Structure et ecriture. Questions d'esthetique du signe en analyse structurale

Structure and writing. Questions on the aesthetics of sign in structural analysis

• Auteur / Autrice : Pierre-Henri Castel
• Direction : Jacques Derrida
• Type : Thèse de doctorat
• Discipline(s) : Philosophie
• Date : Soutenance en 1992
• Etablissement(s) : Paris, EHESS

Mots clés

Mots clés contrôlés

Structuralisme (littérature)

Signe (linguistique)

Résumé

L'auteur prend le contre-pied de la lecture traditionnelle de l'analyse structurale : au lieu de la concevoir comme un modele, tire des sciences du langage et applique a un objet indifferent, il montre qu'on en saisit mieux l'originalite epistemologique et esthetique, en la considerant comme la methode la plus propre a relever dans ses details le devenir-significatif d'un reel singulier ; en allant donc des choses significatives en soi aux categories du langage dans lesquelles pareil donne s'articule completement. Il y parvient en degageant les formes pures de la signification, tant dans le reel ou elles s'inscrivent (signaux, signes concrets comme les masques, etc. , symboles) que dans les figures plus abstraites que connait le langage, grammaticales ou rhetoriques. L'auteur specule sur l'unite profonde qu'indiquent l'ecriture de ces formes, du visible au dicible. Critique a l'egard des reappropriations phenomenologiques ou positivistes de l'analyse structurale, il veut rehabiliter les notations quasi-formelles si decriees de lacan ou levi-strauss, en lien avec la saisie d'un reel singulier qui est l'enjeu subjectif veritable de la methode.

The author opposes the traditional reading of structural analysis in anthropology. It is not a model, derived from the sciences of language, and applied to anything indiferently. Rather, its epistemological originality and its intrinsic aesthetical dimension are better understood, when structural analysis is regarded as the moste appropriate methode to unrave in all its details the way some singular realite becomes significant. He proceeds from what is significant as such amongs things, towards the categories of language in which these primary data are fully articulated. He reaches this goal in isolating the pure forms of signification among real things (signals, concrete signes such as masks a. S. O. , symbols), and in the more abstract figures of language as well - in grammar and rhetorics. All along, the author speculates on a profound unity between what is said and what is seen, unity which might be conceived via the mode of inscription of these forms and figures. The author criticizes the phenomenological and positivist reappropriations of structural analysis. He endeavours to rehabilitate the ill-fated attempts of formalization which can be found in lacan or levi-strauss. They could be justified in strict relation with the absolutely singular reality, the captation of which is the true subjective stake in their works.