Poetry and Scientific Exposition: An Analysis of Two Forms of Symbolic Representation
Author(s): Monica Wengrowicz Cooper
Source: Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Spring, 2002), pp. 86-99
Published by: University of Illinois Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3333628
Accessed: 14/08/2010 20:19
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=illinois.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Aesthetic Education.
http://www.jstor.org
Poetry and Scientific Exposition: An Analysis
of Two Forms of Symbolic Representation
MONICA WENGROWICZ
COOPER
Introduction
Art and science are generally thought to be two different forms of human
activity. When speaking of "arts," we normally use the term to encompass
diverse types of art such as painting, poetry, and music, even though the
modes of symbolization in the different arts are based on different characters such as notes, lines, and words. Science (and I refer here to natural science), however, communicates its findings using the same symbolization
scheme as the literary arts, namely, the English language. The book Languages of Art by Nelson Goodman provides a set of categories that purportedly serve to analyze a symbolic representation in its form as well as in its
referent.1 The exercise of examining the way in which a scientific paper is
written and its comparison to a literary piece might allow us to understand
where the work of art and the work of science are each located, as well as
their means of symbolic representation. The questions one might ask are:
how is the symbolization scheme used differently in the two activities? How
different are the written symbols of the literary arts from those of science
and in what way? How are the different meanings conveyed and what is
the realm of those meanings? Is a scientific paper a literary art, and if not,
why not? Is a literary piece fulfilling a scientific function? If the two forms
are different, how do words "stretch" to do both tasks? Where does the
work of art reside? Where does the work of science reside? The exercise of
comparison for the purpose of analysis and understanding can be a very
powerful means of illuminating features hitherto unseen. And Goodman's
work can be very useful in guiding an exploration into a symbolic work.
Goodman's analytical categories are used here in a novel way, namely directly applied to particular instances of symbolic representations. This
approach is shown to yield an understanding of the way in which poetry and
scientific writings have to be read.
Monica WengrowiczCooper is ResearchAssociate at HarvardGraduateSchool of
Education.She was a contributorto the specialJournalof AestheticEducationissue on
the artsand academicachievement,Fall2000.
Journalof Aesthetic Education,Vol. 36, No. 1, Spring 2002
?2002 Boardof Trusteesof the Universityof Illinois
Poetry and Scientific Exposition
87
With those aims in mind, this essay will first explore the form of poetry,
chosen for being short and, seemingly, particularly defined among the literary arts' forms. It will then analyze a paper of scientific writing using the
poetry analysis for contrast purposes. The analysis will follow the concepts
and definitions of Goodman's Languagesof Art with my personal deviations
from his categories clearly explained.
Two excerpts follow, the first exemplifies poetry and the second a scientific
writing. They will be used as models to base the analysis of these forms of
writing. This paper is not meant to apply only to these two particular writings but to draw conclusions as general as possible, and for that reason
other excerpts will be used when needed.
The Bells by Edgar Allan Poe is a poem of 113 lines; only the first 14 lines
of the poem follow:
Hear the sledges with the bellsSilver bells!
What a world of merriment their melody foretells!
How they tinkle, tinkle, tinkle,
In the icy air of night!
While the stars that oversprinkle
All the heavens, seem to twinkle
With a crystalline delight;
Keeping time, time, time,
In a sort of Runic rhyme,
To the tintinnabulation that so musically wells
From the bells, bells, bells, bells,
Bells, bells, bells
From the jingling and the tinkling of the bells.2
"Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids - A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic
Acid" by J.D. Watson and F.G.C. Crick, is a paper one page long; parts of
the second, third, fourth, and sixth paragraphs and the complete last two
paragraphs follow:
A structure for nucleic acid has already been proposed by Pauling
and Corey. They kindly made their manuscript available to us in advance of publication. Their model consists of three intertwined chains,
with the phosphates near the fiber axis, and the bases on the outside.
In our opinion, this structure is unsatisfactory for two reasons:... Another three-chain structure has also been suggested by Fraser (in press).
