Differential Archaeology of the Linguistic Sign – SEMAINO

As its name suggests, «SEMAINO. Differential Archaeology of Linguistic Signs« is a research venture whose historical focus is comparative scrutiny and mapping of transformations. Its main aim is to match and classify theoretical patterns and models in philosophical understanding of what linguistic signs are, how can they be lent meaning and what precautions are required when we use them. Broadly speaking, an archaeological inquiry may proceed differentially in at least a couple of ways. Hence the alternative SEMAINO has been confronted with: i) Either one may study for itself linguistic theories from Antiquity to nowadays. He may try next to draw a chart of his findings outlining, in each case, which elements are being highlighted and which ones are left in the background. The result should be a nice grid allowing for differential readings. ii) Or one may select a few language theories – chosen amongst the most innovative and/or the most influential ones – and use them as “heuristic filters” in order to provide both a check-list of relevant features and the comparative frame within which to assess to what extent historical ways of understanding what language is and how it works should alternatively be brought together or set apart. Leaning towards plain historical facts – as opposed to more speculative constructs – « SEMAINO » went for the second option and it looked for – and eventually found – three such paradigms: Aristotle (ANR, Lille), Roger Bacon (SNF, Geneva) and Edmund Husserl (ANR, Lille). Their works into language and meaning set or reset the conceptual network through which linguistic and semantic theories have been defining, gathering and coping with relevant data in their own historical and intellectual context. While restoring as much as possible the historical singularity of each, SEMAINO laid down the groundwork for their collation.

SYMPOSIA, WORKSHOPS & SEMINARS
International Symposia (1): « SEMAINO B : Théories anciennes de la signification ». Lille, December the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th 2016 (https://semaino.hypotheses.org/142)
International Workshops (2): « SEMAINO A: Aristote et le langage ». Lille, June the 15th and 16th 2016 (https://semaino.hypotheses.org/179). « Après les Anciens : figures du signe, de la parole, du discours dans la tradition tardo-ancienne et médiévale ». Lille, June the 1st 2017 (https://semaino.hypotheses.org/256).
Seminars (1): « La philosophie du langage d’Aristote (2016-2017) » (https://semaino.hypotheses.org/71)
SCIENTIFIC OUTPUT: « SEMAINO »’s achievements include the micrological turn it brought about in Aristotelian studies as far as language is concerned. « SEMAINO » has built a strong case starting form the unsophisticated, albeit usually neglected evidence that, however straightforward and to the point Aristotle’s remarks about linguistic signs may be (and they are definitely both), they are rather subsidiary in nature and scattered over the corpus of his writings. « SEMAINO » has spared no effort to extract where he could – and extrapolate everywhere else – the features of Aristotle’s understanding of language and its workings. As a result, a major publication is scheduled: L. Gazziero (ed.), Le langage. Lectures d’Aristote, Leuven, Peeters, forthcoming (2020).

While continuing its work on Aristotle (Lille) and Roger Bacon (Geneva), « SEMAINO »’s focus will shift to the rather complex and still fully unexplored account of linguistic signs developed by Edmund Husserl. As Aristotle (https://semaino.hypotheses.org/71) and Roger Bacon (https://semaino.hypotheses.org/253), Husserl will have his seminar (« Depuis les Modernes. Ontologies et phénoménologies des signes », semaino.hypotheses.org/375) and his International Symposium scheduled in December 2018 (« SEMAINO G : Phénoménologies des signes : paroles, symboles et indices — autour de Husserl et au-delà »). The proceedings will be published as a special issue of Studia Philosophica in 2021.

L. Gazziero, « Présuppositions linguistiques et enjeux philosophiques des paralogismes liés à la forme de l’expression dans les Réfutations sophistiques d’Aristote », dans B. Wendling-Godard et L. Raïd (éd.), A la recherche de la presupposition, Londres, ISTE editions, 2016, p. 25-46 (https://iste-editions.fr/products/a-la-recherche-de-la-presupposition).

L. Gazziero, « “Vertendo vel etiam commentando in Latinam redigam formam” (In Aristotelis peri hermeneias commentarium. Editio secunda, II, 79.23 - 80.1). Boèce ou l’art de bien traduire (en commentant) et de bien commenter (en traduisant) », Rursus, 10, 2017, p. 1-118 (https://rursus.revues.org/1295).

C. Majolino, « Réflexions sur le problème “philosophique” des impersonnels (à partir de Über subjektlose Sätze de Marty, mais aussi au-delà). Première partie : des dogmes et des effets », Cahiers de l’Institut de Linguistique et Sciences du Langage de l’Université de Lausanne (I.L.S.L.), 52, 2018 (sous presse).

L. Cesalli, J. Friedrich et C. Majolino, « Parole efficace et action langagière. Les actes de parole dans la tradition austro-allemande », dans B. Ambroise (éd.), De l'action au speech act. Le concept d'acte de parole au prisme de ses histoires, Londres, ISTE Editions (sous presse).

“Why are there linguistic signs?”
“What is a linguistic sign and how does it mean what it means?”
“What effects do linguistic signs have and what precautions are called for when we avail ourselves of them in order to convey our thoughts and feelings, argue with other people or try to move them in any way?”

This complex set of issues, whose roots go back at least as far as Plato and Aristotle, is still of paramount importance today, insofar as it governs the most fundamental questions we ask about language, its meaning and its uses. Throughout debates whose emphasis has shifted hence and forth between logic, grammar, theology, as well as rhetoric and literature, our understanding of what it takes for a linguistic expressions to be meaningful has come in a variety of ways. In order to make sense of this diversity, the consideration of results, even the most recent ones in linguistics, cognitive sciences and information sciences, however essential, is not enough. What is required first and foremost is a second-order model allowing us to catalogue, classify and differentially analyse theoretical patterns that have been implemented throughout history in order to account for the complex phenomenon of meaning as a property of linguistic expression, as a correlate to contents of thought, or else as a product of communication practices.

SÊMAINÔ research project is meant to develop such a methodological device by way of historical comparison between relevant authors and theories. Used as a heuristic filter, it will help us discover and assess (filter “in” and “out”) differences and similarities between them. These as well as other elements of continuity and discontinuity, whose charting is one of the project’s priorities, will be instrumental in identifying both past patterns and margins for future development.