References of "Provenzano, François"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
See detailCritique du capitalisme néolibéral et travail rhétorique chez Frédéric Lordon : un discours d’affectation.
Provenzano, François ULg; Janvier, Antoine ULg

in Dissensus (in press)

Les ouvrages de Frédéric Lordon ont offert ces dernières années un éclairage nouveau des mécanismes de la finance et du capitalisme en régime néolibéral, en vertu de la place centrale qu’ils accordent aux ... [more ▼]

Les ouvrages de Frédéric Lordon ont offert ces dernières années un éclairage nouveau des mécanismes de la finance et du capitalisme en régime néolibéral, en vertu de la place centrale qu’ils accordent aux affects. Il est frappant que cette entreprise – qui est triple: analyse de la finance, analyse du capitalisme, analyse de la domination – soit doublée d’une attention portée au discours même qui la développe. On peut repérer une telle attention dans la pluralité des genres de discours qu’investit Frédéric Lordon : ouvrages « savants » ou « universitaires », mais aussi courts essais engagés aux éditions Raisons d’agir, articles de presse dans Le Monde Diplomatique notamment, tenue du blog « La pompe à phynance » sur le site du même journal, et même pièce de théâtre récemment adaptée au cinéma, D’un retournement l’autre. Comédie sérieuse sur la crise financière. En quatre actes, et en alexandrins . Diversité de genre entre les différents types de textes, donc. Diversité interne à chacun de ces textes, aussi : le lecteur de Frédéric Lordon se trouve toujours à cheval sur plusieurs codes rhétoriques dont joue l’auteur dans un même ouvrage. On pourrait bien sûr tenir cette double diversité pour la simple conséquence du talent d’écriture de Lordon, ou d’un plaisir pris par l’auteur à jouer du langage et des ethos qu’il construit. Le présent article propose au contraire de considérer cette diversité comme le résultat d’un véritable travail sur les modalités rhétoriques du discours critique sur le capitalisme financiarisé, qu’il faut articuler aux principaux postulats de sa théorie sociale. L’hypothèse défendue sera, précisément, de considérer qu’il y a une construction rhétorique qui participe de l’entreprise critique et, du même coup, qui s’inscrit comme un geste politique dans une « société des affects ». [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 9 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailL'imaginaire politique de la théorie de l'énonciation
Provenzano, François ULg

in Langage et Société (2014), 147(mars 2014), 133-150

Detailed reference viewed: 24 (8 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailQue peut le métalangage ? What can metalanguage do ?
Dondero, Maria Giulia ULg; Provenzano, François ULg; Klinkenberg, Jean-Marie ULg et al

in Signata. Annales des Sémiotiques = Annals of Semiotics (2014), 4

In the social sciences, research that is conveyed in a display of technical language is not always seen in a good light. This is a trend particularly in semiotics. As a field of study, it has a reputation ... [more ▼]

