mine is ａ long and ａ sad tale !’is ａ perfectly grammatical sentence. Alice,

however, is looking at the Mouse's tail.and she takes the Mouse's “tale" for its homo-

－150－

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Akiko Inaki and Tomoko Okita

phone “tail". She is baffled since she can understand “ａlong tail" but not “ａ sad tail".

She tries to detect which part of the tail is“sad" just when the “tale" turns into ａ verse

in the shape of the winding “tail" of the Mouse. This is perhaps, as Gardner says in

The Annotated Alice, the besレknown example in English of emblematic, or figured

verse.

　　Being reproached for listening to the Mouse's tale absentmindedly, Alice tries to

show her attentiveness by referring to the physical “tail" figured in the teχt. She an-

swers the Mouse, 'You had got to the fifth bend*. This is too much for the Mouse to

understand and brings it a furious retort *Ihad not!' with the emphasis on “not"｡

　　This leads to a further mistake on the part of Alice, who takes “not" for “knot",

since it is associated with “bend". To this error is added confusion between the perfec-

tive auχiliary“have （got）", and the colloquial eχpression of the possessional verb “have

got". Furthermore Alice's response is not “knot" but 'A knot' with emphasis on the in-

definite article. This is quite suggestive. Alice corrects the Mouse grammatically. Her

intention is to point out that the object of the verb requires an article before the con-

Crete noun.

　　Alice's next remark 'Oh, do let me help to undo it' has ａ twofold interpretation :

one to the effect that if a bend in the tail has become tangled in ａ knot, she wants to

help to undo it, and the other to the effect that if the Mouse is in trouble solving ａ

problem, she wants to help it. The Mouse, however, interprets this“undo" as ａ sugges-

tion that it has “done" something amiss. Since the Mouse has not actually done any-

thing, Alice's remark seems beside the point. The Mouse takes Alice's comment for

nonsense and feels very much insulted. When Alice notices that the Mouse is angry,

all she can come up with is the apologetic cliche 'Ididn't mean it！ But you're so easily

offended, you know !’ Here, the conversation is broken off｡

　　All of this indicates that Alice's off-base remarks, one after another, make the

Mouse feel insulted, in spite of her ｅχcuse. But for Alice, there is no inconsistency in

what she has said, and she cannot understand why the Mouse gets angry and walks

away.　Alice's poor fielding skills,as it were. invites a failure in conversing with the

Mouse.

　　The following table shows the tentative conversation structure, where （　）is for

ｃｏｎtｅχtualｅχplanation and 〈　〉for supplementary comments.

－151－

Alice's Adventures in Wordland

Table 1

MOUSE ALICE

You promised to tellme your history,you

know, and why itis you hate― C and D.

{substituting "mine" for "your history")

Mine is a long and a sad tale ! ^T"^

(looking down with wonder at the Mouse's

tail)

(taking "mine" as "my tail")

Itis a long tail,certainly, but why do you call

,it sad ?

(wondering which part of the tail was "sad",

Alice listens to the Mouse's tale, which is

printed in the shape of the winding tailof the

Mouse)

(figured verse)

<to Alice who is watching the tail)

You are not attending !

What are you thinking of ? -―___^

I beg your pardon.

(trying to show her attentiveness in terms of

how farits tale has proceeded along the tail)

You had got to the fifth bend, I think ?

(being unable to understand her reference to

"bend", the Mouse responds negatively with

strong stress on "not")

I had not!

(mixing up "not" with "knot" and conclud-

ing that a bend has got tangled into a knot)

A knot!

(ready to help in unbinding)

Oh, do let me help to undo it !

(Not having done anything to "undo", and

thinking her talkingnonsense)^-^^

I shalldo nothing of the sort.

You insultme bv talkingsuch nonsense ! x

(seeing that the Mouse has got angry)

I didn't mean it!

But you're so easily offended, you know !

Please come back, and finish your history !

The emblematic verse in the shape of the Mouse's tailsymbolizes the cause of the

discrepancy between Alice and the Mouse. And to this verse Carroll made several re-

visions both in content and shape. It is quite interesting to trace the ways in which

-152-

Akiko Inaki and Tomoko Okita

the Mouse's tailis improved, because they clarifyhow Carroll was at pains to heighten

the problematic elements already mentioned in our conversational analysis.

Fieure 1 Figure 2

Figure 1 is from Alice's Adventures Under Ground, which is the original manuscript

of Alice'sAdventures in Wonderland and is hand-lettered by Carroll himself. In it we

have an entirely different verse and shape. This original tale answers Alice'squestion

about why the mouse dislikescats and dogs.

