Volume 2020, Issue 234 - Points aveugles et points borgnes: Quelques réflexions sur l'innovation en sémiotique; Guest Editors: Stéphanie Walsh Matthews, Louis Hébert, Éric Trudel, Thomas Broden, Sémir Badir & Pascal Michelucci

Telos is in vogue in biosemiotic researches, which present the teleological solution as anti-Darwinian, while it is more often, for biologists, only ante-Darwinian. The assimilation of structuring contents to a “function”, and of the function to a “goal”, in an irreversible temporality, is the most frequent basis of this methodological creepage. The teleology is based on a projective and ascending epistemic orientation, to which we can oppose a retrojective, descending and achronic one, including modal and sensitive interactional semiotics. For semiotics, the challenge lies in the nature of its relationships with other disciplines, particularly biology. Indeed, we see that the temptation is great for semioticians to dwell precisely in the shadows and shams of other disciplines, and to call “sign” or “semiosis” what other sciences seem to have still some trouble to explain, with the risk of only confronting problems that will soon be obsolete. We propose here the theoretical and methodological principles of structural biosemiotics, and precisely attentive to the problems that biologists face, solve and renew.

The paper starts from the premise that the epistemological requirements of the semiotic discipline have led it to overlook the variation (geographical, chronological, social) of the subjects it deals with. After reviewing the historical and methodological reasons for this setting aside, this paper outlines a general theory of semiotic variation. For this, it distinguishes two families of variation – the variation of practices and the variation of attitudes – and three axes of variation: the spatial axis, the time axis and the social axis. It also highlights the two types of forces that govern the variation: centripetal forces and centrifugal forces. The paper concludes with the epistemological impact that the concern about variation may have on semiotics and disciplines that, such as sociology and anthropology, have made variation their subject.

Résumé  La théorie sémiotique s’est développée comme une théorie de la production du sens et de sa manifestation dans les diverses pratiques humaines. Dernièrement, elle est demandée à rendre compte de l’émergence du sens, de sa nature . Pour la philosophie merleaupontienne ce point d’origine est donné dans la perception, comme le premier sol où le sens se fait. La perception détient la primauté de la construction du monde signifiant pour l’homme. Dans les sciences naturelles, les neurosciences pointent vers le cerveau, en particulier l’équipement neuronal que nous avons en tant qu’hommes, comme le siège de la construction du sens. Notre connaissance du monde vient d’une « neuroception », un néologisme inévitable pour lui donner un air de famille avec celui de la « per-ception ». Devant ces deux positions théoriques, nous pouvons en sémiologie et linguistique offrir et défendre l’hypothèse que notre connaissance du monde est péremptoirement générée dans les mailles des langages. Une opération de sémioception , basée sur l’acte sémiologique arbitraire des langages, commande la perception humaine elle-même, avec antécédence. Ce n’est pas le cerveau qui « fait de l’esprit », c’est plutôt le langage qui « fait le cerveau » humain.

Résumé La comparaison de la cybernétique de Wiener et du schéma narratif de Greimas permet de repérer leurs points forts respectifs : dans le schéma de la rétroaction de Wiener, les fonctions de commande et d’information des messages, d’une part, ainsi que les opérations relatives à la transmission des messages, d’autre part ; dans le schéma narratif de Greimas, la sanction finale anticipée par un sujet et qui motive celui-ci à donner suite à la proposition d’un autre sujet. La nouvelle théorie proposée fusionne ces points forts et ajoute des notions élaborées ailleurs : notamment celle de besoin, inspirée de la théorie de la motivation de Maslow. Nous aboutissons ainsi à un schéma de la satisfaction d’un besoin en six étapes, auquel sont associées plusieurs notions complémentaires : en particulier, celles de valeur d’un objet par rapport à la satisfaction de l’un des quatre besoins essentiels, de jugement de réalité ou de valeur exprimé par un sujet, d’opération qui modifie ou non l’avoir d’un sujet et de sujet individuel ou collectif. Finalement, dans le cadre de la nouvelle théorie, la notion de sujet s’élargit et inclut tout être vivant ou association d’êtres vivants – êtres humains, animaux ou plantes.

