Bordwell admits that the first three meanings are intentional. They can be developed to be a rationale-agent model linked to the context of producing and receiving films. They can be generated by the grammatical competence so as to stay in the social space spectator’s of communication. However, the fourth meaning breaks this down. Symptomatic meaning merely results from the preferred reading. audience’s As previously discussed, narrative film theory of cognitive film semioticians proposes a communication model between the filmmaker (the enunciator) and the spectator (the addressee). Film can generate a deictic meaning related to the context of production or reception. This does neither mean that such a meaning is generated in every film, nor that this always occurs without any possibility of other meanings. The fact is that such a communication may occur as a specific consequence of the interactive motion of institution, modes and operations, based on the principle of relevance. What is important to note is that, though a film may not convey an actual historical reality, in a specific modification the spectator may choose a documentarizing reading to find a message that is assumed to be given to him/her. The filmmaker modifies a film to be read as such in the intended and grammar competence. In other words, the spectator’s context spectator is able to understand the deictic intention from a contextual and filmmaker’s grammatical modification. This does not mean that such a social space of communication is always successful, or that a documentary reading is about realization. However, once a social space of communication or a documentarizing reading in which the same way of producing meaning is adopted and the meaning is received by the spectator particularly given to him/her occurs, its principle and process can be described as such.
Bordwell admits that the first three meanings are intentional. They can be developed to be a rationale-agent model linked to the context of producing and receiving films. They can be generated by the spectator’s grammatical competence so as to stay in the social space of communication. However, the fourth meaning breaks this down. Symptomatic meaning merely results from the audience’s preferred reading. As previously discussed, narrative film theory of cognitive film semioticians proposes a communication model between the filmmaker (the enunciator) and the spectator (the addressee). Film can generate a deictic meaning related to the context of production or reception. This does neither mean that such a meaning is generated in every film, nor that this always occurs without any possibility of other meanings. The fact is that such a communication may occur as a specific consequence of the interactive motion of institution, modes and operations, based on the principle of relevance. What is important to note is that, though a film may not convey an actual historical reality, in a specific modification the spectator may choose a documentarizing reading to find a message that is assumed to be given to him/her. The filmmaker modifies a film to be read as such in the intended spectator’s context and grammar competence. In other words, the spectator is able to understand the filmmaker’s deictic intention from a contextual and grammatical modification. This does not mean that such a social space of communication is always successful, or that a documentary reading is about realization. However, once a social space of communication or a documentarizing reading in which the same way of producing meaning is adopted and the meaning is received by the spectator particularly given to him/her occurs, its principle and process can be described as such.
%28PhD%20Thesis%29%20THE%20WISDOM%20OF%20CHRONICLES%20Buyoung%20Son%20120107117.docx