Figure 2 is from a facsimile of the first edition of 1866, Alice's Adventures in

Wonderland. One important difference from Figure 1 is that Figure 2 contains no refer-

ence to cats.

Figure 3 is from The Annotated Alice by Gardner. The end of the tailis a little

modified in shape.

Figure 4 is from the last edition, which Carroll himself corrected in proof. The

shape becomes more refined. In the tale,the indefinite articleis changed into the def-

inite article:'We must have the trial...'

■153-

Alice'sAdventures in Wordland

Figure 3 Figure 4

The Mouse reproaches Alice for not attending to its tale,while Alice is involved in

the tailof the Mouse. Alice shows that she had attended by mentioning "the fifth

bend". This raises the question: where is the fifth bend of the tail? In Figures 2 and

3, the fifthbend is in about the middle of the tail,while in Figures 1 and 4,it is almost

at the end of the tail.The Mouse itselfsays that 'Mine is a long and a sad tale!' This

is consistent with the semantic content when the fifth bend is at about the end of the

tail. Furthermore the shape of the tailis the most refined in Figure 4. Thus we can

see that in the last edition checked by Carroll,we have the tale and the shape, which

exactly suits the flow of the conversation between Alice and the Mouse.

154-

Akiko InAK! and Tomoko Okita

How to Get the Caterpillar'sAdvice

Alice is searching for something to eat or drink in order to grow up again when she

meets ａ caterpillar sitting on top of ａ mushroom. Silence reigns for some time be-

tween them as the Caterpillar quietly smokes ａlong hookah without noticing her or

anything else. At last the Caterpillar addresses Alice, asking, 'Who are you ?･ This

does not serve as an encouraging opening for Alice, as she is not sure herself who she

is after the number of changes that have taken place in her body that day. To Alice's

hesitant answer, 'I－I hardly know, Sir, just at present－', the Caterpillar demands

'Explain yourself I' Already troubled about her identity, Alice literallyinterprets this

to mean “explain who you are" instead of the normal interpretation “ｅχplainclearly

what you're saying". She therefore answers, 'Ica'n't[sic]explain myself, I'm afraid,Sir,

because I'm not myself, you see∴showing her deep distress. The Caterpillar,however,

is not concerned with her distress and instead fastens only on her link words and re-

plies,'Idon't see',showing how literallyit has taken her. So misconstrued and inter-

rupted, Alice cannot proceed further forａtime.

　　　When she eventually tries to reply, Alice says, 'and being so many different sizes

in ａ day is very confusing', to which the Caterpillar simply retorts,'Itisn't.' Remem-

bering that the Caterpillar has to turn firstinto ａ chrysalis and then into ａ butterfly,

Alice is kind enough to interpret its simple comment sympathetically and says, 'well,

perhaps you haven't found it so yet‥. I should think you'llfeelit a littlequeer, wo'n't

you ?' The answer, however, is 'Not a bit.'Trying to meet it halfway, Alice perceives

their different points of view and then moderately says, 'alll know is,it would feel

very queer to me.' To this comes 'You ！Who are you?', which brings their conversa-

tion right back to the very beginning. Irritated,Alice gravely answers, 'I think you

ought to tellme who you are, first' 'Why ？'is the Caterpillar'stypically terse answer

and this so puzzles Alice,despite all her efforts to proceed with the conversation, that

she gives up and turns away.

　　　Butthen the Caterpillarsays, 'Come back ！I've something important to say I' This

sounds promising, so Alice returns only to be told,'Keep your temper.' Lectured by

the very one who has caused this trouble. Alice says, 'Is that all?' trying to swallow

her anger. 'No' is the Caterpillar'smonosyllabic reply. Then it subsides into a long

－155－

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Alice'sAdventures in Wordland

silence,finallybroken by 'So you think you're changed, do you ？' At last the conver-

sation seems to have resumed properly and Alice begins to complain that she cannot

remember things as she used. In compliance with its request to show what is the

matter with her, Alice begins to repeat 'You are old.Father William≒which turns out to

be ａ nonsense parody of the original verse. The Caterpillar'scomment is 'That is not

said right' Alice admits, 'some of the words have got altered',but the Caterpillar

insists,'Itis wrong from beginning to end'. and the conversation is dropped again.

