De-authoring or Authoring?: A plunge into the question of authorship and language in J.M. Coetzee's Foe

J. M. Coetzee's Foe is not only a post-colonial novel, but it is also a re-writing of a classic, and its main themes are language, authorship, power and identity. Moreover, Foe is narrated by a woman, while written by a male, Nobel prize winning South African author. The aim of my tesina is to focus on the question of authorship and the role of language in Foe. Without any claim to be exhaustive, in the first section I will examine some selected extracts of Coetzee's book, in order to provide an analysis of the novel. These quotations will mainly be its metalinguistic parts and will be analysed in the “theory” sections of my work, relying on literary theory and on previous works on the novel. Among others, I will cover themes such as the relationship between speech and writing, the connection between writing, history, and memory, the role of silence and alternative ways of communicating and the relationship between literary authority and truth. These arguments will be the foundation for my second section, in which I will attempt to shed a light on the importance of the novel from a linguistic point of view, but always keeping an eye on the implication that this has on authorship. While it is true that it is less politically-permeated than Coetzee's previous works, Foe is above all a “journey of discovery” in the world of language and authorship. In fact, it becomes a warning for any person immersed in the ocean of language since, while everyone naturally tends to trust speech and writing as the only medium through which one can get closer to the truth, authority never is a synonym of reliability, and language is a system of communication behind which structures of power, misconceptions, lies, and treacherous tides easily hide.

Benchmarking ’Expressing Without Asserting’ approaches on a large Wikidata dump

Semantic Web technologies provide the means to express the knowledge in a formal and standardized manner, enabling machines to automatically derive meaning from the data. Often this knowledge is uncertain or different degrees of certainty may be assigned to the same statements. This is the case in many fields of study such as in Digital Humanities, Science and Arts. The challenge relies on the fact that our knowledge about the surrounding world is dynamic and may evolve based on new data coming from the latest discoveries. Furthermore we should be able to express conflicting, debated or disputed statements in an efficient, effective and consistent way without the need of asserting them. We call this approach 'Expressing Without Asserting' (EWA). In this work we identify all existing methods that are compatible with actual Semantic Web standards and enable us to express EWA. In our research we were able to prove that existing reification methods such as Named Graphs, Singleton Properties, Wikidata Statements and RDF-Star are the most suitable methods to represent in a reliable way EWA. Next we compare these methods with our own method, namely Conjectures from a quantitative perspective. Our main objective was to put Conjectures into stress tests leveraging enormous datasets created ad hoc using art-related Wikidata dumps and measure the performance in various triplestores in relation with similar concurrent methods. Our experiments show that Conjectures are a formidable tool to express efficiently and effectively EWA. In some cases, Conjectures outperform state of the art methods such as singleton and Rdf-Star exposing their great potential. Is our firm belief that Conjectures represent a suitable solution to EWA issues. Conjectures in their weak form are fully compatible with Semantic Web standards, especially with RDF and SPARQL. Furthermore Conjectures benefit from comprehensive syntax and intuitive semantics that make them easy to learn and adapt.