Semiotics and Discourse Studies

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Badir, Sémir
Data de Publicação: 2017
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Gragoatá
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.uff.br/gragoata/article/view/33548
Resumo: In this paper, I would like to discuss the contribution that post-structuralist semiotics has brought to the analysis of academic discourse. The semiotic model was developed initially for the analysis of tales and myths. It has been gradually extended to various forms of fiction (novels, short stories), and then, according to "a growing degree of complexity and abstraction", to all "forms of social production of meaning" (p. 5). This is the project stated in the first pages to a book entitled “Introduction to Discourse Analysis in Social Sciences” (A.J. Greimas & E. Landowski eds, 1979). The generalized extension is based on a typology of discourses that has been illustrated by specific analyses published in the 1980s (Bastide 1981, Bastide & Fabbri 1985, Landowski 1986, Bordron 1987). One may be considered that the research project led by Greimas and Landowski is thus located at the farthest point of development and initial application of the model and it is therefore a test for the narrative hypothesis. In doing so, the semiotic approach took the risk of being confronted with other models of analysis, such as they were elaborated in theoretical frameworks resulting from rhetoric (renewed in the 1950s by Chaim Perelman and his school ), pragmatics (cf Parret 1983 & 1987), sociology of knowledge (from the founding work of Berger & Luckmann 1966), or as they relate to other theoretical currents in the language sciences (in particular, In France, the Althusserian discourse analysis). For the discourse in social sciences, these models offer two advantages over that of semiotics: on the one hand, it seems that the theoretical postulates on which they are worked out are more directly in accord with this type of discourse; on the other hand, they can count on a solid tradition of studies to ensure the sustainability of the results. Nevertheless, the model of semiotic analysis is original and it has also an advantage: it is general. I will put forward the benefits of this generality. ---DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22409/gragoata.2017n44a1033
id UFF-6_ba88e9c141ebc0cc9d10431a81f7febc
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/33548
network_acronym_str UFF-6
network_name_str Gragoatá
repository_id_str
spelling Semiotics and Discourse StudiesSemiotics and Discourse StudiesDiscourse studies. Semiotic. Academic discourse. Greimas.Estudos do Discurso. Semiótica. Discurso acadêmico. Greimas.In this paper, I would like to discuss the contribution that post-structuralist semiotics has brought to the analysis of academic discourse. The semiotic model was developed initially for the analysis of tales and myths. It has been gradually extended to various forms of fiction (novels, short stories), and then, according to "a growing degree of complexity and abstraction", to all "forms of social production of meaning" (p. 5). This is the project stated in the first pages to a book entitled “Introduction to Discourse Analysis in Social Sciences” (A.J. Greimas & E. Landowski eds, 1979). The generalized extension is based on a typology of discourses that has been illustrated by specific analyses published in the 1980s (Bastide 1981, Bastide & Fabbri 1985, Landowski 1986, Bordron 1987). One may be considered that the research project led by Greimas and Landowski is thus located at the farthest point of development and initial application of the model and it is therefore a test for the narrative hypothesis. In doing so, the semiotic approach took the risk of being confronted with other models of analysis, such as they were elaborated in theoretical frameworks resulting from rhetoric (renewed in the 1950s by Chaim Perelman and his school ), pragmatics (cf Parret 1983 & 1987), sociology of knowledge (from the founding work of Berger & Luckmann 1966), or as they relate to other theoretical currents in the language sciences (in particular, In France, the Althusserian discourse analysis). For the discourse in social sciences, these models offer two advantages over that of semiotics: on the one hand, it seems that the theoretical postulates on which they are worked out are more directly in accord with this type of discourse; on the other hand, they can count on a solid tradition of studies to ensure the sustainability of the results. Nevertheless, the model of semiotic analysis is original and it has also an advantage: it is general. I will put forward the benefits of this generality. ---DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22409/gragoata.2017n44a1033In this paper, I would like to discuss the contribution that post-structuralist semiotics has brought to the analysis of academic discourse. The semiotic model was developed initially for the analysis of tales and myths. It has been gradually extended to various