Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1 Introduction
1 Earlier versions of some sections of this chapter have appeared in Semino (2005), Semino
(2007) and Semino (2011).
280 Elena Semino
that he has been encouraged to write a novel by Siobhan, his favourite teacher at
the special-needs school he attends. However, as he does not like “proper novels”
(Haddon 2003: 5),2 he has decided to write an autobiographical murder mystery
novel, that chronicles his attempt to discover who killed his next-door neigh-
bour’s dog, Wellington. As the story progresses, Christopher not only discovers
the identity of Wellington’s murderer but much else besides, and goes through
several traumatic experiences. In addition, Christopher’s narrative reflects and
reveals his own peculiarities, and particularly the challenges and insights that
result from having a mind that clearly works in a way that cannot be straightfor-
wardly described as ‘normal’. The words ‘autism’ and ‘Asperger’ never occur in
the novel, but Christopher is normally described in these terms by readers,
reviewers, critics, Haddon himself and the book’s back cover. More importantly,
the novel has been almost universally praised for providing a realistic and moving
representation of the workings of an autistic mind. For example, the following
comment was posted on an online Question-Answer session with the author that
was conducted on the website of the UK Guardian newspaper in January 2004:
Mark, I read your book last week and was so moved I can barely find the words. My 19-year
old son has Asperger’s Syndrome, although he is more socially functional than Christopher.
I believe you have done more to advance understanding of this form of autism than all the
textbooks and professional journals ever written. I have bought a second copy of the book to
lend to anyone who asks, “What exactly is wrong with him?” That’s the first answer they
need: There’s nothing “wrong” – he just sees the world differently, and you’ve made that
very clear.3
Perhaps more unusually, the novel has been praised in similar terms by specia-
lists in cognitive disorders, as, for example, in the following extract from a review
that appeared in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry:
The book brilliantly portrays the mind and behaviour of a person with autism without being
sentimental or condescending and helps the reader understand the difficulties that such an
individual has with information overload, social relationships, and emotional abstractions.
[…] This text is recommended to all mental health professionals, especially those who are
likely to come into contact with patients with autistic spectrum disorders. Parents who must
come to terms with a new diagnosis in an offspring might find Christopher’s story particu-
larly helpful. (Andrade 2007: 474)
2 All references to the novel are to this edition and will henceforth be referred to by page number
only.
3 http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2004/feb/02/fiction.markhaddon (accessed 23 September
2011).
■ Language, Mind and Autism ■ 281
The novel has also been criticised, however, for contributing to the folk notion
that people with autistic-spectrum disorders tend to be savants (Christopher is a
talented mathematician), as, for example, the character famously played by
Dustin Hoffman in the film Rain Man (see Draaisma 2009). Haddon himself, on
the other hand, has claimed to have only “what you might call an interested
layperson’s knowledge of autism and Asperger’s”4 and has expressed his view of
the main theme of the novel as follows: “[I]f anything it’s a novel about difference,
about being an outsider, about seeing the world in a surprising and revealing
way. it’s as much a novel about us as it is about christopher.”5
What makes The Curious Incident interesting for my purposes is the consider-
able amount of evidence that many readers of the novel form a realistic impres-
sion of a mind that works in an unusual way, which they tend to see as a
consequence of an autistic-spectrum disorder.6 As I have mentioned, Christopher
is often more specifically described as having Asperger’s syndrome, a form of
higher-functioning autism whose sufferers typically have problems with commu-
nication, social relationships and imagination, even though they have near-
normal language development and average-to-high levels of intelligence. I am
specifically concerned with how the narratological and linguistic characteristics
of the novel make these readers’ reactions possible. My chapter is therefore
influenced by the recent focus in narratology on the representation of ‘mind’ and
‘fictional mental functioning’ (e.g. Margolin 2003, Palmer 2004, Fludernik 1996),
and by the tradition within stylistics for the study of ‘mind style’ in fiction –
defined by Fowler as “any distinctive linguistic representation of an individual
mental self” (1977: 103).
Margolin (2003), in particular, has pointed out “the preference of much
literature for nonstandard forms of cognitive functioning, be they rare or margin-
al, deviant, or involving a failure, breakdown, or lack of standard patterns” (287).