In his model the phosphates are on the outside and the bases on the
inside, linked together by hydrogen bonds. This structure as described
is rather ill-defined, and for this reason we shall not comment on it.
We wish to put forward a radically different structure for the salt of
deoxyribose nucleic acid. This structure has two helical chains each
coiled round the same axis. We have made the usual chemical assumptions, namely, that each chain consists of phosphate diester groups
joining b-D-deoxyribofuranose residues with 3', 5' linkages. The two
chains (but not their bases) are related by a dyad perpendicular to the
88
Monica WengrowiczCooper
fiber axis. Both chains follow right-handed helices, but owing to the
dyad the sequences of the atoms in the two chains run in opposite
directions... .The novel feature of the structure is the manner in which
the two chains are held together by the purine and pyrimidine bases.
The planes of the bases are perpendicular to the fibre axis. They are
joined together in pairs, a single base from one chain being hydrogenbonded to a single base from the other chain, so that the two lie side
by side with identical z-co-ordinates....It has not escaped our notice
that the specific pairing we have postulated immediately suggests a
possible copying mechanism for the genetic material. Full details of
the structure, including the conditions assumed in building it, together
with a set of co-ordinates for the atoms, will be published elsewhere.3
What is in a Word?
Words are characters in a notational scheme, the English language, according to Goodman: "Any symbol scheme consists of characters, usually with
modes of combining them to form others" (LA, 131). Characters in a notational scheme need to show properties of "disjointness" and "syntactic
equivalence." These two properties are of a syntactic nature: disjointness
means that "no mark may belong to more than one character" (LA, 133).
Syntactic equivalence or "character indifference" means that "being instances of one character in a notation must constitute a sufficient condition
for marks being 'true copies' or replicas of each other" (LA, 131).
Words are made up of more "atomic" characters: letters and also syllables, so that words are called "compound" characters (LA, 141). According to Goodman, a notational scheme correlates with a "reference field" or a
"compliance-class" (LA, 143). Letters are marks on a piece of paper which
correlate with vocally produced sounds in their field of reference. A string
of letters makes up a word and produces the string of sounds which is the
"composite" sound reference field of a word (LA, 146).
Words are also characters in a symbol scheme which has objects or actions as compliants ("compliance," "compliance-class," and reference field
are used interchangeably) (Goodman, 143-44). Goodman calls this scheme
the "object-English" scheme while words with sounds as compliants he
calls "sound-English" scheme (LA, 144). Because the compliance-class is different, the two schemes are separate schemes, although the same words are
members of both schemes. A word then denotes sounds and the same word
denotes an object, both as referents.
At this point we know something of what is in a word: words are made
up of letters which confer upon them a sound compliance-class and we also
know that words may denote an object or, put similarly, have objects as
compliants. ("Objects and events," LA, 144)). Goodman keeps these two as
separate compliants as he clearly states in his footnote on page 144.
Poetry and Scientific Exposition
89
Let us now explore the possibilities that the sound compliance-class of
words can open. The first thing is that, for vocal reasons, letters group in
syllables. The utterance of a syllable denotes, in a rhythmical compliance, a
single beat. A word with more than one syllable in it has one syllable that is
strong, the accented syllable, and the rest are weak. The word "sy-lla-ble"
has a beat correlate of TAN-tan-tan. We can say, then, that a word has a
sound correlate and it also has a rhythm correlate. Rhythm-compliant
schemes are extremely "redundant" for many words have three syllables
with an accent on the first (LA, 151). And the lack of a marked accent in
English sometimes creates a lack of disjointness in the rhythm scheme, for
example, up-set' and up'-set, both have "upset" for a character.
The symbol system of music also has compliance-classes of sound and
rhythm. Notes as characters in music correlate with pitch while the sound
that letters and words correlate with is vocal or phonetic and does not denote pitch. Despite this most substantial difference, the additional correlation with rhythm, common to both schemes, gives words the possibility to
"exemplify" musicality. "Exemplification" can be thought of as "the converse of denotation": "denotation implies reference between two elements
in one direction while exemplification implies reference between the two in
both directions" (LA, 59). Thus, words denote sound and in turn possess or
exemplify musicality.