forms of fiction (novels, short stories), and then, according to "a growing degree of complexity and abstraction", to all "forms of social production of meaning" (p. 5). This is the project stated in the first pages to a book entitled “Introduction to Discourse Analysis in Social Sciences” (A.J. Greimas & E. Landowski eds, 1979). The generalized extension is based on a typology of discourses that has been illustrated by specific analyses published in the 1980s (Bastide 1981, Bastide & Fabbri 1985, Landowski 1986, Bordron 1987). One may be considered that the research project led by Greimas and Landowski is thus located at the farthest point of development and initial application of the model and it is therefore a test for the narrative hypothesis. In doing so, the semiotic approach took the risk of being confronted with other models of analysis, such as they were elaborated in theoretical frameworks resulting from rhetoric (renewed in the 1950s by Chaim Perelman and his school ), pragmatics (cf Parret 1983 & 1987), sociology of knowledge (from the founding work of Berger & Luckmann 1966), or as they relate to other theoretical currents in the language sciences (in particular, In France, the Althusserian discourse analysis). For the discourse in social sciences, these models offer two advantages over that of semiotics: on the one hand, it seems that the theoretical postulates on which they are worked out are more directly in accord with this type of discourse; on the other hand, they can count on a solid tradition of studies to ensure the sustainability of the results. Nevertheless, the model of semiotic analysis is original and it has also an advantage: it is general. I will put forward the benefits of this generality.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Semiótica e Estudos do DiscursoNeste artigo, eu gostaria de discutir a contribuição que a semiótica pós-estruturalista deu à análise do discurso acadêmico. O modelo semiótico foi desenvolvido inicialmente para as análises de fábulas e mitos. Ele tem sido gradualmente estendido às várias formas de ficção (romances, contos) e, então, de acordo com “um grau de crescimento de complexidade e abstração”, para todas as “formas de produção social de sentido” (p. 5). Este é o projeto declarado nas primeiras páginas de um livro intitulado “Introdução à Análise do Discurso nas Ciências Sociais” (A. J. Greimas & E. Landowski (eds), 1979). A extensão generalizada toma como base uma tipologia de discursos que tem sido ilustrada por análises específicas publicadas nos anos 1980 (Bastide, 1981; Bastide & Fabbri, 1985; Landowski, 1986; Bordron, 1987). Pode-se considerar que o projeto de pesquisa liderado por Greimas e Landowski está então localizado no ponto mais distante do desenvolvimento e aplicação inicial do modelo e, portanto, é um teste para a hipótese narrativa.  Ao fazê-lo, a abordagem semiótica correu o risco de ser confrontada com outros modelos de análises, tais como foram elaborados na perspectiva teórica resultante da retórica (renovado nos anos 1950 por Chaim Perelman e sua escola), da pragmática (cf. Parret, 1983 & 1987), da sociologia do conhecimento (pelo trabalho fundador de Berger & Luckmann, 1966), ou como elas se relacionam com outras correntes teóricas nas ciências da linguagem (em particular, na França, a análise do discurso althusseriana). Quanto ao discurso nas ciências sociais, esses modelos oferecem duas vantagens sobre a semiótica: por um lado, parece que os postulados teóricos nos quais são trabalhados estão diretamente de acordo com esse tipo de discurso; por outro lado, eles podem contar com uma sólida tradição dos estudos para garantir a sustentabilidade dos resultados. Mesmo assim, o modelo de análise semiótica é original e tem também uma vantagem: ela é geral. Apresentarei os benefícios dessa generalidade. ---DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22409/gragoata.2017n44a1033Universidade Federal Fluminense2017-12-22info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.uff.br/gragoata/article/view/3354810.22409/gragoata.v22i44.33548Gragoatá; Vol. 22 No. 44 (2017): From language to discourse: theoretical paradigms; 1049-1065Gragoatá; v. 22 n. 44 (2017): Da língua ao discurso: paradigmas teóricos; 1049-10652358-41141413-907310.22409/gragoata.v22i44reponame:Gragoatáinstname:Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)instacron:UFFenghttps://periodicos.uff.br/gragoata/article/view/33548/19535Copyright (c) 2018 Gragoatáinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBadir, Sémir2019-08-23T11:12:09Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/33548Revistahttps://periodicos.uff.br/gragoataPUBhttps://periodicos.uff.br/gragoata/oai||revistagragoata@gmail.com2358-41141413-9073opendoar:2019-08-23T11:12:09Gragoatá - Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Semiotics and Discourse Studies
Semiotics and Discourse Studies
title Semiotics and Discourse Studies
spellingShingle Semiotics and Discourse Studies
Badir, Sémir
Discourse studies. Semiotic. Academic discourse. Greimas.