　　　The Caterpillar has ｅχaggerated Alice's moderate confession to the utmost. This

reflectsthe different referentiallevels of the quantifiers some and all,which is implied

in 'from beginning to end'. Pragmatically speaking, this difference can be notationally

rendered, 0くsome＜many＜all. Incidentally, we may sometimes repeat verses wrongly,

but if they are wrong from beginning to end, the result is. logically speaking, a dif-

ferent verse. Taking into consideration the intention to repeat ａ verse, however, even

ａ completely different one is ordinarily acceptable apart from its incorrectness. The

Caterpillar,however, doesn't appreciate her intention and, furthermore, the verse she

has repeated｡

　　　Aftersome silence, the Caterpillar asks Alice, 'What size do you want to be ?'

Pleased that it has come to the point, Alice hastily replies,'Oh,I'm not particular as to

the size,only one doesn't like changing so often, you know.' To this the Caterpillar

says, 'Idon't know', which is another literalreply to the link words “you know", and

baffles Alice to the point she cannot proceed with the conversation. With such ａ

number of discouraging impasses. Alice again loses her temper.　The Caterpillar then

asks, 'Are you content now ？'and Aliceｅχpressesher wish to be a littlelarger, adding

that 'three inches is such ａ wretched height to be'. Unfortunately, the Caterpillar is

exactly three inches high so it retorts angrily, 'itis ａ very good height indeed !' Poor

Alice pleads, 'But I'm not used to itI'to which the Caterpillar retorts,'You'll get used

to it in time,'with the smoke of hookah. This time Alice realizesso well she has hurt

its feelings that she patiently waits untilit begins to speak again. The Caterpillar gets

down off the mushroom and crawls away into the grass, with the words 'One side will

make you grow taller,and the other side will make you grow shorter.' Alice is puz-

zled,thinking 'One side of what?　The other side of what？' The Caterpillar answers,

'Of the mushroom,' as ifit has read her mind. Then the Caterpillaris gone.

　　　Finally,the Caterpillar has taken Alice's wishes into consideration. Until now, the

－156－

Akiko Inaki and Tomoko Okita

Table 2 -1

CATERPILLAR ALICE

Who areyou ? -

(rather shyly)

I ― I hardly know, Sir, just at present―at

least I know who I was when I got up this

morning, but I think I must have been

■changed several times since then.

(sternly)

What do you mean by that?

Explain yourself! ^^

(taking literally "yourself" and substituting

"myself")

(very politely)

I ca'n'texplain myself, I'm afraid,Sir,because

I'm not myself, you see.

■(takingliterally"you see")-

I don't see. *" "

I'm afraid I ca'n't put it more clearly,for I

ca'n't understand it myself, to begin with;

and being so many different sizes in a day is

-verv confusine.

<a matter of course for the Caterpillar)

It isn't.iHHIir"

Well, perhaps you haven't found it so yet, but

when you have to turn into a chrysalis ― you

will some day, you know ― and then after

that into a butterfly,I should think you'llfeel

it a littlequeer, wo'n't you ?

Not a bit.

Well, perhaps your feelings may be different.

-AllI know is,it would feel very queer to me.

^substituting "you" for "me")

(contemptuously)

^^^^You ! Who are you ? t^_

(back again to the beginning) -

(a littleirritated at the Caterpillar)

I think vou ousrht to tellme who vou are. first.

Why?

Come back ! I've something important to say !

(puzzledand turningaway)

(coming back with expectation)

Keep your temper.

(swallowing her anger)Is thatall?

No.

157

Alice'sAdventures in Wordland

Table 2-2

CATERPILLAR ALICE

(silenceforsome time)

So you think you'rechanged, do you ?

I'm afraid I am, Sir.I ca'n'tremember things

as I used ― and I don't keep the same size for

ten minutes together !

Ca'n'tremember what things?(in a very melancholy voice)

■Well, I've tried to say 'How doth the little busy

bee' but it all came different !

Repeat 'You are old,Father Vfilliam'.

(repeating the verse)

That is not said right.

(timidly)

Not quite right,I'm afraid. Some of the words

have got altered.

<to the moderate "some")

(decidedly)

It is wrong from beginning to end.

What sizedo you want to be ?

(silence)

(hastily)

Oh, I'm not particularas to size,only one

doesn'tlikechansine so often vou know.

{taking literally "you know") -

I don't know. *-~~~

(feeling that she is losing her temper)

Are you content now ?

