Dialogism, Intermediality and Digital Textuality

2012

Based on phenomenological perspectives on embodied communication and con-textuality, this paper contributes to a more integral understanding of the constitutive role of communicating in organising and organisations. Relating to the recent turn towards interpreting emergent communication as constitutive for organisation, the paper shows the supplementing role of advanced phenomenology of the body, embodiment and inter-corporeity as well as creative expression for transcending the materialist-idealist dualism and interpreting relational communication. After presenting a phenomenological understanding of embodied communication the status of language as a living process is discussed. Then communication is interpreted as embodied, intentional and responsive practice and as such being part of a specific contextuality in organizations. Finally the process of-inter-communicating‖ and further implications will be discussed.

2006

Journal of Pragmatics, 2013

Context and Contexts: Parts meet whole?, edited by Anita Fetzer and Etsuko Oishi, is a new contribution to the field of discourse studies and pragmatics explicitly focused on the ubiquitous, but also notoriously underdetermined, notion of context. Because the concept is evidently indispensible in language studies, there is a true need for reliable research and intellectual effort to inform both expert understanding of context-related phenomena and the role that the notion can play in elucidating linguistics, language processing and communication in general. In this light, the book is a welcome contribution to the ongoing dispute on the nature and scientific-methodological description of the phenomenon. In the ''Introduction'', Anita Fetzer and Etsuko Oishi, provide a concise and reliable summary of contemporary approaches to context as organized ''in'' and ''through'' communication, perceived as a process or a product, with due attention paid to the concept of time as dynamically coordinating ''being'' and ''becoming'', and ''the context-dependence of context'' (p. 4) which itself is ''a multilayered complex network'' (p. 2). This introductory part, which sketches the background for the contents of the volume, may itself provide many readers of lower expertise with guidance with regard to studies of context-related phenomena. The research papers are classified into three thematic sections, each of which contains three articles. The first part, entitled ''Situated meaning in context'' opens with ''Why a mother's rule is not a law: The role of context in the interpretation of Greek laws'' by Amalia Moser and Eleni Panaretou. The authors convincingly argue that speech act recognition depends not so much on the grammatical form of sentences as on the genre frame, in which they are embedded. Referring to Greek data, the authors compare functioning of deontic sentences culled from two contexts: family interactions and the domain of institutional law. Selected opinions on the nature of legal language which are cited within the text may seem contentious; for instance, it is not universally accepted that the law is basically composed of ''commands'', or that the concept of ''all-inclusiveness'' can be translated into the belief that law is supposed to ''cover every aspect of social life'' (p. 13; cf. Witczak-Plisiecka, 2007 and references within), but in its entirety, the paper offers an interesting perspective on the nature of deonticity and speech acts, especially on sentences with the internal conditional structures which involve modality. The authors argue that speech act recognition is relative to the audience's recognition of the relevant professional frame, which is why deontic legal sentences are accepted even when their form is deviant and judged as ungrammatical and never given epistemic interpretation. As ''mothers' rules do not constitute a genre'' (p. 33) and do not arise from a professional community, it cannot be expected that they, even in a very explicit form, would be treated as seriously and unambiguously as legal sentences. The authors argue that different cognitive processes are at work when people are confronted with these two genres and that features such as lexical choices and structural characteristics function as contextualization clues with grammaticality (or ungrammaticality) of legal sentences being of secondary importance. The discussion invites further comparative studies in intercultural contexts pertaining to processing grammar and specialised registers in private and institutional settings. The mechanisms behind Chávez's political discourse form the focus of the next paper, ''Fighting words: Hybrid discourse and discourse processes'', authored by Lawrence N. Berlin. Chavistic discourse, the possible dangers that it implies and linguistic ideological manipulation have for years been popular topics of analyses by both experts and young researchers (cf. Hoffman's (2010) study report). Berlin struggles with a complex and fascinating problem of how reality can be construed through discourse, and how audiences may be manipulated through exposition to, narrated rather than real, threats and ideologies; how ''manipulation of language begets manipulation of ideology'' (p. 41). Chávez is shown to produce a hybrid language, which even in the context of a televised interview has non-standard characteristics and is used to exert influence, e.g. to produce and justify a call for action, through a series of scattered iterations. It is argued that, even in an interview, Chávez can use encontextualization and contextualization in a way which suites his purposes, using www.elsevier.com/locate/pragma

