Tuesday, June 01, 2010
I remember when I came across that word interorientation in my set of 120. I was confused as Hell because God Darmel taught us to look everything up that we didn't understand yet I couldn't find that damn word anywhere. I got into arguments with some muslims who said it was really 'interpretation'. Being the historical scientist that I was I got my hands on degree sets from when MFM was here and saw that they had interorientation in them. I later figured it out. It was actually quite simple. You had to check dictionaries from circa 1930 OR specialty linguistic dictionaries. If you notice the size of the average dictionary doesn't change yet new words come into existence every year. This is because they go through the dictionary and take out old words (words that aren't that heavy in circulation) in order to make room for new words. Interorientation was one of those words that was taken out yet is still in use amongst the linguistic community. The reason that some of the older Gods KNEW it was a word is because they DIDN'T have the internet. They didn't even have dictionaries in their homes. They had to go into public libraries and they dusted off those old dictionary tomes.
So for those who need some references for interorientation (or inter-orientation) I have listed them below. You can find usage of the word in works on linguistics especially. Specifically I found a lot regarding its usage within the works of Bakhtin. The below are excerpts from Bakhtin and the Human Sciences and Introduction to Bakhtin.
Bakhtin’s consistent emphasis on ‘interorientation’ adds significance to the concept of
dialogism.17 Interorientation suggests the ways in which meaning, as conditioned by
material circumstances, is contingent, not limitless (and is in fact rigorously context-
bound). Yet meaning is nonetheless negotiable, either in contentious and explicit ways,
or in subtle and more latent fashions, precisely because of its material bases. More than
one voice, identity, position, or logic is articulated or articulating at any one time, even
when only one voice is expressed. Indeed, monologue is possible only through a
disavowal of, and thus in relation to, other voices. Hence Bakhtin’s related coinage:
heteroglossia (other tongues).
Dialogism, interorientation, and heteroglossia do not ‘explain’ all cultural products or
material contexts all the time, in this study or beyond it. However, Bakhtin’s ideas do
provide a catalyst for discussing the relations between texts and contexts, materiality
and representation, especially in relation to deviant mobility. Dialogism is manifested as
the ingressions, egressions, and transgressions of rogues reveal the conflicted and
permeable nature of ideological and physical environments where such hybridity is
demonized. Moreover, dialogism animates how art realizes this deviant mobility. It
indicates the ways in which aesthetic products cultivate ambiguity and irresolution by
juxtaposing disparate discourses, thereby responding to the confusions constituting
material realities. With dialogism, as with Bakhtin’s theory of the Carnivalesque,
transgression and the containment of transgression can occur simultaneously.18
Expressions, communications, and the material contexts they realize, are hybrids,
internally unstable, and radically suggestive. Even as opposed and distinct discourses
are articulated, through dialogism denials can become affirmations, rejections can signal
inclusions, and transgressive intercoursings are impossible to resist. These features of
dialogism are perhaps initially best appreciated through an analysis of attempts to define
16 Holquist, op.cit., 20-21.
17 ‘Interorientation’ is a word employed in Bakhtin’s study of the early modern Carnivalesque; see
(1984) Rabelais and His World, trans. H. Iswolsky. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 465
‘Therefore, [the speaker’s] orientation toward the listener is an orientation toward a specific conceptual horizon, toward the specific world of the listener; it introduces totally new elements into his discourse….The speaker strives to get a reading on his own word, and on his own conceptual system that defines this word, within the alien conceptual system of the understanding receiver; he enters into dialogical relationships with certain aspects of this system. The speaker…constructs his own utterance on alien territory…’ The ‘subjective belief system of the listener’ means that ‘this dialogism bears a more subjective, psychological and (frequently) random character…’
Now with all of the above information I 'hope' that you can now draw up a functional definition for interorientation.