roland r. kouassi.pdf

8/13/2019 Roland R. KOUASSI.pdf

1/15

THE APPROACH OF ANTOINE CULIOLI TO THE THEORY

OF THE UTTERER

KOUASSI Roland Raoul & KOUADJO Koffi HilaireUniversity of Cocody, Abidjan

RSUM:

Le dveloppement de la science linguistique a toujours t caractris par un mouvementconstant vers la structure intime de la langue avec pour objectif de dvoiler les oprations qui

prsident aux phnomnes de la chaine linaire A la fin des annes !" et au dbut des annes#", une nouvelle approche de rflexion linguistique a t propose par des linguistes tels que

$ustave $uillaume, %mile &enveniste et 'oman (a)obson L*ide fondamentale sous+tendantcette conception thorique tait la libration du phnomne parole -, jusque l. mure par lestructuralisme et la grammaire gnrative et transformationnelle /ls se sont investis dans latraque des oprations et mtaoprations constituant l*assiette de l*explication des noncs desurface Cette approche a eu l*appellation de thorie de lnonciation, linguistique desorations, ou encore linguistique du su!et" Ce papier vise . prsenter le modle d0AntoineCulioli qui est le prcurseur de la thorie des oprations nonciatives

MOTS CLS :oprations, mtaoprations, nonciateur, lexis, nonciation

ABSTRACT:

1he development of linguistics has been a regular progress to2ards the inner structure oflanguage to sort out the operations underlying the phenomena at the linear chain level /n thelate !"s and early #"s, a ne2 trend 2as set forth by linguists such as $ustave $uillaume,3mile &enveniste and 'oman (a)obson 1he fundamental idea 2as the disclosing of the4speech4 phenomena, loc)ed up by structuralists and generative and transformationaltheorists 1hey too) up to found a theory accounting for the operations and metaoperationsoccurring 2ithin language, as core elements for the explanation of utterances 1his trend has

been named enunciation or linguistics of oerations or linguistics of the utterer or theuttering act" 1his paper aims at present the model of Antoine Culioli, 2ho has been theforerunner of the uttering act theor#

KEY WORDS:5perations, metaoperation, utterer, lexis, uttering act

6


2/15

INTRODUCTION

$eneral linguistics is addressed on the standpoint of t2o different approaches 1he first

involves the concept of 7langue8 and is investigated by theories such as structuralism and

generative grammar 2hile the second is )no2n 2ith reference to 7parole8 2hich is the subjectof study of uttering act theories 1hese theories are in turn t2ofold9 a pragmatic approach and

a grammatical approach 1he approach of Culioli refers to the grammatical aspect relying on

the utterer as the center of language production

1he objective of this paper is to overvie2 the theory of Culioli )no2n as the uttering act

theory so as to shed light on its specificities going from its early development up to its recent

evolution

:e therefore suggest to overvie2 the early developments of the $heor# of the Utterer2ith

reference to both $ustave $uillaume and 3mile &enveniste as pioneers of the concerned

theory before addressing the model of Culioli

I. SOME FORERUNNERS

1he development of the science of linguistics has gone through a series of disruptions since

the early #"s Under the epistemological pressure of philosophers, linguists, and other

scientists, the practice of linguistic analyses 2ill undergo sharp modifications as to the

behavior of the scientific object and the descriptive and;or explanatory approach A great

number of linguists have ever since oriented their analyses in the bosom of the metalinguistic

operations, prior to the surface concatenation /n order to do so, linguists have to consider the

dynamism of the object and that of the uttering act 1hose 2or)s 2ill inspire Antoine Culioli

in the foundation of his%inguistique des orations nonciaties '%O()"

Among the forerunners of that trend are :ilhelm $ustav


3/15

I.1. Gustave Guillaume

/n spite of the belated recognition of the greatness of his 2or)s6, $ustave $uillaume remains

a )eystone in the constitution of a linguistics based on the activity of the utterer or the reality

of the language practice :e shall present $ustave $uillaume in three steps9

I"*"*" +uillaue, the eisteologist

$ustave $uillaume undertoo) to found a linguistic method based on an analytically rigorous

and demanding spirit ?ee $ustave $uillaume,%angage et science du langage, 6B#"