2008

In his book History and Poetics of Intertextuality Marko Juvan argues that intertextuality is constitutive of all textuality and that it may be foregrounded in literary works, genres, or styles such as parody. Juvan surveys the field in order to ground the poetics of intertextuality in the history of its idea and presents its development as general intertextuality (from Kristeva to New Historicism) and citationality (from Genette’s late structuralism to the present text theory). He also discusses the concept’s precursors since Antiquity (imitatio, influence, etc.). In modern times the concept emerged in the 1960s from a radical theory of writing. Based in Derrida’s deconstruction, the notion and practice of intertextuality implied a relational and transformative character of identity, meaning, subject, text, and socio-historical reality. In consequence, the notion gained currency in postmodernist aesthetics while in literary studies it has been transformed from its transgressive content into a detailed descriptive methodology. However, by bringing citationality into focus, practices of intertextuality suggest that literature is an autopoetic system, living on cultural memory, and interacting with other social discourses. The poetics of intertextuality Juvan proposes in his book is based mainly on semiotics and it elucidates factors determining the socio-historically elusive border between general intertextuality and citationality (encyclopaedic literary competence, paratext, etc.). In his analysis Juvan explores modes of intertextual representation. He stresses that in intertextuality pre-texts evoked or re-written in post-texts figure as interpretants of the latter and vice versa. Juvan’s analysis suggests that intertextual derivations and references have become common in literary culture as citational figures and genres.

The article presents a terminological analysis of the notion of text in the context of semiotic and communication paradigms to define its boundaries and to disengage it from non-textual semiosis. The objectives were achieved through the application of general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, description), the semioanalysis following Yu. M. Lotman's methods and also structuralist and, to a certain degree, post-structuralist approaches. While performing the analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that the concept of infinite textualization of the actual reality, which is promoted by a number of post-structuralists, tends to neglect both the complex dialectical relationship and the opposition between the text and actual reality. The article defines the ontological status of a text as a specific conditional reality. Then, differences and similarities between the text, other conditional realities, and the actual reality can be more clearly identified, which is quite important, considering the current post-modernist tendency to blend the text and extra-textual realities. The conclusion is that the main characteristics of the text are ontological conditionality, semiotic property, informativity, communicative nature and origin, the presence of an intentional sender, artificial origin, accessibility for universal perception, coherence, integrity, and completeness. To sum up, I define the text as a semiotic conditional reality generated by a communicative situation with non-degenerated planes of expression and content, and characterized by the unity of syntagmatic cohesion and paradigmatic integrity, certain systematicity, and completeness.

International Journal of Literature and Arts, 2023

The aim of the paper is to discuss the operational concepts and theory of intertextuality as a postmodern theory.Postmodern theory is a theory that emerged in the second half of the 1960s. This theory was born as a reaction to modernity and its ideals. By the 1970s, postmodern aesthetics, on which postmodern theory was based, began to be felt in almost every field of art, from architecture to painting, from literature to cinema. Intertextuality seems such a useful term because it foregrounds notions of relationality, interconnectedness, and interdependence in modern cultural life. In the Postmodern epoch, theorists often claim, it is not possible any longer to speak of originality or the uniqueness of the artistic object, be it a painting or novel, since every artistic object is so clearly assembled from bits and pieces of already existent art. An author or poet can use intertextuality deliberately for a variety of reasons. They would probably choose different ways of highlighting intertextuality depending on their intention. They may use references directly or indirectly. They might use a reference to create additional layers of meaning or make a point or place their work within a particular framework. A writer could also use a reference to create humour, highlight an inspiration or even create a reinterpretation of an existing work. The reasons and ways to use intertextuality are so varied that it is worth looking at each example to establish why and how the method was used.

2003

Text & Talk, 2014