We can summarize by saying that words are characters in at least two
notational schemes: the "sound-English" scheme, with sound (and rhythm,
although rhythm is "marked," only in phonetic writing) as reference field and
the "object English" scheme with objects and events as compliants in their
reference field. Because words possess properties of sound and rhythm, they
can exemplify musical elements.
Words in Poems and Scientific Writings - Text and Compliance Classes
Language is built as a string of words, forming infinite numbers of "compound characters" such as sentences. Additional elements are used such as
punctuation marks, which add intonation (",", ";", ".", "( )", "?", "!").
Goodman does not address these elements, except he mentions "mood" (?
and !) and only to say that "[it] does not make a system notational or not
notational" (LA, 155 ). Of the two compliance classes that words denote,
namely object-compliance and sound-compliance, we need to explore the
second one in more detail at the start because in poetry the sound compliance
of words acquires its greatest prominence.
Words, having a sound and a rhythm compliance, can be thought of as
units of sound, which when stringed in language can be compounded to
create reference to additional elements of music. One example already mentioned is the intonation that punctuation marks bring to regular speech. In
poetry, not only punctuation marks but the more or less regular intervals
90
Monica WengrowiczCooper
created by the verse form introduce a correlate intonation (intonation correlate with line). The verse form imparts both intonation and phrasing, also an
element of music, by means of the silence that follows the end of the line and
the time it takes to go to the next line. The italicized words above denote
musical properties which, in turn, are exemplified in poetry using linguistic
devices.
Using the example of The Bells, we can look at additional musical referents. One is repetitiveness, a common pattern in music. In The Bells we find
sound repetitions that are sequential as well as at a distance:
Sequential repetition: tinkle, time, bells
At a distance repetitions: bells-foretells, tinkle-oversprinkle, nightdelight, and time-rhyme, for example.
At a distance repetitions become rhymes when they occur at the end of a
phrase or line. Repetitiveness is also apparent in this poem in the number of
beats per line: 4,2,8,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,8, then 8 times the word "bells" (eight number of beats as well as sound repetitions), and then 7 beats for the last line.
Rhythms also repeat: in the shape of four beats with an accent on the third
("How they Tinkle") and in their combination with three beats with an accent in the third beat ("with a crysta-lline delight"). We can see how the
strong and weak beats can produce a variety of rhythmic combinations,
similar to those of music.
A form of harmony for the entire piece can be produced by devices such
as rhyme combinations: bells with foretells, then tinkle, night, oversprinkle,
twinkle, delight, time, rhyme, wells, bells, bells, bells - a pattern, in this
case, where the same rhyme is found at the beginning and end of the poem:
a-a-b-c-b-b-c-d-d-a-a-a-a. Harmony is produced also by repeats of number
of beats as shown above.
We have at this point found several pieces of evidence that in this poem
there is an emphatic use of the musical compliance class of language, both
between word-pairs and in the poem as a whole. One can probably safely
say that most other forms of literary discourse do not make use of the musical compliance of words as much as poetry does. Poems thus express musicality by exemplifying extensions of labels such as intonation, harmony,
and phrasing. Intonation is much more complex in real music than in a
poem, but a read-poem exemplifies intonation more than regular speech
does. The poem expresses musical intonation.
Versification and the expression of the musical compliance of words are
both an essential part of what poetry is, not just in The Bells but in poetry in
general. Those are the most obvious distinguishing and defining characteristics of poetry vis-a-vis every other form of (prose) writing.
In contrast, the paper by Watson and Crick displays no versification and
no musicality, and neither do most other scientific papers in English. One
can try versifying the text: We wish to put forward/a radically different
Poetry and Scientific Exposition
91
structure/for the salt of deoxyribose nucleic acid. This exercise adds very
little musicality (some intonation perhaps), and makes the meaning of sentences hard to follow. If we conclude that this scientific paper (and probably
most others) does not have a musical compliance-class more than regular
speech does, we can establish a first source of dissimilarity between the two
forms of literary discourse: this poem expresses musicality while scientific
writings do not. The conclusion can be, most probably, extended to traditional poetry in general vis-a-vis scientific writing, since rhyme and number
of syllables per line and combinations of those are the standard form of
much of traditional poetry.