4/15

$uillaume preaches for a scientific attitude that consists in discovering the marvelous theory

inherent to the system of systems GlanguageH ?ince languageis not directly observable, the

linguist should analyIe discourse 'the anifestations, the consequences)in order to grasp the

language 'the s#ste of conditions)4

DIS5OURS( %A1+UA+(

Direct o/seration anal#tical o/seration

GConsequencesH GConditionsH

1he linguist must have a theoriIing behavior in 2or)ing out the linguistic phenomena =e has

to set a tool, a model, 2hich 2ill enable him to comprehend the process of construction of the

system and reveal the extraordinary order Gits intimate theoryH lying belo2 the apparently

chaotic phenomena 2e experience 1he purpose is to understand the types of relations

bet2een the different elements of the system 1he linguist has to dismantle the system and

unveil the systematic structure, the organiIation of language =e 2ill then be able to state the

structuring rigor of that system

/n order to have a handle on the intimate structure of language, $ustave $uillaume suggests

that the linguist posit the dialectics language 2 ind"6


5/15

EirtualiIation vs actualiIation

Kast vs after+past

Condition vs consequence

Cause vs effect

Language vs iscourse

/n the linguistic analysis, $ustave $uillaume made t2o major discoveries9 the 8inetics of the

article and the chronogenesis of the er/al9teoral s#ste" 1hese phenomena are explained

by a simple binary fact

As for the article, the system is tension * s" tension 04

Univesal 1 Pati!ula Univesal "

1he article, in language represents a 2hole process &ut in discourse, it is a moment of this

process from U6 to U>

1he tension * represents the functioning of the operator aand the tension 0, the functioning of

the operator the"

:e shall provide a deeper explanation of this )inetic system in another presentation

$uillaume discovered the chronogenetic s#ste in trying to understand the follo2ing

utterance9

SI ous le faites et :UI% sensuie un alheur, on ous en tiendra rigueur"

G/f you do it, and a misfortune does occur, you 2ill be held accountable for thatH

=e tried to understand the reason 2hy there occurs a subjunctive form after queand 2hy there

is an indicative form aftersi"

$uillaume discovered that there is a dynamic movement from the irtual to the resent

'current)" SI is a tracer of the irtuali7ation of a current eleent 2hereasQUEar8s the

actuali7ation of a irtual eleent4

!

$ension * $ension 0


6/15

SUBJUNCTIVE INDICATIVE

1he theory of $uillaume not only asserts the dynamic aspect of languagebut it does give the

reasons to say so ?cience does not live out of truth but out of proofs, Antoine Feillet used to

say

$uillaume has given the proofs that language is a systematic and active set 3ach unit in the

system holds a given position and does function in a 2ay fundamentally different and

opposed to the others

I"*"6" +uillaue, a forerunner of the $heor# of Oerations

1he theory of $ustave $uillaume is governed by the fact of accounting for the system by the

scientist 2hile remaining inside or 2ithin the boundaries of language Foreover, language is

not a phenomenon that one can directly experience 1he linguist should start by the analyses

of its manifestations called discourse"


7/15

explaining the structuring processes occurring 2ithin language 1his theory then does deserve

the appellation of uttered9centered linguistics"

$ustave $uillaume has paved the 2ay to a sound linguistics, 2hich 2ill deserve its position

in the sphere of the demanding community ofscience"

Another important step in the development of uttered+centered linguistics is sho2n through

the 2or)s of 3mile &enveniste

I.". Emile #enveniste

I"0*" ;enenistes ercetion to the uttering act theor#

1he approach of &enveniste 2as influenced by ?aussure*s vie2 of the study of

linguistics /n fact, ?aussure in 5ours de lingustique gnraleJdistinguishes bet2een langue

and arole and suggests to consider langue instead of arole for homogeneity and

generaliIation matters &enveniste in turn 2ill be interested in the couple langueandarole

and )eep the latter as the basis of any linguistic study et he did not reject langue"

Another significant step in &enveniste*s study is the concept of communication, 2hich helps

him address the issue of sign and semantics

I"0"0" ;enenistes theor# of enunciation

Communication is of )ey significance in &enveniste*s analysis /n3ro/l?"