Résumé On enquête dans cet article sur le concept de modalité comme il a été élaboré dans la théorie sémiotique, distinctement des approches linguistique et logique, à l’instigation d’A. J. Greimas, puis largement employé dans l’analyse des textes. Si la modalité répond tout d’abord de la possibilité de présence d’un verbe modal ( pouvoir, vouloir, savoir ), bientôt l’effort théorique des sémioticiens a tendu à rendre compte des différentes modalités au moyen d’une structure sémantique. L’exposé de cinq travaux poursuivant cet effort de systématisation (Rengstorf. 1976. Pour une quatrième modalité narrative. Langages 43. 71–77 ; Greimas et Courtés. 1979. Sémiotique. Dictionnaire raisonné de la théorie du langage . Paris: Hachette ; Greimas et Fontanille. 1991. Sémiotique des passions . Paris: Seuil ; Fontanille et Zilberberg. 1998. Tension et signification . Liège: Mardaga ; et Fontanille. 2003 [1999]. Sémiotique du discours . Limoges: PULIM) nous permettra de proposer, dans un premier temps, un bilan. On remarquera, dans un second temps, que les extensions et justifications successives n’ont pas toutefois été sans introduire des contradictions dans la conception théorique de la modalité. Nous mènerons alors les développements nécessaires en vue d’une définition plus raisonnée du concept de modalité et d’une refonte générale du système des modalités.

Résumé  La figure, dans la sémiotique greimassienne, héritant d’une élaboration polysémique chez Hjelmslev, appartient tant au plan de l’expression qu’au plan du contenu. Sur le plan du contenu, elle s’introduit au niveau discursif et renvoie à un thème, qu’elle concrétise . Par ailleurs, dans Sémantique Structurale, les traces d’information que nos cinq sens nous apportent sont aussi appelées figures, et c’est par leur intermédiaire que le monde naturel joue un rôle dans la naissance du sens. Ces figures engendrées par la perception sont des figures d’expression et appartiennent de ce fait au plan de l’expression. L’unification des deux types de figures en une figurativité générique, située au niveau discursif et subdivisée en figurativité stricto sensu , dite de surface, et figurativité lato sensu , dite profonde (Landowski. 2017. Com Greimas : interações semióticas . São Paulo : Editora CPS e Estação das Letras e Cores) est discutée avec l’apport d’auteurs de la sémiotique française et la structure quadratique du signe due au Groupe µ (2015. Principia semiotica : aux sources du sens . Bruxelles : Les Impressions Nouvelles : 283–292). Cette discussion nous suggère la figurativité comme transversale au parcours génératif du sens et contribuant à l’opération de conversion, dans la mesure où des traces du monde naturel refont surface sous la forme de figures du monde, sur le plan du contenu discursif.

This article seeks to define what is semiotic and what is Semiotics . Provided first is a brief presentation of various perspectives of Semiotics. Pursuant to this, we will seek to uncover Semiotics’ particulars by evaluating various approaches. We will commence by framing the definitions of the word “Semiotic” to consider then Semiotics via eight particular anthropic – human-related – levels. This partition, derived by the author from a Rastier typology, defines the following levels: noumenophysical, phenophysical, semiotic, representational (“mental images” and concepts), sens (physical), felt (affects), cognitive other and transcendental. From here, we will consider the place of Semiotics among disciplines. Finally, the text presents a typology of relationship between disciplines, including semiotics: anadisciplinarity, disciplinarity, valodisciplinarity, intradisciplinary (such as intertheoricity), multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, metadisciplinarity).

Independently of the generative and enunciative theories, the dynamic structuralism of the Saussurian tradition has made it possible to pose the problem of semiosis, understood as the individuation of the sign from a structural germ. At a higher level of complexity, the processes that preside over this individuation seem to also govern the composition of texts. Literary and pictorial examples make it possible to detect them; they confirm that reflection on the arts is a major area of general and comparative semiotics

Résumé Cet article se propose d’envisager le signe iconique à l’aune du modèle néosaussurien du signe et de la sémiosis qui se dégage des Écrits de linguistique générale . Après avoir exposé ce modèle à partir des propositions que François Rastier tire des textes autographes de Saussure, cette contribution transpose le cadre à la description du signe iconique, en réinterrogeant certains éléments de la conceptualisation que donne le Groupe µ de ce type d’énoncé visuel. Une brève analyse de la toile Le retour à la nature de Magritte permet d’illustrer et de valider la transposition théorique du modèle néosaussurien du signe et de la sémiosis. Cette démarche ouvre la possibilité de procéder à l’interprétation des images selon la théorie morphosémiotique développée par la sémantique de Rastier.