The poem The Bells not only expresses music (metaphorically exemplifying it) but its object-compliance is, in great measure, musicality. Words that
say music are, for example: bells, melody, tinkle, time, musically, and jingling. Of course, one can find many poems in which the object-compliance
is not musicality but that still have a sound compliance class, as noted
above. The two, of course, need not coincide. Traditional poems, those with
rhyme, stanzaic form, and line measure, will have always musicality in their
sound-compliance; meanwhile, their object compliance could be anything
else.
Comparing the scientific paper to a poem with such remarkable soundcompliance class and concurrent sound object-compliance makes the task
more difficult. Perhaps a poem with less musical expressiveness and a different object-compliance class, one that is more visual, would help make a
more balanced comparison. Following is the first stanza of the poem Good
Night, by William Carlos Williams:
In brilliant gas light
I turn the kitchen spigot
and watch the water plash
into the clean white sink.
On the grooved drain-board
to one side is
a glass filled with parsleycrisped green.
Waiting
for the water to freshen-:
a pair of rubber sandals
lie side by side
under the wall-table
all is in order for the night.4
The poem is written in free-verse: the stresses range between one (Waiting) and four (into the clein white sink), the syllables between two (Waiting)
and eight (all is in order for the night), without a pattern.5
Despite the apparent absence of rhyme, this poem possesses musical
compliants. There are a few sound repetitions: "clean" and "green" and
92
Monica WengrowiczCooper
then "light" closing the first line with "night" closing the last line. This last
rhyme, at the beginning and end, creates an enveloping harmony. Also, of
the sixty-seven words in the poem, all but twelve are monosyllables. Monosyllables have the sound quality of a single beat: blunt, simple and familiar.
The sound of the poem, although it appears to resemble that of language
flowing naturally, as if in conversation, possesses many more musical
denotations than regular speech does.
What is the object reference-field of the poem? We "see" a spigot being
turned on, water splashing out of it and into a clean white sink. We "see"
parsley in a glass on the side of a grooved drain-board. We wait for the water
to freshen, we "see" rubber sandals lying side by side under a wall-table.
Then we find out that it is night time (in case we did not realize it from the
first line: everything is happening "in brilliant gas light") and that the poet
feels that "all is in order for the night."
The object reference field is quite clear and straightforward in this poem.
Poems can be obscure in their reference. Often, students of the poet and his
or her style can aid with their expertise to interpret the nature of the reference
field denoted. I will come back to interpretation later.
The reference field I just described is the reference field denoted by the
words in the poem. What is the reference field of the poem as a "character
in a notational scheme" itself (LA, 207)? I would say: the poet going from
item to item and noticing each as in a series of film shots - the spigot, the
parsley, the shoes, and the wall-table; the last hours of the day, the poet
readying for the night; order, cleanliness, peace of mind to focus on the
simple things around; the poet watching water flowing and waiting for it to
freshen, his attention calm and receptive. Thus, the reference field of the
poem is all that the reference field of the words denote and at the same time
more than that; which is to say, not that. For one can notice that in the reference field proposed for the poem, I have used words that are not characters
in the poem: noticing, readying, last hours of day, order, cleanliness, peace
of mind, calm, and so forth. It appears, then, that the poem conveys things
it does not say. How does it do that? One could explain this by saying that it
"expresses" those things - that "what is expressed is metaphorically exemplified" (LA, 85). Thus, according to Goodman, what the poem does not expressly denote (by "saying" it) but still implies or refers to derives from its
metaphorically exemplifying those properties. How is metaphorical exemplification, or expression, different from interpretation? Goodman warns us
to "reserve the term "expression" to distinguish the central case where the
property belongs to the symbol itself regardless of [anything, including]
subject-matter, author, or spectator [reader]" (LA, 85-86). Thus, we need to
find in the poem itself the metaphorical exemplifications of what we say the
poem expresses. We can say, for example, that "Waiting" is metaphorically
exemplified: The word is written not in alignment with the rest of the poem,
Poetry and Scientific Exposition
93
but after a space, a "waiting period."6 We wait to say "waiting," so in the
poem waiting is said and is also expressed by the parallel act of waiting.
