Problèmes de linguistique générale
Citations
23 citations
23 citations
23 citations
Cites background from "Problèmes de linguistique générale"
...Emile Benveniste (1966) suggested in a famous analysis that what is ordinarily considered the pronouns of the first, second, and third persons should really be considered the result of combining two different dimensions, the correlation of personality, which opposes the person to the non-person, and, within the former pole, the correlation of subjectivity, which opposes the subject to the non-subject. The traditional third person, in this sense, is no person at all, and it is opposed to two kinds of persons: the one identified as the speaker and the one identified as the listener.(5) Tesnière (1969) later proposed to use the somewhat more enlightening but more cumbersome terms autoontive, antiontive, and anontive – respectively: the one who exists in itself, the one who exists in opposition (to the first one), and the one who, properly speaking, does not exist at all. It could be said, then, that Culture is the domain of the subject or autoontive while Extraculture is the domain of the non-subject or antiontive. Non-culture, finally, is the residence of the Non-person, or anontive. It seems particular proper to describe Non-culture as that which does not properly exist. Among the classical discoverers of the New world, Columbus, making lists of all kinds of resources and including human beings among precious metals, animals, and plants, is a good example of somebody conceiving the American continent as an Alius – while Cortés, employing an interpreter and using the myths of the Aztecs to integrate himself into their world, adopts the attitude one has to an Alter (cf. Todorov 1982). In our context, it is interesting to note that, while Columbus took with him an interpreter who understood Hebrew and Arabic, apparently expecting to find the natives speaking some kind of generic foreign language, Cortés managed to set up a chain of translators, Aquilar interpreting from Spanish to Maya and vice-versa, and Malintzin interpreting from Maya to Nahuatl and vice versa (cf. Figure 3 and Miralles 2004). Given these definitions, it might be better, following a suggestion by Anna Cabak Redei (2007), to adopt the terms Ego-culture, Alter-culture, and Alius-culture....
[...]
...Emile Benveniste (1966) suggested in a famous analysis that what is ordinarily considered the pronouns of the first, second, and third persons should really be considered the result of combining two different dimensions, the correlation of personality, which opposes the person to the non-person, and, within the former pole, the correlation of subjectivity, which opposes the subject to the non-subject. The traditional third person, in this sense, is no person at all, and it is opposed to two kinds of persons: the one identified as the speaker and the one identified as the listener.(5) Tesnière (1969) later proposed to use the somewhat more enlightening but more cumbersome terms autoontive, antiontive, and anontive – respectively: the one who exists in itself, the one who exists in opposition (to the first one), and the one who, properly speaking, does not exist at all....
[...]
...Emile Benveniste (1966) suggested in a famous analysis that what is ordinarily considered the pronouns of the first, second, and third persons should really be considered the result of combining two different dimensions, the correlation of personality, which opposes the person to the non-person,…...
[...]
...Emile Benveniste (1966) suggested in a famous analysis that what is ordinarily considered the pronouns of the first, second, and third persons should really be considered the result of combining two different dimensions, the correlation of personality, which opposes the person to the non-person, and, within the former pole, the correlation of subjectivity, which opposes the subject to the non-subject....
[...]
23 citations
23 citations