In this article, we will discuss the integration of digital with semiotics and propose that a conceptual modeling can offer a bridge of dialogue between these two classically partitioned domains. More precisely, we will put forward the hypothesis that any research project that will call for computer science is a scientific process if it constructs a theory that contains, in addition to the classical models that are the formal, computational and physical models, a conceptual model. This place, where researchers conceptualize the multiple dimensions of their research subject, will then be defined as the foundation for a strong relationship between semiotics and computer science. We will see that the different definitions of the conceptual model converge on the thesis that scientific knowledge implements a conceptualization process that must identify the various dimensions of the problem in addition to having to express itself in such a way that it can be communicated between members of epistemic communities. We will see, finally, that a semiotic research project requires the construction of such a model in order to describe, generalize and select problems and that this same conceptual model will also be necessary if the semiotician uses computer science in the context of his or her research.

This article aims to introduce Geoesthesic, an approach to the sciences of culture interested in interactions between space and semiotic reception. The twentieth-century spatial shift in the arts and sciences inspired the creation of several new approaches related to space and territory. Kenneth White’s Geopoetic, Bertrand Westphal’s Geocriticism, and later Prieto’s and Tally’s, the Geoesthetic of Quirós and Imhoff and possibly even the geosymbolic worked by Christiane Lahaie and Mario Bédard. It is by noticing the absence, among all these approaches, of one whose central point would be, not space, but the link between space and the reception process that Louis Hébert suggested to us to design and write the premises of such an approach. Geoesthesic would thus be a practical and experimental approach by which one could observe the impact that space can have on the semiotic reception of a given element or the influence of a specific semiotic reception on the perception of a defined space.

Comparative research enriches semiotics and deepens its exchanges with other sciences. The work can also highlight inductive methods and socio-historically specific forms and practices, thereby helping to develop a general semiotics and a semiotics of cultures. This article compares the morphology by Vladimir Propp that inspired the Greimassian narrative schema to a small sample of narrative forms, then to Aristotle's Poetics and to a model of Hollywood films. Certain motifs and subgenres represent elementary schemas with two or three actants and functions that rely on role reversal and emotions. A half dozen subgenres can be differentiated by the different affects that they aim to elicit. Greek tragedy is to evoke intense emotional states, and reveals a close interdependence between characteristics of the hero, modulations of the critical action, and the emotive effect produced. In the films, the variation of the affective intensity constitutes a key element of the narrative rhythm, and two main sequences supply opposing and complementary axiologies. A conclusion suggests the value of bringing together the semiotics of the passions, recent research on the history of the emotions, and comparative studies of how different cultures express feelings.

Focused on manifestation, semiotics has nevertheless constantly considered its surroundings, the imaginary that makes the image and gives it meaning. The article tries to problematize this relationship. It separates the picture from its imaginary share, the image, and seeks to support its general propositions on plastic analyzes, a painting by Francis Bacon, an installation by Abdelkader Benchamma and another installation by Adrien M and Claire B. It focuses on reductions and the tipping points of the picture, where the “opening” occurs, striving for a structuring of its proposals. It thus instructs both sides of the enunciation, an enunciation centered on the visible and an invisible enunciation still premeditated by the enunciation.

In this article we plan to revisit the notion of substance of the plane of expression, as found in semiotic studies of the image, and how this notion relates to the concepts of purport and form. The article is divided into three parts: The first section gives a brief history of the various ways substance has been addressed in (or excluded from) image analyses based on Greimassian semiotics and Groupe μ rhetoric. Drawing upon Jacques Fontanille’s semiotics of practices and Jean-François Bordron’s theory of iconicity, the second section concerns proposals that attempt to address the “moment” of giving substance in autographic works of art – and also in writing –, through notions of support, application, and the gestural act of inscription. The third section tests these methodological tools on chemical photography and on digital image-making in order to propose a new, specifically semiotic approach to studying the media characteristics of images.