Leech and Short (1981) have proposed a cline from “natural”, “uncontrived” mind
styles at one end, to, at the other end, mind styles, “which clearly impose an
unorthodox conception of the fictional world” (151), as in the case of Lok in
Golding’s The Inheritors, for example (Halliday 1971). The Curious Incident is in
fact one of several recent novels in English that feature protagonists with autistic-
spectrum disorders (see Greenwell 2004). In Leech and Short’s terms, Christo-
pher’s narrative projects a mind style that arguably lies between the middle of the
cline and the ‘unorthodox’ end. In this chapter, I discuss a range of aspects of the
language of The Curious Incident that, I propose, contribute to the readers’
perception that Christopher’s mind works in an unusual way, and to the attribu-
tion to him of an autistic-spectrum disorder.
I begin by considering the variety of kinds of information that Christopher
provides about himself, either directly or via the voices of other characters. I then
discuss distinctive choices and patterns in vocabulary, grammar, figurative lan-
guage, deixis, speech presentation and interactional behaviour. I argue that these
patterns contribute to or, minimally, are consistent with the inference that Chris-
topher has an autistic-spectrum disorder. Where relevant, I supplement tradi-
tional stylistic analysis with quantitative evidence gained by applying corpus-
linguistic methods to the novel (see also Archer 2007, Mahlberg 2007, Semino and
Short 2004).
That was because when I was little I did not understand about other people having minds.
And Julie said to Mother and Father that I would always find this very difficult. But I don’t
find this very difficult now. Because I decided that it was a kind of puzzle, and if something
is a puzzle there is always a way of solving it. (145)
Some readers may recognise the teacher’s questions as a task aimed to check
whether a child has what is known as a ‘Theory of Mind’ problem, which is
associated with autistic-spectrum disorders: the inability to understand that
others have minds that are separate from one’s own, and to attribute mental
states to others (e.g. Baron-Cohen 1995, Zunshine 2006). The combination of
exceptional mathematical abilities with some difficulties in understanding and
interacting with others is central to lay notions of people with autism. As I
mentioned earlier, the novel has been criticised for contributing to the view that
cognitive and social limitations in people with autistic-spectrum disorders tend to
be compensated for by outstanding abilities elsewhere (see Draaisma 2009).
In addition, Christopher’s narrative provides a wealth of what Culpeper
(2001) calls ‘implicit cues’ to his characterisation, namely, a variety of more
indirect sources of inferences about Christopher’s characteristics, and especially
about the workings of his mind. These implicit cues primarily involve the ways in
which Christopher uses language, both as a narrator and as a character in his own
story. To use Fowler’s terms, in the rest of the chapter, I will show how, in the
novel, “[c]umulatively, consistent structural options, agreeing in cutting the pre-
sented world to one pattern or another, give rise to an impression of a world-view,
what I shall call a ‘mind style’” (1977: 76).
284 Elena Semino
3 Vocabulary
(1) The video was about the sea creatures who live around sulphur chimneys, which are
underwater volcanoes where gases are ejected from the earth’s crust into the water. Scien-
tists never expected there to be any living organisms there because it was so hot and so
poisonous, but there are whole ecosystems there. (100)
■ Language, Mind and Autism ■ 285
4 Grammar
(3) There were lots of people on the train, and I didn’t like that, because I don’t like lots of
people I don’t know and I hate it even more if I am stuck in a room with lots of people I don’t
know, and a train is like a room and you can’t get out of it when it’s moving. And it made
me think of when I had to come home in the car from school one day because the bus had
broken down and Mother came and picked me up and Mrs Peters asked Mother if she could
take Jack and Polly home because their mothers couldn’t come and pick them up, and
Mother said yes. But I started screaming in the car because there were too many people in it
and Jack and Polly weren’t in my class and Jack bangs his head on things and makes a
noise like an animal, and I tried to get out of the car, but it was still going along and I fell
out onto the road and I had to have stitches in my head and they had to shave the hair off
and it took 3 months for it to grow back to the way it was before. (196)
The use of ‘and’ in this extract is more typical of speech than of writing, and is
reminiscent of child-like speech. Indeed, it has been noted that a high frequency
of ‘and’ in fiction is one of the devices that is associated with child-narrators, or
with characters/narrators who have child-like minds, such as Benjy in Faulkner’s
The Sound and the Fury (e.g. Leech and Short 1981: 165). Extract (3) also contains
four instances of the conjunction ‘because’, which is also overused in the novel as
compared with the Imaginative Writing corpus. ‘Because’ is a relatively basic
subordinating conjunction, and its high frequency in the novel reflects Christo-
pher’s concern for cause-effect relationships, and his tendency to spell out in
detail explanations for facts and events.
