Ksenia Elisseeva - Bruno Osimo, traduzioni, semiotica della ...

3.3. Finally, there are rules that pertain to the system's external use.
Chess
The rule “remove a piece after
capturing it”; the time-limit, etc.
Language
The requirement that the speaker
really believe what he says 1 .
4. There are completely different violations for each of the types of rules
cited, which witnesses indirectly to the differences between them.
4.1. Rules of the 3.1. kind generally cannot be violated, for their violation
results in violation of the system. It is true, as pointed out in the note to 3.1., that
there are intermediate cases in language, such as grammatical government,
whose violation brings us to 3.2.
4.2.1. Rules of the 3.2.1. kind can of course be violated, most of all
because, generally speaking, it is possible for the different participants to make
use of them to a different extent. However, violation of these rules does not
necessarily lead to reduced effectiveness. On the contrary, in chess, as in
language, the creative but by no means unpremeditated violation of the 3.2.1.
rules can exert a very powerful effect, as happened with hypermodernism in
chess of the 1920s.
4.2.2. Violation of the 3.2.2. rules is involved where orientation on the
basis of mode1s plays a different role according to various inclinations 2 .
4.3. Violation of the 3.3. rules can go unpunished if it is not noticed by the
other participant and does not affect achievement of the goal set by the speaker
or player; let us note that in the case of language the goal here is precisely to
deceive the hearer; see 1.3.
1 From our viewpoint, such rules do not pertain to the postulates of language but rather
to the postulates of good sense; see Karpinskaâ, I. I. Revzin 1966: 34-36. For another
viewpoint, see Wheatley 1970: 34, according to which language contains a semantic rule of the
type, “A says: I promise X, entails: A intends X”.
2 The author has devoted a special study to this question.
46