In the social sciences, research that is conveyed in a display of technical language is not always seen in a good light. This is a trend particularly in semiotics. As a field of study, it has a reputation for eagerness to use semio-jargon at the worst, or at best, a reputation for walling itself off in a self-reflective meta-language. It is true that the best known and most cited treatise on structural semiotics, by Greimas and Courtés, was published as an Analytical Dictionary. And it is also true that Peirce's work is prodigiously crammed with terminological inventions and speculations. It would seem that in both cases, the quest for scientific rigor took precedence over elegance of expression and of so-called natural discourse. Nothing new under the sun, n'est-ce pas? They say that a courtesan under Louis XIV scandalized the Sun King's court by uttering a technical term in the king's bedchamber, which illustrates how far back the issue goes; it certainly didn't begin with the development of the academic study of signs. In issue 4 of Signata we would like to examine the various aspects of building the meta-language of semiotics. The intention is not to adopt a philological perspective, but to look at the issue of terminologies in current scientific epistemology. We will examine the diversity of the possible meta-languages (natural language versus technical language?), the influence of related disciplines (what implications do the borrowed terms from grammar, logic, mathematics, and so on have for semiotics?), the reasons — explicit or not — for the choices made, and the stylistic impacts of those choices. An inquiry of this sort could go in many directions. What follows is an open-ended, non-exhaustive enumeration: Semiotics: A special case? Is it actually true that the semiotic approach generates a more prolific meta-linguistic output than other disciplines? How and why? It would be interesting, for example, to do comparisons with these more or less related disciplines (linguistics, sociology, psychology, etc.), to assess whether their rapport with the meta-language might possibly be different, and the reasons for and effects of those differences. In these assessments, of course, there arises the issue of "natural language", which is so readily its own meta-language: Are there disciplines that reconcile themselves with this supposed naturalness without any detriment? An updated meta-language may be deemed as unavoidable for a discipline whose vocation is to generalize, which implies substantial modeling power. But what do we find in philosophy, which can be expressed without abandoning natural language, and which seems to incur less reproach for its jargon than semiotics? The archaeology of meta-languages Another line of inquiry would be of a genealogical nature: This would involve examining the theoretical justifications that underpin meta-language borrowings from this or that other discipline, at this or that other time in its history, and the repercussions, both stylistic and epistemological, of the trade in terminology. On this score, we note that classical structuralism has expressed itself to a great extent in a grammatical and more broadly linguistic language (actants, modalities, deixis, articulation, semes, etc.). But it is common knowledge that other approaches to semantic facts have favored the language of logic. And yet others have shown that it is both possible and effective to use language taken from geometry or optics. In addition to these, from the perspective of the primacy of perception, the language of the natural sciences must be included — particularly that of the neurosciences —, and the language of sensory forms from phenomenology. Whether one is helping oneself to terms like "isotopy" and "valence" from physics and chemistry or "topology" from mathematics, these are not innocent choices in a discipline that has blazed its trail through the social sciences. The epistemological influence of the meta-language. Without any doubt, herein lies the most complex, ambivalent issue. Firstly, when one adopts a meta-language, by definition one views the object of study as a language (whether it is the natural language or the language of images, or the language of social practices). Yet this operation is so laden with consequences that to enumerate them would be an impossible task. We will merely note that many theoretical categories and analytical tools seem to emerge directly from the choice of a particular meta-language and the distance dictated by it. Secondly, opting for one meta-language over another is ipso facto a choice of which explanatory form the analysis will use. It follows that working on the meta-language, far from being a deathly sterile activity, is a practice intended to generate the form the explanation will take (which is without any doubt a major issue in scientific discussion). But these two epistemological impacts of meta-language generation can trigger a great deal of discussion on what we might call "the adverse effects" of the chosen options. For example, if there is a consensus within a group on a particular meta-language (such as in Greimassian semiotics), it may become just a template to apply, simply a schema to project onto objects; but if it is an object of inquiry (such as in Peirce's work), it may yield an approach that is more theoretical than practical. Hence the question: Hasn't semiotics in fact been above all a field with a mix of applied and self-reflective approaches? And in any case, does it truly explain things when one supports a meta-language and seeks to apply it and think within its terms? For example, we might question whether the meta-linguistic power of semiotics hasn't made it a discipline that is quick to generalize, and kept it from focusing on the singularity of its objects. We might also question whether semiotic research isn't all too often more formal than substantial, both in the Hjelmselvian sense and the usual sense. Ultimately, even further up the line, one could debate the epistemological possibility of the meta-language itself — as the poststructuralist philosophies have done. Isn't the distinction between object language and meta-language actually a bit utopian in the natural languages, since it assumes that the terms completely lose their reflexivity? Lastly, we might question whether the meta-language as a theoretical tool doesn't entail more than just artless transparency, but also an effort to define the theory within a restrictive set of evidence. For example, to bring up the "semiotic square" presupposes that there is always a semiotic square that explains the basis of the discourse (in such a way that what was a working hypothesis could become a non-falsifiable theory). The socio-rhetorical effects of the meta-language Aside from the epistemological requirements, when technical terminology is reworked, this has impacts on the circulation of concepts and their appropriation by different groups, which then affects group members' recognition of one another and how they differentiate one group from another. The boundary drawn on a conceptual system by a terminological apparatus thus gives rise to corollary inclusion-exclusion repercussions that are not unimportant. There are fights over terminological legitimacy, whose foremost characteristic is actually that they are not formulated as such. Any meta-language also has impacts on the social aspects of thinking. This is especially true of the meta-language of semiotics, because, due to its dedication to generality and transposability, it must fully support deconstruction. On the other side of the coin, one can maintain that meta-language is to objects what bureaucracy is to communities: It is helpful in creating order and making distinctions, in establishing levels and empty slots, but the risk, then, is that it may become an end in itself that must be maintained and tended, and that it ultimately disallows acting and thinking in other ways. In the light of this rhetorical approach, finally, we will set down some things to consider on the manner in which semiotics talks to itself: Are "techno-speak" and "jargon" inevitable? Are "elegance" and "practicality" valid criteria for a meta-language? What impacts on the meta-language are due to the obligation we often have in semiotics to dialogue with those outside our field: Can/ should this influence the way semiotics is communicated? And what is the cost of this influence? [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 31 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailPortrait photographique d’écrivain et newsmagazine. Pour une approche rhétorique de l’événementialité du littéraire
Provenzano, François ULg

in COnTEXTES : Revue de Sociologie de la Littérature (2014), 14

Detailed reference viewed: 11 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailCe que Sartre fait à la négritude. Archéologie d'un discours francodoxe
Provenzano, François ULg

in Imorou, Abdoulaye (Ed.) La littérature africaine francophone. Mesures d’une présence au monde (2014)

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (5 ULg)
See detailHistoriographie de la littérature belge. Une anthologie
Dozo, Björn-Olav ULg; Provenzano, François ULg