Another example of what is expressed is "peacefulness, receptiveness, and
simplicity": the actions described are "turn," "watch," "waiting," "lie." Also,
the eye moves, as if with a filming camera, from gas light, to spigot, to sink,
to glass, to parsley, to rubber sandals to wall-table, simple items that by
coming into full focus make simple things become all important. Then, "all
is in order for the night" is the natural conclusion: all that has been expressed so far is indeed in order. The poem says orderliness and expresses
it.
In summary, the reference field of the poem is not just what the words
denote but what the poem expresses. What the poem as a whole refers to is
expressed by exemplification with verbal or other poetic devices, such as
lineation (as in the "
Waiting" case). Having clarified the object reference field of a poem (at least this poem), I will come back later to discuss
exemplification further and the place of the literary work.
Now it is time to turn our attention to the scientific writing to try to understand it as a "character in a notational scheme" using Goodman's analysis (LA, 207). As was found above, in a scientific paper, the sound reference
field of words is not emphasized and compounded as was found to be the
case in poetry. However, in making this choice a scientific paper is no more
different from poetry than some other types of works in prose are, and than
all of prose is when it comes to the full range of musical properties expressed
in poetry, such as rhythm and phrasing.
The reference field of the Watson and Crick paper can be divided into
three sections: first, a reference to the current state of "knowledge" in the
specific field of "DNA-molecule modeling," followed by a description of
the model being advanced for consideration and closing with a reference to
the value of the present contribution to scientific theory in the field. This
format, repeated over and over in almost every paper long and short,
distinguishes scientific exposition from other forms of prose writing.
If we look into this particular paper in more detail, we find in the aforementioned first section: "a structure proposed by Pauling and Corey...is
unsatisfactory" and another structure "by Fraser...is ill defined, and for this
reason we shall not comment on it." Words here describe unsatisfactory
and "no comment" structures, thus implying the need for a satisfactory and
sound structure. Next, let us look at the third section: "the specific pairing
we have postulated immediately suggests a possible copying mechanism
for the genetic material" is preceded by - the now famous - "It has not
escaped our notice." The second part of the sentence says all that needs to be
said for scientific purposes: this mathematical structure displays a mechanism
that will work for the structure's known function which is the copying of
genetic material. As in most other papers, the "fit" of the present paper's
94
Monica WengrowiczCooper
finding into the general theory of knowledge is remarked (LA, 264). What
does "it has not escaped our notice" add to this statement? It could express
simply awareness of a fact ("we notice") or, perhaps it could imply something more metaphorical, like awareness of the profound implications of
the finding, or even the forestalling of any would-be "interpreters" from
proceeding to publish their thoughts on the model. The difficulty in determining what is expressed here is explained by Goodman when he notes
that "the boundaries of expression...are inevitably somewhat tenuous and
transient" (LA, 90). So, in retrospect, and having the model proposed by
Watson and Crick turn out to be so influential in the last forty years, we
might tend to ascribe a premonitory, highly history-making reference to
those six words: "it has not escaped our notice." According to Goodman,
and as it was remarked for the poem, expression for a verbal symbol is limited to "only properties metaphorically exemplified" so that what is expressed is not exactly what is said. It can be concluded then that something
other than scientific fact is expressed with the phrase "it has not escaped
our notice," the content of which might change somewhat with time and
circumstance.
The object reference field of these two sections expressed first, the need
for a satisfactorymodel (in "unsatisfactory" and "no comment") and last, the
impact of this model on the rest of the field ("It has not escaped our notice").