Well, I should like to be a littlelarger, Sir,if

you wouldn't mind, three inches is such a

wrAirhpri hpirrhtin Yip

(being exactly three inches high)

(angrily)

It is a very good height indeed ! :

(pleading in a piteous tone)

-But I'm not used toit !

You'll get used to itin time. <――"""" "

(smoking for some time)

(getting down off the mushroom)

One side will make you grow taller,and the

other side will make you grow shorter.

(waiting patiently)

(thinking to herself)

One side of what ? The other side of what ?

<as though reading her mind>^

Of the mushroom. ≪-

-158-

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Akiko Inaki and Tomoko Okita

Caterpillar turned the conversation any way it pleased. in its own sweet time, being in-

terrupted only when Alice was stuck for words to its curt comments. Alice is annoyed

when it changes the flow of discourse by giving literal interpretations to link words.

Alice misses the clues to the conversation, being at ａ loss how to answer its extremely

curt remarks. The Caterpillar, however, with the words 'Of the mushroom', actually

gives just the right answer to the question Alice asked herself at the beginning : 'I sup-

pose ｌ ought to eat or drink something or other; but the great question is“What ･?"'

How long it took to get appropriate advice ！

　　　Still,through Alice's efforts to proceed. the conversation reaches ａ more or less sat-

isfactory conclusion, even though she was at such ａ loss how to catch or chase the ball

thrown willfully by the Caterpillar, as symbolized by the ｅχtended silences｡

　　　The preceding Table is given verbatim, to show in simple quantitative terms ； how

short the Caterpillar's remarks were ； how annoyed and how patient Alice was in her

efforts to get along. Though it took the initiative in opening most of the conversa-

tions, the Caterpillar was curt and discouraging enough to make us doubtful if it had a

mind to proceed at all. Without Alice's efforts to proceed, the conversation would

have been broken off. The Caterpillar has his own way in conversation, if any, so that

Alice cannot enjoy ａ normal one. She cannot catch even the ball at all until the Cater-

pillar feels like throwing it normally. Even though she was at the mercy of the Cater-

pillar, however, she finally got proper advice from it, and this conversation ends happi-

ly somehow.

Is Alice ａ Serpent or ａ Little Girl ？

The second bite of mushroom, according to the Caterpillar'sadvice, suddenly makes

Alice enormously larger, with an immensely long neck. Her shoulders and her hands

are nowhere to be found and she looks down 'to find that her neck would bend about

easily in any direction,like a serpent'. This phrase serves to explain ａ hasty decision

on the part of ａ Pigeon which brings about another episode of miscommunication.

Alice begins by making ａ search for her shoulders as she wriggles her neck towards

the trees beneath.

　　　Sheis then attacked by the Pigeon which has been on the lookout for ａ serpent.

The Pigeon has jumped to the conclusion that Alice is ａ natural enemy, ａ serpent

－159－

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Alice'sAdventures in Wordland

aiming for its eggs.　Alice triesto convince it that she is not ａ serpent but “a little

girl",but only afterａ fateful moment's hesitation, which the Pigeon will not let pass.

As for Alice, she rather doubts who she is after such the number of changes.　But on

second thought, even with such ａlong neck and ａ big body, Alice is sure she is noth-

ing but a 7-year-old girl,so she cannot help calling herself 'a littlegirl'.The magic of

the mushroom has triggered ａhasty decision on the part of the Pigeon that Alice isａ

serpent. The Pigeon's suspicion is further deepened by Alice's uncertain sense of her

identity｡

　　　Thereis a difference between the Pigeon and Alice as to the semantic features of

the word “serpent". Alice's argument on the difference in species,is not appealing

enough to convince the Pigeon, given the ｅχplicitconteχt of her long neck and big

body.　Even worse, Alice calls herself not only ａ human being but, it seems unneces-

sarily and indiscreetly,“a littlegirl",which the Pigeon cannot believe in such ａ con-

text. This further convinces the Pigeon that Alice is indeed the serpent, notorious for

its lies since Adam and Eve. In addition, Alice's hesitation for ａ moment in calling

herself“a littlegirl"further excites the Pigeon's suspicion and at last it mutters dis-

believingly,'alikely story indeed j'

　　　The discrepancy between their perspectives gets more complicated with Alice'sre-

sponse to the Pigeon's query about eating eggs. Alice, too honestly and carelessly,

confesses, 'I have tasted eggs, certainly.'　Confident because of this admission, the

