Among William Empson's seven ambiguities, the theory of "ambiguity" is:
(1) One thing is similar to another, but they are similar in several different properties; (2) Various meanings caused by context coexist, including polysemy of words and polysemy caused by poor grammar; (3) Two apparently unrelated meanings appear at the same time; (4) Two or more meanings of a sentence are contradictory, reflecting the author's complex comprehensive mentality; (5) Looking for the true meaning while writing, resulting in inconsistent meanings of a word; (6) the statement is contradictory or cumbersome, forcing the reader to explain himself; (7) The two meanings of a word and the two values of a vague language are exactly the opposite meanings stipulated by the context.
Compared with metaphors, symbols, hints and other common expressions, "seven kinds of ambiguity" is more rational, but in my opinion, its point (6) is even more unacceptable and not impossible. The problem is that this seems to add obstacles to the reader, rather than adding meaning to the work. Of course, the literary creation under the "vague" thought has indeed achieved good results: for example, Mu Dan's love poem "Eight Poems"-
"You saw the fire with your own eyes,
You can't see me, although I light up for you;
Alas, that burning is only a mature age,
Your bottom, my bottom, we are separated like mountains!
From this natural transformation process,
I love you temporarily.
Even if I cry, turn gray, turn gray and be reborn,
Girl, that's just God playing with himself. "
It seems nothing to explain "play" in the most primitive sense, and "God plays with himself" can be interpreted as God's self-entertainment. But if you reread this poem carefully with this understanding, you will feel that there is a mysterious force (God) in control of everything. The love between "you" and "me" and the "fire" that "ignites" you and makes me cry, grey, grey and reborn are just a game of God. He created human emotional maturity (natural need), but he hated drama and separated people. In this painful and contradictory entanglement between men and women, God's game mentality has been greatly satisfied, and how small people are! Since love is at the mercy of God when he amuses himself, it can't last long, but it can only be short-lived and nihilistic. This is the tragic nature of love. And "fire" and "mature age" can also have different interpretations. From here, readers can read the helplessness of love and feel the understanding and consideration of other things. The key depends on how readers understand and grasp it.
Modern literary works (especially poems) are more ambiguous than in the past. Generally speaking, they have richer connotations, greater flexibility and tension in language and diverse meanings. The ideas expressed sometimes even contradict the tradition, so it is really difficult to understand. However, I think it should be acceptable as long as it is not too divorced from reality, not too obscure language, not too many images and not lacking space for spiritual connotation.
If "ambiguity" goes too far, it will be too difficult for readers to understand the work, and the author will inevitably give people a mysterious and even deceptive feeling. Moreover, it is not very beneficial to the continuation of the artistic life of the work, and it should not be too worthy of recognition.
As for the reclassification of fuzzy types in China: 1, the ambiguity of the specified object; 2. Ambiguity of the author's attitude; 3. Grammatical ambiguity. In fact, it is basically a generalization of Empson's fuzzy theory, and there is not much new idea.
Of course, there are a lot of knowledge and theories related to fuzziness, but the author really lacks fuzzy knowledge and can only say something extremely superficial or even not superficial. In a word, fuzziness, a literary theory, can make the language of a work full of more uncertainties, full of semantic echoes and bring readers a richer reading experience.