J?aussure, 5ours de linguistique gnrale, 6B6#!&enveniste,3ro/lndeditionH#&enveniste, op cit

M


8/15

1hus stated, the utterer becomes the most significant variable to ta)e into account in the

production of the utterance Language becomes therefore very dynamic since considering the

utterer amounts to envisaging language as an activity

1he study of communication involves t2o main elements that aresign andseantics

/>>6+ 1he linguistic sign and semantics

According to &enveniste, the sign both involves the signifier and the signified so that he

vie2s 7langue8 as made of t2o entities9 semiotics is the level 2here the sign is perceived

2hereas semantics is identified as the universe of the utterer, and so, that of discourse

As language is meant for communicating, meaning becomes very important Feaning is not

in fact ta)en for granted, it results from the action, or more, the activity of the utterer 2ho

activates language through the use of 7arole8

/>>> 1he utterer

&enveniste states the utterer as 7/8 facing 7you8, the co+utterer 1he use of 7/8 evidences

subjectivity as related to time and space 7/8 is qualified as 7ego8, the space as 7hic8 and time

as 7nunc8 1he time of events is related to 7parole8 and is ordered 2ith regard to discourse

&enveniste vie2s the present as the best representation of time through 2hich the utterer

endorses his utterances

As a brief summary, it can be noted that &enveniste is )no2n as being the first to explicitly

refer to the term uttering act 2hen addressing the issue of communication /n this field, thereare t2o main distinctions to put for2ard9 entities 2ith full and permanent states should be

differentiated from those stemming from the utterer 2hose existence is made possible

because of the factor of inter+subjectivity 1he main feature of uttering actis the actualiIation

of the discursive relation to the linguistic partner represented as follo29

?ubjectlanguediscoursemeaning

D


9/15

&asing on the abovementioned facts, &enveniste*s vie2 helps understand the approach

of Antoine Culioli

II. THE THEORETICAL SCHEME OF ANTOINE CULIOLI

II.1. T$e t$e%eti!al &%un'ati%ns

&asing on the 2or)s of &enveniste, $uillaume and (a)obson, Culioli ta)e to set up a po2erful

linguistic model in theoriIing the linguistic oerations"


10/15

II"*"* $he le-is schea

1he first level ta)es into account a set of three notional entities called notions Culioli defines

the notion as a bundle of physical and cultural properties 1he notions are both grammatical

and lexical 1hey are not constructed nor contextualiIed 1he uttering act starts 2ith a

primitive relation and a lexis schema noted N0,1,O, 2here 0,1 are variables for

arguments and , a variable for operators of predication P", refers to the first argument, P6,

the second argument and the variable for operators of predication /t refers to the binding

operator that builds up the predication /t is also the binding operator that builds up the

predicative mode

II"*"0 A le-is

After the lexis schema, comes the lexis At this level, there is an instantiation of a schema by

terms 2hich have themselves been constructed from notions A lexis is noted GlambdaH

1his second level is called the assignment level /t consists in assigning lexical units to void

places according to the primitive relations inherent to physical and cultural properties 1he

lexis is said to be pre+assertive /t is a dictum, a le8tonor a set of paraphrases Ga paraphrastic

familyH, a set of propositions /t is not an utterance since it is neither asserted nor unasserted

Q Nplayer, goal, scoreO

II"*"6 Assertion

1he third level is the assertive level 2here the utterer endorses his utterance 1his is the place