These two sections refer to issues beyond the description of the model and,
as mentioned above, they are the norm in scientific papers. So there seems
to be a social norm adhered to in this genre, a reflection of how science is
constructed: the paper addresses the scientific community declaring how its
findings fit in to what is known and closes with the interpretation of the
change that would result with the paper's acceptance and the adoption of
its findings. Without the community's recognition, the scientific paper has
no value. If the work is not accepted and adopted it is useless and forgotten.
That is the underlying meaning expressed in the introduction and conclusion
sections of a scientific paper.
In the core of the paper, words describe a model structure for the "molecule of DNA." Does the paper as a character express something other than
what the words denote? As we learned when analyzing the poem, the text
might express properties different than those "said" (LA, 91). Thus, we must
look into what properties are exemplified in the text. The text possesses
clarity, orderliness, detail, chemical symbolization, and a diagrammatic representation of the verbal description. These are distinguishing properties of
every other scientific paper: clarity, detail, scientific symbolization. They
permeate scientific discourse, making it easy to identify from other forms of
prose. Words are chosen which possess as unambiguous a denotation as
possible. Predicates are added on and on to increase detail and dispel ambiguity of previous predicates' compliants. Parentheses are used for further
Poetry and Scientific Exposition
95
clarification. Of communicational necessity, the scientific paper must be
written in the symbolic means of language, a notational scheme and not a
notational system precisely because of its ambiguity and semantic density
(LA, 152). However, the main reference field of the paper is a mathematical
model, physically constructed in the laboratory, presumably out of threedimensional shapes (such as rods and spheres). Other than expressing
acknowledgement of the scientific community - with comments such as
"The novel feature of the structure" and "It has been found experimentally
[by others]" - the description of the mathematical model and its "fit" with
existing scientific data on the "molecule of DNA" is the only reference field
of the paper. The description of a mathematical model and of quantified
measurements of chemically and physically symbolized properties is carried out here with the symbolic means of language, a scheme with built-in
denotational and expressive ambiguity. Rather than utilizing the properties
of language such as ambiguity and semantic density to increase expression
as in other forms of literary discourse, the language in the scientific paper
seeks to be stripped down of those properties and to be closer to unambiguity
and semantic disjointness and differentiation.
What is the referential relationship between the "model" and the "molecule of DNA?" A model is a symbol which denotes that which it models
(LA, 172). The "model for the structure of DNA" described in this paper denotes the molecule of DNA. It is nonverbal, so it is unlike a description (LA,
172). A model, according to Goodman, is a diagram, a three dimensional
one. Being made of rods and spheres makes it a "digital model" (LA, 173).
This model which denotes the molecule of DNA, is the object reference field
of the paper.
What is the "Work?"
According to Goodman, "a literary work is not the compliance class of a
text but the text or script itself" (LA, 209). The poem, in our case GoodNight,
is its exact words and lineation, for the literary work is the poem itself. Being part of a notational scheme, the poem has a compliance-class. But the
poetic work does not seek to describe that compliant, but to express something other than that. The property the poet seeks to exemplify (say, peacefulness), finds in this poem its compliance, or, in other words, its expression. The poem is crafted to convey that which is not said but expressed, and
its expression is locked in the poem's syntax and semantics.
In the case of the scientific exposition, is this a literary work whose value
resides in the text itself and not in its compliance class? In the previous
section we found the central compliance class of the paper to be the model
for the structure of the molecule of DNA. The model would not be of any
96
Monica WengrowiczCooper
lesser value and the work not less acclaimed if the paper had a different
syntax. For a scientific paper, all other papers, written or verbal, that have
an equivalent compliance (the same model of the DNA molecule as the one
in the Watson and Crick paper), are equivalent regardless of their syntactic
composition. In other words, when the Watson and Crick model is described, say, in a textbook, as the model of the DNA molecule, that description is equivalent to this paper, even if this paper is not even quoted. This
equivalence explains the "urgency" in the publishing expressed at the end
of the paper. If somebody else would have published a paper, of totally
different syntax, but describing the same model structure for DNA before
the Watson and Crick paper, this latter paper would have been considered
in the scientific literature literally a "copy." The identity of a scientific paper
resides in its compliance class, so that all papers that denote the same
compliance-class are equivalent.