As I noticed in relation to lexis, however, Christopher’s grammatical struc-
tures exhibit greater complexity in some of the stretches of text where he talks
about topics of a scientific nature that particularly interest him. This can be seen,
for example, in extracts (1) and (2) above, which also show Christopher’s over-
lexicalisation in, respectively marine biology and geometry. Both the sentences
that make up extract (1) are longer than the novel’s average sentence length of
17.61 words (29 and 24 words respectively). The first sentence contain three rela-
tive clauses, while the second sentence includes, amongst others, a subordinate
clause with the formal and slightly archaic structure ‘there to be’. In extract (2)
Christopher’s description of Battenberg cake consists of a 16-word noun phrase
(beginning “a long cake”).
These occasional switches to greater grammatical complexity are less likely
to be consciously noticed by readers than changes in lexical complexity. None-
theless, the greater complexity of these extracts may contribute to the general
impressions that Christopher sometimes switches to a different style, and possi-
bly to a more competent and confident persona, when he talks about topics he
has a special interest and talent in. It is also possible, of course, for Haddon to
be criticised for inconsistency, by arguing that, for example, someone who
ordinarily expresses himself as Christopher does would not be able to use
structures such as ‘there to be’. Conversely, such occasional shifts to a more
■ Language, Mind and Autism ■ 287
complex and formal style could be explained and made coherent with the
general representation of Christopher as being affected by an autistic-spectrum
disorder such as Asperger’s syndrome. For example, extract (1) could be read as
a verbatim quotation on Christopher’s part of an extract from the video itself.
Exceptional powers of memory are a characteristic of high-functioning autism,
and Christopher explicitly mentions that he is “really good at remembering
things”, as his memory is “like a film” (96). I will return to this point below.
Overall, the grammatical patterns and contrasts in Christopher’s narrative are
consistent with what I have pointed out in relation to lexis: they suggest a mind
that is relatively simplistic and child-like in some respects, but exceptionally
able in a few areas.
5 Figurative Language
(4) The second main reason [why Christopher finds people confusing] is that people often
talk using metaphors. These are examples of metaphors
[…] I think it [metaphor] should be called a lie because a pig is not like a day and people do
not have skeletons in their cupboards. (19–20; emphasis in original)
(5) He was asking too many questions and he was asking them too quickly. They were
stacking up in my head like loaves in the factory where Uncle Terry works. The factory is a
bakery and he operates the slicing machines. And sometimes the slicer is not working fast
enough but the bread keeps coming and there is a blockage. I sometimes think of my mind
as a machine, but not always as a bread-slicing machine. It makes it easier to explain to
other people what is going on inside it. (8)
(6) My memory is like a film. That is why I am really good at remembering things, like the
conversations I have written down in this book, and what people were wearing, and what
they smelled like, because my memory has a smelltrack which is like a soundtrack.
And when people ask me to remember something I can simply press Rewind and fast
Forward and Pause like on a video recorder, but more like a DVD because I don’t have to
Rewind through everything in between to get to a memory of something a long time ago.
And there are no buttons, either, because it is happening in my head.
If someone says to me, “Christopher, tell me what your mother was like,” I can Rewind
to lots of different scenes and say what she was like in those scenes. (96)
(7) And when I am in a new place, because I see everything, it is like when a computer is
doing too many things at the same time and the central processor unit is blocked up and
there isn’t any space left to think about other things. […] And sometimes, when I am in a new
place and there are lots of people there it is like a computer crashing and I have to close my
eyes and put my hands over my ears and groan, which is like pressing CTRL + ALT + DEL
and shutting down programs and turning the computer off and rebooting so that I can
remember what I am doing and where I am meant to be going. (177–8)
6 Person Deixis
7 All results reported in this section reach a level of statistical significance of 99 per cent (p <
0.01) or above.