2here all possible operations are made in line 2ith the produced utterance, in concrete

situations of communication At this stage, an utterer endorses the lexis G) =e;she locates

the lexis 2ithin a situation of utterance G?itH9

Sit ( S, T )

6"


11/15

All the utterances do display this unique axiom

Nplayer, goal, scoreO Sit0(S0, T0) 1he player scores the goalR S

1he utterer is the )ey notion in the theory of Culioli in that he;she is the one 2ho 2ill ta)e the

lexis into charge and ma)e it effective =e 2ill apply some operations of modulation and

modality according to the parameters of the situation of utterance /t is then a utopia 2hen

trying to explain the linguistic phenomena regardless of the utterer 1he utterer is the one 2ho

organiIes the linguistic event

II.". T$e s!$eme %& Ant%ine Culi%li

Antoine Culioli has organiIed a research team around the enunciatie oerations" 1he

objective of this team T made of philosophers, psychologists, anthropologists, linguists,

mathematiciansS T is to account for the enunciative phenomena and present an accurate

image of language in general 'language uniersals)" After these explanations, the scientist

2ill have to formaliIe the regularities Gand irregularitiesH of language and come to a

mathematical programming in setting up a scheme of algorithms to account for the linguistic

phenomena observable in all natural languages

/n this attitude to formaliIation, the scientist has to fathom the operations lying behind the

surface structure T formaliIing the surface is paraphrasing T and found a formal enunciative

system 1he purpose of such a formal system is to reduce the amount of subjectivity in the

scientific explanations and assure the transportability and malleability of the theory

1he formaliIing project of Culioli is T definitely T a complex project 1his is 2hy Culioli*s

team is made of researchers 2hose various disciplines are to help grasp the entire dynamism

of the object 1he linguistic phenomenon being al2ays ne2 T as a quantum T a probabilistic

theory seems to be much more suitable to express the results 1his probabilistic characteristic

is the basis of many critics against the formaliIing project of the linguistic facts

Unfortunately, for Culioli, this is the only 2ay to prove the scientific aspect of thescience of

language"


12/15

1he formaliIation project demands a co+operation among different fields, bet2een the

mathematician and the linguist for instance =o2ever, the tools are not automatically to come

from the field of mathematics Galgebra, geometry, topologySH 1he items offered by the

mathematician have to be corroborated as far as the behaviors of the linguistic phenomena are

concerned and adapted or rejected 1he linguist can found some metaoperators that are

suitable to account for the facts studied

/f the behavior of the quantum has been formaliIed through a ro/a/ilistic function of the

Bae, the enunciative operations can also be formaliIed

Antoine Culioli has proposed a set of metaoperators to systematiIe the linguistic phenomena

5ne of the most important items is the etaoeratoroflocation or locating oerator4

1he concept of location is fundamental to the theory of Culioli insofar as, for him, uttering

consists in constructing a set of locating parameters A term is said to be located 2hen it has

been specified, situated or determined /n the theory of operations Gor theor# of the le-isH, a

unit acquires a specific value by means of a system of location

M

1his operation of location is abinary operation bet2een a locatorand a located eleent4

G is located relative to H

1he complexity of this system of location depends on the spatiotemporal data of the utterer or

the 2ay she or he vie2s the relations9

GGGGH G>>HH G66HH G""HH S

/n the uttering act process, the system of location can be represented as follo2s9

M?ee ( &ouscaren et al,Introduction to a %inguistic +raar of (nglish 4 an Uttered9centered Aroach,6BB>, p6!"

6>


13/15


14/15

reads 7 is not identifiable 2ith 8 or 7 is located relative to 8 and is

consequently different from

H isconnection G H

reads 7 is neither identifiable 2ith , nor different from 8 1his means that

the location is not carried out relative to

JH


15/15

Foreover, Culioli advocates for a fruitful co+operation bet2een neighboring fields so that the

marvelous phenomena of language should be accurately thought through and formaliIed

#I#LIOGRAPHY

&3@E3@/?13, 3mile,3ro/l

roland r. kouassi.pdf

Documents