BIBLOS. Revistă a filialei ieşene a Asociaţiei Bibliotecarilor din România.
Seminarul de logică discursivă, teoria argumentării şi retorică
Ascultam, zilele trecute, un interviu cu Academicianul Laurenţiu Popescu, medicul cu telocitele. Fără să fi avut vreo înţelegere cu Domnia Sa – nu ne cunoaştem – şi chiar fără să sper, îl auzeam confirmînd ceea ce încerc să induc studenţilor mei, ba chiar şi colegilor de breaslă: regula compromisului şi ideea că totul poate avea valoare de adevăr, dar numai contextual, numai într-un timp anume. Continue reading
It is known that there are spheres of human life and areas of human activity so complex in nature that they inherently become, on the one hand, absolutely exceptional, and, on the other hand, impossible to seize in any global model: we lack data, we cannot corroborate data extrapolated from the analysis of the various perspectives meant to observe the objects in question but above all things we cannot count on the faithful repetition of the events specific to these spheres and areas. I include in this category the spheres related to both natural and social phenomena, to human thinking, and, finally, to the language activity, deeply embedded in thinking and also seen as central to any instance of communication in our world, namely the world of the living. Continue reading
Unul dintre domeniile pe care le are sub permanentă observaţie o structură de PR este cel al managementului resurselor umane. Ca şi în cazul altor activităţi din interiorul organizaţiei – management, comunicare internă etc. – observarea sau, mai bine spus, monitorizarea activităţii de management al resurselor umane se face în scopul evitării derapajelor discursive, derapaje care pot afecta, chiar grav, relaţia diverselor publicuri cu organizaţia. Continue reading
Classical logic proved to be not quite proper to describe natural phenomena. Understanding and explaining naturalphenomena requires natural logic. This kind of logic was the most important construction Jean-Blaise Grize came up with.
Then, he developed an instrument for the analysis and description of the discursive activity, the discursive schematization (schématisation discursive), which proved to be infalliblein all sorts of situations. To achieve this, Grize went deep, to Aristotel’s Antiquity. All logicians do this. But he went aside, too, widening his horizon and seeking foundation in humanities and social sciences. This is what the present study is trying to bring to readers’ attention. Continue reading
There are many ways people use some established wooden language and this differentiate them when they are targeted by manipulative discourses. Some people would be genuinely politically correct and use the speech code with all their heart. Those ones can be manipulated by the bias of targeted discourses in the given wooden language. Some other people would not believe that wooden languages could be used in real communication. Part of these later ones would fake using the established wooden language in their group or society, part of them would overtly refuse to use such a language, while some of them would use the wooden language in an ironic key, to rally human or social shortcomings. Counting apart the first category, all these kinds of people would escape any manipulation attempt. Continue reading
Everywhere in the world, societies – acting as communities – set up institutions or just use already existing ones, leading to their own reproduction.This reality relies on the use of language, which not only influence people, but also socio-culturally shapes their minds. This paper has the goal of discussing mind formatting institutions that smoothly “manipulate” people into being “good citizens”, from their early ages to the end of their lives, thanks to language, understanding manipulation as a amoral tool. Continue reading
Traditionally, the term “manipulation” is used in a morally depreciative sense, as a pejorative expression. The present paper tries to propose another view on manipulation as action and thus another perception of the linguistic term. For this, we will leave the territory of moral distinctions (good vs. bad, moral vs. immoral) and go camp in the territory of adequacy, a territory of instruments and their efficiency in usage (the distinction will be good vs. bad, in the sense of the appropriateness and efficiency of the chosen instrument in performing some particular action).
Taken as such, the manipulation is no longer viewed as moral or immoral, but simply as amoral. In contrast with that, manipulation will be discussed under the opposition good vs. bad in terms of the pragmatics of the action. We will then accept that there can be morally good manipulation, which also means that an expression like “bad manipulation” is not a pleonasm, but a way to refer to manipulation that didn’t produce the expected effect. Continue reading
While following the description of different perspectives on communication, one can remark that they cross one another, but never cover one another well enough to allow us see one single contour, one single possible model of this complex phenomenon called communication. Studying this phenomenon means accepting the multiplicity of perspectives and chosing one approach, as rich as possible, which could lead to inter- or even trans-disciplinarity. Then, all the chances to build a global model of communication are there. Or near… Continue reading
Studying discourses seems to be an endless occupation, mostly because of the different approaches to the concept of ‘discourse’, but also because of the ever changing media and contexts where discourses take place. Our attention has always been drawn to the idea that discourses are social interactions which leave traces in our lives. Continue reading
The text deals with clichés, in the sense of phrases everybody uses just because they are in fashion. The difference between phrase and enunciation, between text and discourse is the foundation of the claim made in this study. A phrase – any phrase – can have a semantic of its own and this makes it worth using in some contexts. In other words, the phrases get meanings in context. But the changing of contexts could make a perfectly acceptable phrase become not so acceptable. Or, contexts evolve and resuming former truth can have the most unexpected results. Some notorious
phrases are discussed and proven out of date or simply inadequate. On the other hand, a well known phrase is saluted as happily enriched with a meaning which got lost over the years. When it comes to using phrases, we have discourses, and the meaning of any discourse is contextual. Clichés don’t work well all the time.
Keywords: context sensitive meaning, phrase vs. enunciation, text vs. discourse, clichés Continue reading