The work of science, thus, is in the creation of models. The models themselves aspire to denote the physical world. The work is done before the paper is written, and so is the "fit" or interpretation of the model vis-a-vis the
existing theoretical frameworks. Having finished the "work," the scientistwriter writes the scientific exposition text focused on denoting the new
model.
Thus, "a literary work is not the compliance class of a text but the text or
script itself" (LA, 209 ); but the scientific work is the compliance class of a
text and not the text or script itself. "Even replacement of a character in a
[literary] text by another synonymous character (if any can be found in a
discursive language) yields a different work" (LA, 209). As clearly and elegantly written as a scientific text might be, it is not a literary work, as a
change of words in the text is inconsequential. The scientific work resides in
a place other than the text: it resides in the model that denotes some aspect
of the natural world. The scientist works at fitting the data collected experimentally to a mathematical, chemical, or diagrammatic representation of
the physical world. The paper does not seek to express abstract properties
or feelings. On the contrary, it seeks to denote as unambiguously as possible
that which is the actual work of science: findings or models of the natural
world, complete with methods to facilitate "copying" or replication. Expressions of communality with fellow scientists are part of the genre and, as it
was found above, are typically located at the opening and closing sections
of the text.
If the paper is not a literary art and the work of science is in the scientific
models, then what is the function of the paper? Its value as a representational symbol is to represent the work so that it can transcend the laboratory and add to the general body of scientific knowledge by means of its
acceptance in the social context of the scientific community.
Poetry and Scientific Exposition
97
The Aesthetic in Poetry and Science
A poem is, at one and the same time, syntactically articulate and, as a field
of reference of properties exemplified, a poem is semantically dense (LA,
238-39). "Thus even though a literary work is articulate and may exemplify
or express what is articulate, endless search is always required here as in
other arts to determine precisely what is exemplified or expressed" (LA,
240). Indeed it was not straightforward to define what property the poem
GoodNight exemplified and how, even in a poem so especially clear, written
in language that appears to be that of a casual conversation.7 The compliance-class of the words seems to be mostly the concrete, familiar world and
its functioning, except for the last line. How does this poem, then, express a
variety of feelings and properties and how does it convey an aesthetic experience? Roman Jakobson says about poetry: "anything sequent is a simile,"
meaning that the "contiguity [of words] imparts to poetry its...polysemantic essence."8 Expression in a poem occurs as a result of words acquiring a great multidimensionality: their sound compliance, their regular
semantic compliance, and the metaphoric semantic value imparted by the
contiguity with other words. Goodman suggests the term "repleteness" as
an aesthetic "symptom" mainly for syntactically dense systems, where multidimensionality in the characters reflects on relatively more repleteness
(LA, 252-53). Although "scripts" are not inherently syntactically dense (as
sketches are, for example), the multidimensionality of words and wordstrings in the poem is the source of the relatively higher degree of repleteness in the poetic language compared to other scripts. For example, I found
the poem to use the musical compliance of words in a way unusual for a
discursive symbol: rhythm, phrasing, time, harmony, and intonation; as
well as to express abstract properties (exemplification) by means of lineation and word sequencing. The aesthetic symptom of semantic density (LA,
252) is also found in the poem as a character in its implied allowance for
varied interpretations. The repleteness in the language, as well as the semantic density are complemented by a third aesthetic symptom in the
poem, namely, exemplification. Exemplification focuses on the expression
of properties, those "possessed and shown forth" (LA, 253), not denoted.
Good Night expresses properties such as orderliness, simplicity, and peacefulness. Exemplification and repleteness as aesthetic symptoms derive
naturally from the analysis of the poem using Goodman's system of inquiry
into symbolic systems.
How does the scientific exposition fare in an analysis of the aesthetic?
The text as discursive language displays little relative repleteness. In fact,
quite the contrary is true. The paper as a character in a notational scheme,
including all its various means of representation, such as language, diagrams and chemical symbols, could be said to have a multidimensionality,
98
Monica WengrowiczCooper
and perhaps a certain relative repleteness, although all those representations are by themselves not syntactically dense. However, the text, as script,
does not utilize the many properties of words like the poem does. What it
does do (at its best) is show exemplification in the properties of conciseness,
clarity, and unambiguity, which may satisfy aesthetic preferences for some
people.