■ Language, Mind and Autism ■ 291
Writing section of the BNC sampler revealed that ‘you’, ‘your’ and ‘yourself’ are all
underused. ‘You’ and ‘your’ were also found to be underused in the ‘Christopher
only’ version of the novel as compared with the first-person fiction corpus. In other
words, Christopher’s narrative, including his direct speech, seems to contain an
unusually low frequency of references to an addressee.
An examination of the concordances for ‘you’ and ‘your’ in the ‘Christopher
only’ version of the novel provides further insights into Christopher’s distinctive
use of second-person pronouns. The vast majority of Christopher’s uses of ‘you’
and ‘your’ occur in narration rather than direct speech, and are best described as
instances of the ‘generic’ use of the second-person pronoun to refer to people in
general, as I noted above in relation to some instances of ‘we’. This is the case, for
example, in “It was a clear night and you could see the Milky Way” (11), and “in
this experiment you put your head in a clamp” (146). Only 18 instances of ‘you’
(out of a total of 321) and one instance of ‘your’ (out of 35) occur in direct speech
reports of Christopher’s utterances, and hence function as deictic references to
another participant in communication (e.g. “I said, ‘But you can’t cook.’” [29]). In
other words, most of the utterances that Christopher attributes to himself do not
include deictic references to his addressee(s) by means of second-person pro-
nouns, as he does not tend to comment on or inquire about his interlocutors. This
may further contribute to the impression that he is unusually self-focused, and
that he has little awareness of others’ mental states.
Overall, I would argue that, in The Curious Incident, the combination of over-
use of singular first-person pronouns and underuse of both plural first-person
pronouns and second-person pronouns contributes to create the impression that
Christopher is unusually self-focused, has difficulties understanding the mental
states of others, and seldom feels a sense of affinity and commonality with them.
This is consistent with the attribution to Christopher of a high-functioning autis-
tic-spectrum disorder such as Asperger’s syndrome.
7 Speech Presentation
And I said, “36 Randolph Street” and I started feeling better because I like policemen
and it was an easy question, and I wondered whether I should tell him that Father killed
Wellington and whether he would arrest Father.
And he said, “What are you doing here?”
And I said, “I needed to sit down and be quiet and think.”
And he said, “OK, let’s keep it simple. What are you doing at the railway station?”
And I said, “I’m going to see Mother.” And he said, “Mother?”
And I said, “Yes, Mother.”
And he said, “When’s your train?”
And I said, “I don’t know. She lives in London. I don’t know when there’s a train to
London.” (184–5)
8 In fact, Christopher’s use of direct speech does require some suspension of disbelief on the part
of the reader, as even someone like Christopher is unlikely to be able to remember verbatim every
conversation he has had.
294 Elena Semino
the verb ‘say’ to introduced utterances, often in a clause that begins with the
conjunction ‘and’. This particular use of reporting clauses contributes to account
for my finding that both ‘and’ and ‘said’ are overused in The Curious Incident as
compared with the Imaginative Writing section of the BNC Sampler. More specifi-
cally, the systematic use of reporting clauses, their initial positioning, and their
tendency to include ‘say’, lend a rather mechanical, stilted tone to Christopher’s
reporting of conversations. This is consistent with the idea that people with
autistic-spectrum disorders have difficulties with communication and with the
social relationships that are expressed through them.
The finding that ‘said’ is overused in comparison with the reference corpus
prompted a search for other common reporting verbs in The Curious Incident,
which may carry more information about utterances than is provided by ‘say’. I
used the Concord facility in WordSmith Tools to search for occurrences of a
selection of speech acts verbs that are used in the fiction section of Semino and
Short’s (2004: 239–40) corpus to introduce direct speech. This revealed that
Christopher’s narrative in The Curious Incident contains no instances of common
speech act verbs such as ‘admit’, ‘beg’, ‘demand’, ‘promise’, ‘warn’, and others.
Rather, Christopher relies on a small set of relatively basic verbs indicating the
occurrence of speech (‘say’ and ‘tell’) or, less frequently, simple speech acts and
utterance types (e.g. ‘ask’, ‘answer’, ‘call’ and ‘explain’). Cumulatively, Christo-
pher’s underlexicalisation in this area may reinforce the overall impression that
he has difficulties understanding the illocutionary force of others’ utterances
and, more generally, the intentions and attitudes that lie behind what people
say.