Pigeon will not budge from its argument that Alice is“a kind of serpent" eating its

eggs.　This shows that the Pigeon's argument is based mainly on the idea of“the nat-

ural enemy eating its eggs" among the many features of“the serpent". This dogmatic

assertion invites the unusual conclusion that Alice is one of that category, necessarily

ａ serpent. Concerned with itsindividual interests, the Pigeon overestimates the char-

acteristic“eating eggs", meaning it the decisive feature for“being the serpent". The

Pigeon takes things to an even greater extreme by assuming that a.serpent must nat-

urally want to eat Pigeon's eggs. The Pigeon asserts that itis concerned only about its

eggs and not the name of the enemy, saying, 'what does it matter to me whether

you're a littlegirl or ａ serpent *?' As for Alice,it is most outrageous to be called ａ

serpent and she hastily retorts,'itmatters ａ good deal to me'. Then, as soon as she

says, 'I'm not looking for eggs. l shouldn't want yours : l don't like them raw∴the

Pigeon's argument failsand she is released.

－160－

Akiko Inaki and Tornoko Okita

Table 3

PIGEON ALICE(taking Alice with a wriggling neck for a

serpent)

Serpent ! ―~――^___

(indignantly)

I'm not a serpent !

Serpent I say again ! *

(there'sno escape from the serpent)

(fully watchful in case the serpent is aiming

for its eggs)

Ugh, Serpent ! ――^____

(more and more puzzled)

(beginning to see its meaning)

" But I'm not a serpent, I tell you ! I'm a ―

-I'm a

(not letting Alice'shesitation escape) ""

Well ! What are you ? *""^

I can see you're trying to invent something^

(which is natural for a serpent)

(doubtfully after such changes)*I ―I'm a littlegirl!

(contemptuous of her answer, "a little girl"

with such a long neck)

^^^^^^A likely story indeed ! "^^

(the serpent is a liar)

You're a serpent;.,. I suppose you'll be telling

me next that you never tasted an egg !

<an egg = the Pigeon's egg, a prey to the

serpent) ＼

(too honestly)

I have tasted eggs, certainly, but littlegirls

eat eggs quite as much as serpents do, you

- know,

(eggs = only one kind of food)

I don'tbelieveit.*~ "

(iflittlegirlseat eggs as you say)

Why, then they'rea kind of serpent.

<in confidence)

You'relooking foreggs

(concerned only with eggs)

What does it matter to me whether you're a

littlegirlor a serpent?^_^

(quite silent with the new idea)

(impatient about being mixed up with the

serpent)

It matters a good deal to me, but I'm not

looking for eggs,

(if I was ever looking for eggs)

I shouldn't want yours: I don't like them

raw.

<jiointerestanymore in Alice who doesn'twant the Pigeon'seggs)^ ~~

Well,be off,then! *-^^

-161-

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Alice'sAdventures in Wordland

　　There are several causes for this particular paradigm of misunderstanding.　The

magic mushroom has made Alice physically just like ａ serpent, though to herself,she

is nothing but a littlegirl of 7. The general assumption that itis easy forａ serpent to

telllies prevents Alice'sargument from being accepted. The Pigeon considers“eating

its eggs" to be one of the semantic features of“the serpent". The matter of what to

callAlice then changes into ａ question of how to focus these semantic features. This

brings nothing but a further discrepancy. concerning eggs. To the Pigeon,“(my)eggs"

are the obvious referent, and they are thus, just as obviously, prey to the serpent ；to

Alice, they happen to be only one kind of food and there is no necessary reference to

pigeon's eggs.　Alice'scomment that she does not want the Pigeon's eggs soon dispels

the Pigeon's suspicion. in spite of her long wriggling serpent-like neck.

　　This incident shows the confusion brought about by arbitrary interpretations of

meaning on the part of the Pigeon. This neglects the social phase of language, which

is based on implicit semantic assumptions about general agreements on the meaning

of words. It also points up the difficultyof retorting when an interlocutor is too ｃｏｎ･

vinced of her own point of view. Alice, therefore, cannot proceed normally until she

becomes aware of their differencein word meaning.

　　Table 3 is given to show how willfulmisconstruals subvert communication.

Conclusion

These three conversations from Alice's Adventures in Wonderland have been recon-

structed and analyzed with reference to norms of conversational flow, analogically in

terms of pitching and catching words as balls.

　　In the case of the Mouse's tale.Alice herself,unaware of her original misunder-

standing, thought her pitching and catching were well done.　But actually she was so

poor at chasing the ball that her misunderstanding caused the Mouse to feelinsulted

and go away.　The failurein this conversation is due to Alice's poor fielding skills. As

for Alice, she means to converse sincerely. which is, however, based on the uncon-

scious mistake.