However, since I have argued that the work of science resides in the construction of the model and in the fit between data and theory, all of which
are described in the paper, it is arguably in the model and in that fit with
theory that one should look for the aesthetic in science. The model appears
to be a relatively replete symbol: it is a representation with multidimensional properties; mathematical, chemical, functional, epistemological, social; a structure which fits into a number of theoretical mainframes, from
the physico-chemical to the Darwinian, to the molecular, to the clinical and
social. The symbolic structure, with its multiple properties is an extraordinarily replete, multidimensional creation. This is where the work is and this
is where the aesthetic resides; the language that describes the model in the
paper tries only to do justice to it, to depict it as clearly as language would
allow.
Thus, it could be argued that the aesthetic in science resides in the uncovering of truth. Goodman quickly dispels the notion that science deals
with truth and art does not. He prefers to focus on "fit," fit "of theory to
facts and of facts to theory - with the double aim of comfort and a new
look" (LA, 264). The DNA model thus seems to bring "order" to the DNA
molecule riddle. Good Night seeks to express "orderliness" as well. And to
cite Goodman one more time: "Truth and its aesthetic counterpart amount
to appropriateness under different names....What I am stressing is that the
affinities here are deeper, and the significant differentia other, than is often
supposed" (LA, 264)
Conclusions
The comparison of two forms of symbolic representation in this essay has
yielded new insight into both. The form of poetry has been subjected to
close scrutiny previously by others, probably because it is an art form.
However, a detailed analysis using Goodman's categories helps greatly in
understanding how different fields of reference, such as semantic and auditory, provide for the relative repleteness of language which is so enchanting
in poetry. The scientific exposition form has been less analyzed for its own
value and this approach yielded fresh understanding of the work of science. In the particular case of the Watson and Crick paper, the model to
which the paper referred was indeed a "rods and balls" model, physically
constructed in the laboratory. A variety of molecular models are built in
Poetry and Scientific Exposition
99
this way and then described in a scientific paper. However, my conclusion
reaches beyond physical models: I conclude that the work of science consists of building a model of the natural world to which the scientist fits the
data obtained experimentally, adjusting data to model and model to data.
This paper demonstrates that the work of science is done before the paper is
written, that is, that the identity of the work of science does not reside in the
syntax of the paper itself but in its field of reference, and that the field of
reference is a model of the natural world. What might this model be? Instances that come to mind are three-dimensional shapes, diagrams, laws, familiar substances, mechanisms, and movements. In addition, looking into
the semantics of the introduction and the conclusion in the scientific paper
showed the interest to have the work accepted by the scientific community
as well as the fit of the introduced work to current relevant scientific
theory.9
NOTES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Nelson Goodman, Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1976). This book will be cited as LA in the text for all subsequent references.
Edgar Allan Poe, "The Bells," in ThePoetical Worksof EdgarAllan Poe (New York:
George H. Doran, 1921), 13-14.
J.D. Watson and F.G.C. Crick, "Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids - A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid," Nature no. 117 (1953): 737-738.
William Carlos Williams, GoodNight, in The CollectedPoems of William CarlosWilliams, Vol. 1, 1909-39, ed. A. Walton Litz and Christopher MacGowan (New
York: New Directions, 1986), 85-86.
Marjorie Perloff, Poetry On and Off the Page: Essays for Emergent Occasions
(Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 1998), 129.
Ibid., 131.
Ibid., 130.
Roman Jakobson, "Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics," in Style in Language, ed. Thomas A. Sebeok (New York: The Technology Press of MIT and John
Wiley and Sons, 1960), 370.
I wish to thank the support of Professors Howard Gardner, Catherine Elgin, and
Ellen Winner. I also thank Professor Israel Scheffler for reading and commenting on the manuscript and Mike Connell for his encouragement and comments.