Edited By Rémi Digonnet
The juxtaposition of habitat, a product of architecture, and speech, a product of language, enables us to envisage a dual orientation for what could be called "architexture". The architectural text focuses on the analysis of architects’ discourse, architectural metaphors or spatial markers and prepositions. Textual architecture, meanwhile, explores composition, syntactic ordering, text structure or "construction" grammars. Through verbalisation or spatialization, through verbal or architectural communication, the speaker and the architect are subjected to numerous constraints despite a certain freedom of speech and freedom of construction. Both this constructed speech and this spoken construction summon the architect-speaker to his or her language domus. It is this dual position that the articles in this collection aim to occupy.
La mise en regard de l’habitat, produit de l’architecture, et du discours, produit de la langue, permet d’envisager une double orientation de ce que l’on pourrait nommer l’« architexture ». Le texte de l’architecture traite de l’analyse de discours d’architectes, de métaphores architecturales ou de marqueurs spatiaux et prépositions spatiales, tandis que l’architecture du texte investit la composition, l’agencement syntaxique, la structure d’un texte ou encore les grammaires dites « de construction ». D’une mise en discours ou en espace, à travers une communication verbale ou architecturale, l’énonciateur et l’architecte sont soumis à de nombreuses contraintes en dépit d’une liberté de parole et de construction. Cette parole construite autant que cette construction parlée convoquent l’énonciateur-architecte dans sa domus langagière. C’est cette double posture qui fait l’objet des contributions de cet ouvrage collectif.
Dwelling in Language. The World and the Speaking Subject (Stephen A. Noble)
Dwelling in Language
The World and the Speaking Subject
Stephen A. Noble
Université de Paris-Est – Créteil
This essay contends that the themes upon which the present book is based – inhabiting language, constructing language – run contrary to a commonsensical understating of language as a means for expressing thought and for communicating. Consequently, and in the most general of senses, the essay’s aim is to question the themes to gain a better understating of them. More precisely, we discern two fundamental questions which must be answered: do we indeed inhabit and construct language? And, if it can be said that we do, in what precise manners do we do so? In order to answer these questions, and notably the latter, we first look at the concrete example of a well-known yet enigmatic writer, T. E. Lawrence, a polyglot who shared his life between sharply distinct cultural and linguistic environments, and who also wrote about his experiences in this regard. Some of Lawrence’s most radical observations were taken up by the philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty. By putting the literary and philosophical ideas into dialogue, it is possible to elucidate the role of language, beyond the scope of common sense, as a fundamental existential structure of our experience, and, at the same time, as a phenomenon to whose construction we contribute through creative linguistic acts. By way of conclusion, we briefly indicate some implications of the ideas discussed, notably for contrastive linguistics.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.