　　In the case of the Caterpillar,Alice could not catch the ball at all until the very

last stage, when the Caterpillar was kind enough to give the advice she wanted. The

conversation almost fails without the intentions of Alice and then the Caterpillar to

－162－

Akiko Inaki and Tomoko Okita

proceed. Finally the conversation ends happily for Alice｡

　　　In the case of the Pigeon, Alice was at first baffled by its unusual usage of words.

As soon as she became aware of this. she was able to chase the ball and regain some

kind of normal discourse, which resolved the discrepancy happily.

　　　In the first case. Alice's careless attitude gets herself into trouble with the Mouse.

In the others, conversely, Alice suffers conversational trouble caused by the whimsical

Caterpillar and the dogmatic Pigeon.

　　　These three ｅχamples of conversational ｅχchange present different ways in which

missing, chasing, and finding the ball represent paradigmatic instances of how impor-

tant it is for participants in normal conversation to be concerned with issues of cogni-

tive meaning, implicature, presupposition, intentions and feelings, and ｃｏｎtｅχt.Other-

wise our communications will inevitably tend to be as difficult as those of Alice and

her interlocutors in Wordland. These are pragmatic issues that none of us can afford

to ignore.

＊　We are very grateful to Prof. J.Herrick for his extensive stylisticsuggestions and hearty

　　encouragement on earlier versions of this paper.　All remaining inadequacies are our

　　own.

Texts

Carroll,Lewis, (1984)，Alice's adventures in wonderland. A facsimile of the firstedition of 1866.

　　　London/ Basingstoke : Macmillan Children's Books.

(1987). Alices adventures in wonderland and through the looking-glass. Edited

(1985). Alice's adventures under ground. New York : Holt，Rinehart and Win-

－163－

with an introduction by Roger Lancelyn Green. The world's classics. Oχford : Oxford

University Press.

　　　　　ston.

Gardner, Martin, ed.,(1970). The annotated Alice. New Ｙｏrk:Penguin Books.

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　References

Ball, W. J.,(1986). Dictionary of link words in English discourse. London/Basingstoke : Mac-

　　　millan Publishers.

Batey, Mavis, (1980). Alice'sadventures in ○xford. London : Pitkin Pictorials.

Bloom, Harold, ed｡(1987). Levjis Carroll. New York : Chelsea House.

Cole, Peter and Jerry L. Morgan, eds.，(1976). Syntax and semantics, vol.3; speech act. New

　　　York : Academic Press.

Alice's Adventures in Wordland

Fromkin, Victoria and Robert Rodman, (1978). An introduction to language, second edition.

　　　New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Gordon, David and George Lakoff, (1971). 'Conversational postulates'. Chicago Linguistic

　　　Society 7:63 －84.

Grice, H. Paul, (1976). 'Logic and conversation'. In Peter Cole and Jerry Ｌ. Morgan, eds.,1976.

Hudson, Derek, (1977). Lewis Carroll－an illustratedbiography. New York : New American Li-

　　　brary.

Inaki，Akiko and Tomoko Okita，(1991). Alice no eigo一一-fushigi-no-kunino kotoba-gaku (Alice's

　　　adventures in logic and language). Tokyo: Kenkyusha Shuppan.

Leech, Geoffrey Ｎ｡(1983). Principles of pragmatics. London ：Longman.

,（1987）. Meaning and the English verb. London ：Longman.

Mori, Yoshinobu, (1972). Imiron kara mita eibunpo (A semantic approach to English grammar).

　　　Tokyo : Taishukan Shoten.

Palmer, F. R.,(1981). Semantics, second edition. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Quine,Willard van Orman，(1940). Elementary logic. London : George Allen and Unwin.

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik, (1985). A co肖prehen-

　　　sive grammar of the English language. London : Longman.

Russell, Bertrand, (1940), An inquiry into meaning and truth. London: George Allen and

　　　Unwin. Rpt, Penguin, (1962).

Searle, John R., (1969). Speech act:an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge : Cam-

　　　bridge University Press.

Sutherland, Robert D., (1970). Language and Lewis Carroll. The Hague : Mouton.

Williams, S. H., Falconer Madan and Roger Lancelyn Green, eds., (1962). The Lewis Carroll

　　　handbook. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

Yule, George, (1985). The study oflanguage. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

－164－

1994年９月22日　受理