In his essay “La judéité dans la musique,” Richard Wagner’s horrid portrayal of a Jew by way of physical, economical, linguistic and musical description exposed his anti-Semitic convictions. Much of this aspect has either been forgotten or softened, however, when evoking Wagner, it is in fact the relationship between his anti-Semitism and his work that is the most problematic. This paper proposes to consider three symbolic forms through which this reticence is expressed by looking at the the theoretical writings, opera booklets and their music. Using the Beckmesser character in Les Maîtres Chanteurs de Nuremberg , although Beckmesser is not introduced as a Jew but rather a good German bourgeois, one cannot deny the allegory positioning him as a Jew. First element of demonstration: the analogical resemblance between Beckmesser and the Viennese music critic Eduard Hanslick to whom Wagner accused of hiding his Jewishness. Second element: it has already been proven that Beckmesser’s serenade sung during the second act to the Master Singers was a mockery of a Jewish prayer. Third element: in Cosima’s, Wagner’s wife, diary she explains that this particular piece generated at that time a strong reaction by the Jewish community in Vienna, thus supporting the claim that his antisemitism was already known and problematic to his contemporaries.

This article revisits the notion of distinctive features used in linguistic semantics, through which this discipline converges with semiotics. Applied to grammar, traits make it possible to characterize notional categories and the links between them. These links are empirically demonstrated by the regularities in typological variation and in diachronic evolution. New data are provided explaining the passage from one category to another, in particular from indefinites to negation proper. The approach makes it possible to identify the features and notional categories that structure the semantics of grammar across languages.

Résumé Selon la perspective de l’œuvre ouverte développée par Eco, « un texte est un tissu d’espaces blancs, d’interstices à remplir … un mécanisme paresseux qui vit sur la plus-value de sens qui y est introduite par le destinataire » (Eco 1985, Lector in fabula ou la coopération interprétative dans les textes narratifs , Myriem Bouzaher (trad.). Paris: Grasset, 66–67). C’est à cette plus-value de sens, concomitante à l’activité interprétative, que la présente étude s’attardera, et ce, afin d’identifier d’abord des éléments de l’album d’enfance nécessitant l’interprétation d’un lecteur modèle et d’en convoquer par la suite les significations qui peuvent être appliquées au texte. Plus précisément, il s’agira de décrire et d’analyser les mécanismes intertextuels qui enrichissent l’organisation syntaxique et sémantique de quatre albums d’enfance parus au Québec entre 1992 et 2002 et qui nécessitent l’intervention d’un lecteur modèle pour identifier les systèmes de signification et les savoirs qui y sont rattachés. Les albums soumis à l’investigation reprennent le schéma narratif de contes de fée connus et celui d’une nouvelle contemporaine. L’hypothèse est la suivante: si les composantes génériques de l’album dévoilent à un jeune lecteur des univers de références connus et familiers, le processus de l’intertextualité sollicite des contenus qui, soumis à l’interprétation d’un lecteur modèle, font parfois surgir des structures de signification inattendues.

The contribution that may come from the general science of signs, semiotics, to the planning and development of education and learning at all levels, from early schooling through to university education and learning should not be neglected. As Umberto Eco claims in the “Introduction” to the Italian edition of his book Semiotica and Philosophy of Language (1984: xii, my trans.), “[general semiotics] is philosophical in nature, because it does not study a particular system, but posits the general categories in light of which different systems can be compared . And for general semiotics philosophical discourse is neither advisable nor urgent: it is simply constitutive .” To the title of their book Semiotic Theory of Learning , at the centre of our attention in the present text, Andrew Stables, Winfried Nöth, Alin Olteanu, Sébastien Pesce, and Eetu Pikkarainen, rightly add the subtitle New Perspectives in the Philosophy of Education. This multivoiced contribution to research in learning and education in a semiotic framework has a unifying reference in the semiotics of Charles S. Peirce, but without disregarding an array of other distinguished exponents of the teaching and education sciences from different disciplines, semioticians and philosophers alike. This book, a polyphonic effort, with its appeal to “act otherwise,” and to do so investing in learning and education, no doubt makes a significant contribution in such a direction: education for transformation, for humanizing social change. Beyond evidencing what to us are particularly interesting aspects of the topics under discussion in Semiotic Theory of Learning , we also propose to continue and amplify this multivoiced dialogue. While highlighting still other aspects and contributions made by the same semioticians and philosophers presented by the authors of this book, involving such figures as Charles Peirce, Charles Morris, Thomas Sebeok, John Deely, etc., we have further introduced other voices made to resound throughout, whether directly or indirectly, like that of Victoria Welby, Mikhail Bakhtin, Emmanuel Levinas, Adam Schaff, Ferruccio Rossi-Landi, Marcel Danesi, Augusto Ponzio, and Genevieve Vaughan.