Book published by ENS-Éditions (2014)

Detailed reference viewed: 116 (15 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailÉnonciation
Provenzano, François ULg

in Glinoer, Anthony; Saint-Amand, Denis (Eds.) Lexique Socius. Les concepts des approches sociales du littéraire (2014)

Detailed reference viewed: 15 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDoxa
Provenzano, François ULg

in Glinoer, Anthony; Saint-Amand, Denis (Eds.) Lexique Socius. Les concepts des approches sociales du littéraire (2014)

Detailed reference viewed: 11 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLa notion de discours chez Bourdieu : une politique du sujet littéraire
Provenzano, François ULg

in Bolmain, Thomas; Cormann, Grégory (Eds.) Politiques de la littérature : Bourdieu, Sartre, Foucault (2014)

Detailed reference viewed: 25 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailL'économie rhétorique du Résumé
Provenzano, François ULg

in Janus. Quaderni del circolo glossematico (2014), 13

Detailed reference viewed: 13 (0 ULg)
Full Text
See detailHiérarchisation énonciative, prismes génériques et effet de politisation
Provenzano, François ULg; Goin, Emilie ULg

Conference (2013, April 19)

Cette présentation aborde la question des genres et de leurs effets interprétatifs par le biais de l’énonciation et, plus particulièrement, par le biais des jeux de hiérarchisation énonciative dont ... [more ▼]

Cette présentation aborde la question des genres et de leurs effets interprétatifs par le biais de l’énonciation et, plus particulièrement, par le biais des jeux de hiérarchisation énonciative dont peuvent faire l’objet divers genres de discours. Nous avons choisi de contraster deux genres de discours a priori très différents (discours politique et littéraire) de manière à dépasser la conception du genre comme un ensemble de données situationnelles ou textuelles, pour y voir un double principe de transfert entre ces deux ensembles. Entre la situation et le texte, le genre (roman, témoignage, harangue, etc.) impose certaines routines communicationnelles ; entre le texte et la situation, c’est d’une autre définition du genre dont on a besoin, celle du genre comme activation d’un parcours au sein d’un espace de possibles interprétatifs, donnant ainsi au texte une orientation argumentative, une consistance évènementielle et une valeur d’acte performatif. Nous pensons que dans cette seconde acception, le genre – ici, l’effet politisant – est susceptible de généralisation, tout comme le sont les genres envisagés plus traditionnellement à partir du pôle de la production. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 43 (12 ULg)
Full Text
See detailDénommer. Regards rhétoriques sur la terminologie linguistique
[ Lttr 13 ]; Badir, Sémir ULg; Polis, Stéphane ULg et al

E-print/Working paper (2013)

Detailed reference viewed: 19 (2 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLa vie terminologique de l’énonciation
[Lttr 13]; Badir, Sémir ULg; Polis, Stéphane ULg et al

in Dufaye, Lionel; Gournay, Lucie (Eds.) Benveniste après un demi-siècle, regards sur l'énonciation aujourd'hui (2013)

Detailed reference viewed: 80 (14 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailL’imaginaire linguistique des historiens de la littérature, en France et en périphéries
Provenzano, François ULg

in Moussa, Sarga (Ed.) Le XIXe siècle et ses langues (2013)

Detailed reference viewed: 16 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLe pathos francophone : francodoxie, argumentation et émotions
Provenzano, François ULg

in Galatanu, Olga; Cozma, Ana-Maria; Marie, Virginie (Eds.) Sens et signification dans les espaces francophones. La construction discursive du concept de francophonie (2013)

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLa subjectivité : Lectures critiques entre grammaire et texte
[Lttr 13]; Badir, Sémir ULg; Polis, Stéphane ULg et al

in Revista de Estudos Linguísticos = Linguistic Studies (2013), 8

In this paper, we examine how subjectivity helps to bridge the gap between grammatical description and textual analysis. Since Benveniste, subjectivity has become a central issue in linguistic ... [more ▼]

In this paper, we examine how subjectivity helps to bridge the gap between grammatical description and textual analysis. Since Benveniste, subjectivity has become a central issue in linguistic investigation: while the French linguist set the ground from which subjectivity could emerge as a linguistic issue, he also opened a wide and non-systematic range of terminological possibilities, between philosophy and grammar. From this ground, followers such as Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Coquet, Langacker and Traugott have designed peculiar approaches and — significantly divergent — avenues for future research. The present study investigates these five theoretical frameworks in which, between text and grammar, the term subjectivity holds a place of paramount significance. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 96 (26 ULg)
Full Text
See detailBenveniste serait-il aujourd’hui un linguiste de l’énonciation ?
[Lttr 13]; Badir, Sémir ULg; Polis, Stéphane ULg et al

in Arts et savoirs (2012, July 24), 2

Detailed reference viewed: 30 (5 ULg)