8 Conversational Behaviour
Given that autism, and Asperger’s syndrome in particular, are typically associated
with difficulties in social relationships and communication, it is not surprising
that, in The Curious Incident, Christopher’s communicative behaviour, both as a
character and as a narrator, displays a number of salient features, which readers
may well interpret as a reflection of his condition. These salient characteristics
can be captured, in large part, by Grice’s (1975) Cooperative Principle and by
theories of politeness and impoliteness (Leech 1983, Brown and Levinson 1987,
Culpeper 2011).
■ Language, Mind and Autism ■ 295
The extract below occurs early in the novel, and helps to establish a sense of
Christopher’s peculiarities in communication, both as a narrator and as a char-
acter. While wandering out at night, Christopher has discovered Wellington’s
dead body, with a garden fork sticking out of its stomach. Distraught, Christopher
has entered his neighbour’s garden to pick up the dog. The neighbour, Mrs
Shears, has found Christopher holding the dog, and has called the police. The
passage below is the beginning of Christopher’s account of the arrival of the
police:
(9) Then the police arrived. I like the police. They have uniforms and numbers and you know
what they are meant to be doing. There was a policewoman and a policeman. The police-
woman had a little hole in her tights on her left ankle and a red scratch in the middle of the
hole. The policeman had a big orange leaf stuck to the bottom of his shoe which was poking
out from one side.
The policewoman put her arms round Mrs Shears and led her back towards the house.
I lifted my head off the grass.
The policeman squatted down beside me and said, “Would you like to tell me what’s
going on here, young man?”
I sat up and said, “The dog is dead.”
“I’d got that far,” he said.
I said, “I think someone killed the dog.”
“How old are you?” he asked.
I replied, “I am 15 years and 3 months and 2 days.” (7)
Apart from the relative simplicity of Christopher’s lexis and grammar, the
passage shows, I would argue, that he has difficulties providing information at
the level of detail that would normally be expected from a fifteen-year-old. As a
narrator, he describes some minute characteristics of the police officers’ legs
that are not required in context (a hole in the tight, a leaf stuck under a shoe),
and that will not turn out to be relevant to any subsequent developments in the
plot (unlike what normally happens in detective fiction, for example, when
descriptions appear to be unnecessarily detailed). As a character, Christopher’s
answers to the policeman’s questions are either uninformative, when he tells
the policeman what he already knows (“The dog is dead”, “I think someone
killed the dog”), or unnecessarily detailed (“I am 15 years and 3 months and
2 days”).
Similarly, Christopher’s narratorial descriptions of his own activities often
include details that would normally be regarded as unnecessary, as in the follow-
ing account of drawing cash from an ATM machine:
296 Elena Semino
(10)And I put the cashpoint card into the machine like Father had let me do sometimes when
we were shopping together and it said ENTER YOUR PERSONAL NUMBER and I typed in
3558 and pressed the ENTER button and the machine said PLEASE ENTER AMOUNT and
there was a choice
← £10 £20 →
← £50 £100 →
Other Amount
(multiples of ten only) →
(187; bold as in original)
The category of Q UANTITY relates to the quantity of information to be provided, and under it
fall the following maxims:
1. Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the
exchange).
2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.
(Grice 1975: 45)
Under the category of R ELATION I place a single maxim, namely ‘Be relevant.’ (46)
[A] speaker who, with no intention of generating an implicature and with no intention of
deceiving, fails to observe a maxim is said to ‘infringe’ the maxim. […] This type of non-
observance could occur because the speaker has an imperfect command of the language (a
young child or a foreign learner), because the speaker’s performance is impaired in some
■ Language, Mind and Autism ■ 297
(11)For example, people often say “Be quiet,” but they don’t tell you how long to be quiet for.
Or you see a sign which says KEEP OFF THE GRASS but it should say KEEP OFF THE
GRASS AROUND THIS SIGN or KEEP OFF ALL THE GRASS IN THIS PARK because there is
lots of grass you are allowed to walk on. (38; bold as in original)
Efficient communication depends on the ability to infer what is not said explicitly,
on the basis of shared knowledge and common sense. From Christopher’s per-
spective, however, others’ communicative behaviour often appears confusingly
vague and ambiguous.