Estudos do Discurso. Semiótica. Discurso acadêmico. Greimas.
title_short Semiotics and Discourse Studies
title_full Semiotics and Discourse Studies
title_fullStr Semiotics and Discourse Studies
title_full_unstemmed Semiotics and Discourse Studies
title_sort Semiotics and Discourse Studies
author Badir, Sémir
author_facet Badir, Sémir
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Badir, Sémir
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Discourse studies. Semiotic. Academic discourse. Greimas.
Estudos do Discurso. Semiótica. Discurso acadêmico. Greimas.
topic Discourse studies. Semiotic. Academic discourse. Greimas.
Estudos do Discurso. Semiótica. Discurso acadêmico. Greimas.
description In this paper, I would like to discuss the contribution that post-structuralist semiotics has brought to the analysis of academic discourse. The semiotic model was developed initially for the analysis of tales and myths. It has been gradually extended to various forms of fiction (novels, short stories), and then, according to "a growing degree of complexity and abstraction", to all "forms of social production of meaning" (p. 5). This is the project stated in the first pages to a book entitled “Introduction to Discourse Analysis in Social Sciences” (A.J. Greimas & E. Landowski eds, 1979). The generalized extension is based on a typology of discourses that has been illustrated by specific analyses published in the 1980s (Bastide 1981, Bastide & Fabbri 1985, Landowski 1986, Bordron 1987). One may be considered that the research project led by Greimas and Landowski is thus located at the farthest point of development and initial application of the model and it is therefore a test for the narrative hypothesis. In doing so, the semiotic approach took the risk of being confronted with other models of analysis, such as they were elaborated in theoretical frameworks resulting from rhetoric (renewed in the 1950s by Chaim Perelman and his school ), pragmatics (cf Parret 1983 & 1987), sociology of knowledge (from the founding work of Berger & Luckmann 1966), or as they relate to other theoretical currents in the language sciences (in particular, In France, the Althusserian discourse analysis). For the discourse in social sciences, these models offer two advantages over that of semiotics: on the one hand, it seems that the theoretical postulates on which they are worked out are more directly in accord with this type of discourse; on the other hand, they can count on a solid tradition of studies to ensure the sustainability of the results. Nevertheless, the model of semiotic analysis is original and it has also an advantage: it is general. I will put forward the benefits of this generality. ---DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22409/gragoata.2017n44a1033
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-12-22
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.uff.br/gragoata/article/view/33548
10.22409/gragoata.v22i44.33548
url https://periodicos.uff.br/gragoata/article/view/33548
identifier_str_mv 10.22409/gragoata.v22i44.33548
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.uff.br/gragoata/article/view/33548/19535
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Gragoatá
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Gragoatá
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal Fluminense
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal Fluminense
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Gragoatá; Vol. 22 No. 44 (2017): From language to discourse: theoretical paradigms; 1049-1065
Gragoatá; v. 22 n. 44 (2017): Da língua ao discurso: paradigmas teóricos; 1049-1065
2358-4114
1413-9073
10.22409/gragoata.v22i44
reponame:Gragoatá
instname:Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)
instacron:UFF
instname_str Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)
instacron_str UFF
institution UFF
reponame_str Gragoatá
collection Gragoatá
repository.name.fl_str_mv Gragoatá - Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||revistagragoata@gmail.com
_version_ 1799705502326718464