Satire et transgression dans l’Eloge de la folie d’Erasme. La construction argumentative du sens de fou et de sage
Using an argumentative approach to semantics, the present article explores the construction of the meanings of fou and sage in Erasmus’ satire In Praise of Folly. The argumentative analysis builds on the notion of the doxa as the common opinions shared by speakers, the role of which in satire is...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Editura Universitatii din Oradea
2022-08-01
|
| Series: | Studii de Lingvistica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://studiidelingvistica.uoradea.ro/docs/12-1-2022/pdf-uri/Voicu.pdf |
| Summary: | Using an argumentative approach to semantics, the
present article explores the construction of the meanings of fou
and sage in Erasmus’ satire In Praise of Folly. The argumentative
analysis builds on the notion of the doxa as the common opinions
shared by speakers, the role of which in satire is to establish a form
of community of belief between the author and the reader. We survey
two approaches to argumentative semantics: the former integrates
the doxa through pragmatic topoï – a set of common beliefs that
influence the argumentative force of sentences; the latter considers
as doxastic an argumentative sequence in which the lexical meaning
of a word deploys itself. What makes In Praise of Folly so relevant
for an argumentative analysis is the fact that the structural meaning
of words is suspended in favour of a contextual meaning. The
notion of a semantic block proposed by Carel (2011) brings together
argumentative sequences that spell out the meanings of fou and
sage as a particular form of opposition, namely transgression. We
show that paradox is absent in Erasmus’ work on the semantic level:
following Carel, paradox can only be analysed from the structural
meaning, which is only marginally present in Erasmus’ work. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2248-2547 2284-5437 |