A further salient communicative behaviour can be observed in relation to
Christopher’s approach to ‘telling the truth’, which is captured by Grice’s maxim
of Quality:
Under the category of Q UALITY falls a supermaxim – ‘Try to make your contribution one that
is true’ – and more specific maxims:
1. Do not say what you believe to be false.
2. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. (Grice 1975: 46)
a number of occasions, Christopher tells the truth even though the circumstances
would allow or require some relaxation of Grice’s maxim of Quality. In the extract
below Christopher interacts with a police inspector at the police station where he
was briefly detained after hitting a policeman:
Here Christopher’s explicit statement that he “always tell[s] the truth” precedes
an example of his relentless approach to truth-telling: he points out that his
hitting the policeman was not an accident (i.e. he did mean to hit the policeman
at the time) even though it has become clear that the police inspector has decided
to take a lenient approach to the attack.
In fact, in the course of the story Christopher does at times conceal informa-
tion from other characters. However, there are enough salient examples of un-
necessary or inappropriate truth-telling to support Christopher’s own statements,
and to contribute to the inference that he has a Theory of Mind problem. When we
lie, we deliberately instil in another a belief that is different from what we believe
to be true. This necessarily involves the ability to distinguish between one’s own
beliefs and those of others.
8.2 (Im)politeness
(13) I also said that I cared about dogs because they were faithful and honest, and some dogs
were cleverer and more interesting than some people. Steve, for example, who comes to
school on Thursdays, needs help to eat his food and could not even fetch a stick. Siobhan
asked me not to say this to Steve’s mother. (6)
The request uttered by Siobhan suggests that Christopher could well otherwise
tell Steve’s mother that, unlike a dog, her son could not even fetch a stick. In
Culpeper’s (2011) terms, the behaviour that is implicitly attributed to Christopher
is impolite in the sense that it conflicts with how Steve’s mother would expect and
want her son to be talked about. More specifically, this kind of behaviour conflicts
with people’s expectations, desires and sense of morality, and tends to cause
negative emotional reactions. These would apply even in cases such as Christo-
pher’s, where the behaviour in question is not necessarily perceived as intention-
ally causing offence. Christopher’s inability to attribute mental states to others
means that he can say things that hurt others’ feelings without intending to do so.
In terms of Leech’s (1983) Politeness Principle, the kind of utterances that
Siobhan warns Christopher not to produce break the Approbation Maxim, which
requires speakers to “Minimize dispraise of other” (Leech 1983: 132; italics in
original). A further relevant tendency in Christopher’s communicative behaviour
is best captured in terms of another of Leech’s maxims, namely the Modesty
Maxim, which requires speakers to “Minimize praise of self” (Leech 1983: 132;
italics in original). Christopher often boasts about his own abilities in a rather
blatant and unsubtle way, which is more typical of children younger than his age,
as in the extracts below:
(14) […] I am going to go to university and study Mathematics, or Physics, or Physics and
Mathematics […], because I like mathematics and physics and I’m very good at them. (33)
(16) I went up to Mrs Alexander and said, “Do you know anything about Wellington being
killed?”
[…]
And she said, “No, I don’t.”
I replied, “Somebody must know because the person who killed Wellington knows that
they killed Wellington. Unless they were a mad person and didn’t know what they were
doing. Or unless they had amnesia.”
And she said, “Well, I suppose you’re probably right.”
I said, “Thank you for helping me with my investigation.” And she said, “You’re
Christopher, aren’t you?” I said, “Yes. I live at number 36.” And she said, “We haven’t talked
before, have we?”
I said, “No. I don’t like talking to strangers. But I’m doing detective work.”
And she said, “I see you every day, going to school.” I didn’t reply to this.
And she said, “It’s very nice of you to come and say hello.”
I didn’t reply to this either because Mrs Alexander was doing what is called chatting
where people say things to each other which aren’t questions and answers and aren’t
connected. (51)
9 Concluding Remarks
that the use of techniques borrowed from corpus linguistics can usefully support
one’s claims and intuitions, and thus put the study of literary texts on a firmer
empirical footing.
Works Cited
Andrade, Chittaranjan (2007) “The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time.” Journal of
Critical Psychiatry 9.6: 474.
Archer, Dawn (2007) “Computer-assisted Literary Stylistics.” Contemporary Stylistics. Eds.
Marina Lambrou and Peter Stockwell. London: Routledge. 244–56.
Baron-Cohen, Simon (1995) Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind. Cambridge,
Ma: MIT Press.
