par Zienkowski, Jan
Référence 13th International Pragmatics Association Conference: narrative pragmatics: culture, cognition, context (08/09/2013 au 13/09/2013: New Delhi)
Publication Non publié, 2013
Communication à un colloque
Résumé : This paper presents interpretive functionalism as a heuristic principle for analysing large-scale social and political debates. Interpretive functionalism involves an investigation of the functional relatedness of linguistic forms to one another, to the practices of interaction, and to the meta-pragmatic positioning of the interlocutors and voices involved in the speech event(s) under investigation (Zienkowski 2011, 2012). The notions of function and interpretation are derived from poststructuralist (Foucault 1969; Glynos and Howarth 2007), pragmatist (Bernstein 2010; Rorty 1996), and linguistic pragmatic (Robinson 2006; Verschueren 1999, 2011) approaches to discourse and subjectivity. The practice of using language involves an articulation of semiotic elements at various levels of discursive organisation with each other (Laclau and Mouffe 1985). Phonemes, words, sentences, discourse topics, narratives, genres, ideologies, and hegemonies can only make sense thanks to the way we establish interpretive links between these levels of discursive organisation. In poststructuralist discourse theory this linkage is conceptualised in terms of articulation (Laclau and Mouffe 1985; Torfing 1999). Throughout practices of articulation, the identity and meaning of every articulated element is modified. Pragmatists have also argued for a non-referential theory of meaning (Bernstein 2010: ix-x). In linguistic pragmatic thought, the production of meaning is frequently thought of in terms of a practice of en-, de-, and re(con)textualisation(s) of fragments of discourse (Auer 2009; Bauman and Briggs 1990; Verschueren 2008). Regardless of such terminological differences, it is a basic premise of poststructuralist, pragmatist, and linguistic pragmatic thought that there is no one-to-one relationship between a semiotic form and its function(s). At the same time, meaning is not entirely free-floating. We partially fix meaning by (meta)pragmatically marking preferred and relevant boundaries for interpretation. These interpretive and functionalist phenomena may function as guiding principles for the empirical analysis of large-scale social and political debates. This will be exemplified with reference to a case study of the way intellectuals and activists involved in the Flemish minority debates deploy the notion of ‘integration’ in their political discourse. What function(s) does the signifier ‘integration’ perform in relation to the preferred modes of politics and subjectivity articulated by these activists and intellectuals will be the main research question of this paper. Zienkowski argues that modes of analysis that take the metapragmatic dimension of language use into account can help researchers to establish relevant boundaries for interpretation (Zienkowski 2011).

Documents en relation