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language
Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Culpeper, Jonathan (2001) Language and Characterisation in Plays and Other Texts. London:
Longman.
Culpeper, Jonathan (2011) Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Draaisma, Douwe (2009) “Stereotypes of Autism.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society B 364: 1475–80.
Fludernik, Monika (1993) The Fictions of Language and the Languages of Fiction. London:
Routledge.
Fowler, Roger (1977) Linguistics and the Novel. London: Methuen.
Fowler, Roger (1986) Linguistic Criticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Greenwell, Bill (2004) “The Curious Incidence of Novels About Asperger’s Syndrome.” Children’s
Literature in Education 35: 271–84.
Grice, Herbert Paul (1975) “Logic and Conversation.” Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts.
Eds. Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan. New York: Academic Press. 41–58.
Haddon, Mark (2003) The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time. London: Jonathan Cape.
Halliday, Michael A.K. (1971) “Linguistic function and literary style: an inquiry into the language
of William Golding’s The Inheritors.” Literary Style: A Symposium. Ed. Seymour Chatman.
New York: Oxford University Press. 330–68.
Halliday, Michael A.K. (1985) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Happé, Francesca G. E. (1995) “Understanding Minds and Metaphors: Insights from the Study of
Figurative Language in Autism.” Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10.4: 275–95.
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University
Press.
Leech, Geoffrey (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Leech, Geoffrey, and Mick Short (1981) Style in Fiction. London: Longman.
Lyons, John (1977) Semantics, Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mahlberg, Michaela (2007) “A Corpus Stylistic Perspective on Dickens’s Great Expectations.” Con-
temporary Stylistics. Eds. Marina Lambrou and Peter Stockwell. London: Routledge. 19–31.
Malinowski, Bronislaw (1972) “Phatic Communion.” Communication in Face to Face Interaction.
Eds. John Laver and Sandy Hutcheson. Hammondsworth: Penguin. 146–52.
■ Language, Mind and Autism ■ 303
Margolin, Uri (2003) “Cognitive Science, the Thinking Mind, and Literary Narrative.” Narrative
Theory and the Cognitive Sciences. Ed. David Herman. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of
Language and Information. 271–94.
Norbury, Courtenay Frazier (2005) “The Relationship between Theory of Mind and Metaphor:
Evidence from Children with Language Impairment and Autistic Spectrum Disorder.” British
Journal of Developmental Psychology 23: 383–99.
Palmer, Alan (2004) Fictional Minds. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press.
Scott, Mike (1999) Wordsmith Tools, Version 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Semino, Elena (2005) “Mind Style.” Elsevier Encyclopaedia of Language and Linguistics. Second
Edition. Oxford: Elsevier. 142–8.
Semino, Elena (2007) “Mind Style 25 Years on.” Style 41.2: 153–203.
Semino, Elena (2011) “Deixis and Fictional Minds.” Style 45.3: 418–40.
Semino, Elena, and Mick Short (2004) Corpus Stylistics: Speech, Writing and Thought Presenta-
tion in a Corpus of English Writing. London: Routledge.
Semino, Elena, and Kate Swindlehurst (1996) “Metaphor and Mind Style in Ken Kesey’s One Flew
Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.” Style 30.1: 143–66.
Short, Mick (1996) Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Prose. London: Longman.
Short, Mick, Elena Semino and Martin Wynne (2002) “Revisiting the Notion of Faithfulness in
Discourse Presentation Using a Corpus Approach.” Language and Literature 11.4: 325–55.
Simpson, Paul (1989) “Phatic Communion and Fictional Dialogue.” Language, Discourse and
Literature: An Introductory Reader in Discourse Stylistics. Eds. Ronald Carter and Paul
Simpson. London: Routledge. 41–56.
Thomas, Jenny (1995) Meaning in Interaction, London: Longman.
Walsh, Clare (2007) “Schema Poetics and Crossover Fiction.” Contemporary Stylistics. Eds.
Marina Lambrou and Peter Stockwell. London: Continuum. 106–17.
Wmatrix corpus analysis and comparison tool (restricted online access at http://ucrel.lancs.ac.
uk/wmatrix2.html)
www.markhaddon.com/aspergers-and-autism
www.guardian.co.uk
Zunshine, Lisa (2006) Why We Read Fiction: Theory of Mind and the Novel. Columbus: Ohio State
University Press.