诗的定义弗雷格与雅各布森

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Tatiana V. Tsvigun, Alexey N. Chernyakov
{"title":"诗的定义弗雷格与雅各布森","authors":"Tatiana V. Tsvigun, Alexey N. Chernyakov","doi":"10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article presents a comparative analysis of two approaches to describing the reference within poetic statements: the pragmasemantic approach, which builds upon Gottlob Frege's ideas of the poetic sign as \"a sign with meaning but without reference,\" and aesthetic-functional theories of poetic language linked to Roman Jacobson's concept of the poetic func­tion. The pragmasemantic interpretation of the referential capabilities of a poetic sign explores questions regarding the principles of its verification and examines its relationship with ex­tralinguistic objects. From this perspective, the artistic expression's ability to establish objec­tive references is either entirely denied (by Frege) or associated with the actions of \"aesthetic operators\" (Linsky), specific illocutionary attitudes (Searle), or the recipient's standpoint (Zolyan). On the other hand, the theory of the poetic function of language, as presented in formalism and structuralism, posits that the reference of the poetic sign does not extend to the world of objects but rather to the linguistic environment inherent within the sign. It under­scores the \"auto-referentiality\" (Faryno) of an artistic statement. Pragmase­man­tics and aes­thetic-functional concepts of poetic reference both contribute to a reduction, albeit from oppo­site angles: pragmasemantics locates the referents of the poetic sign within ‘possible’ (artistic) worlds but somewhat overlooks the unique characteristics of poetic language. In contrast, functionalism sidelines the question of a sign's objective references, steering artistic discourse entirely toward linguistic elements. A potential resolution to this polarity in analytical ap­proaches involves viewing the poetic sign as a bi-referential phenomenon, simultaneously engaging along two axes — extralinguistic and linguistic. This approach enables the consid­eration of an artistic statement not as deficient but, conversely, as abundant in its referential connections. It helps reveal the common semiotic mechanisms at play in any work of art, which motivate the ‘definition of poetry’ as a distinct statement about a unique world.","PeriodicalId":34136,"journal":{"name":"Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Definition of poetry’: Frege vs. Jakobson\",\"authors\":\"Tatiana V. Tsvigun, Alexey N. Chernyakov\",\"doi\":\"10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article presents a comparative analysis of two approaches to describing the reference within poetic statements: the pragmasemantic approach, which builds upon Gottlob Frege's ideas of the poetic sign as \\\"a sign with meaning but without reference,\\\" and aesthetic-functional theories of poetic language linked to Roman Jacobson's concept of the poetic func­tion. The pragmasemantic interpretation of the referential capabilities of a poetic sign explores questions regarding the principles of its verification and examines its relationship with ex­tralinguistic objects. From this perspective, the artistic expression's ability to establish objec­tive references is either entirely denied (by Frege) or associated with the actions of \\\"aesthetic operators\\\" (Linsky), specific illocutionary attitudes (Searle), or the recipient's standpoint (Zolyan). On the other hand, the theory of the poetic function of language, as presented in formalism and structuralism, posits that the reference of the poetic sign does not extend to the world of objects but rather to the linguistic environment inherent within the sign. It under­scores the \\\"auto-referentiality\\\" (Faryno) of an artistic statement. Pragmase­man­tics and aes­thetic-functional concepts of poetic reference both contribute to a reduction, albeit from oppo­site angles: pragmasemantics locates the referents of the poetic sign within ‘possible’ (artistic) worlds but somewhat overlooks the unique characteristics of poetic language. In contrast, functionalism sidelines the question of a sign's objective references, steering artistic discourse entirely toward linguistic elements. A potential resolution to this polarity in analytical ap­proaches involves viewing the poetic sign as a bi-referential phenomenon, simultaneously engaging along two axes — extralinguistic and linguistic. This approach enables the consid­eration of an artistic statement not as deficient but, conversely, as abundant in its referential connections. It helps reveal the common semiotic mechanisms at play in any work of art, which motivate the ‘definition of poetry’ as a distinct statement about a unique world.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5922/2225-5346-2023-4-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文比较分析了描述诗歌语句中指称的两种方法:基于戈特罗布·弗雷格(Gottlob Frege)的“有意义但没有指称的符号”的诗歌符号的语用学方法,以及与罗曼·雅各布森(Roman Jacobson)的诗歌功能概念相联系的诗歌语言的美学功能理论。诗歌符号的指称能力的语用学解释探讨了有关其验证原则的问题,并考察了其与语外对象的关系。从这个角度来看,艺术表达建立客观参照的能力要么被完全否定(弗雷格),要么与“审美操作者”(林斯基)的行为、特定的言外态度(塞尔)或接受者的立场(佐利安)联系在一起。另一方面,形式主义和结构主义提出的语言诗意功能理论认为,诗意符号的指称并不延伸到对象世界,而是延伸到符号内在的语言环境。它强调了艺术陈述的“自我指涉性”(Faryno)。语用语义学和美学功能的诗歌指称概念都有助于减少,尽管是从相反的角度:语用语义学将诗歌符号的指称物定位在“可能的”(艺术的)世界中,但在某种程度上忽视了诗歌语言的独特性。相反,功能主义回避了符号的客观参考问题,将艺术话语完全转向语言元素。在分析方法中,这种极性的潜在解决方案包括将诗歌符号视为一种双指涉现象,同时沿着两个轴-语言外和语言。这种方法使我们在考虑一种艺术表述时,不会认为它是缺乏的,相反地,在它的参照物联系中是丰富的。它有助于揭示在任何艺术作品中发挥作用的共同符号学机制,这促使“诗歌的定义”成为对一个独特世界的独特陈述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
‘Definition of poetry’: Frege vs. Jakobson
This article presents a comparative analysis of two approaches to describing the reference within poetic statements: the pragmasemantic approach, which builds upon Gottlob Frege's ideas of the poetic sign as "a sign with meaning but without reference," and aesthetic-functional theories of poetic language linked to Roman Jacobson's concept of the poetic func­tion. The pragmasemantic interpretation of the referential capabilities of a poetic sign explores questions regarding the principles of its verification and examines its relationship with ex­tralinguistic objects. From this perspective, the artistic expression's ability to establish objec­tive references is either entirely denied (by Frege) or associated with the actions of "aesthetic operators" (Linsky), specific illocutionary attitudes (Searle), or the recipient's standpoint (Zolyan). On the other hand, the theory of the poetic function of language, as presented in formalism and structuralism, posits that the reference of the poetic sign does not extend to the world of objects but rather to the linguistic environment inherent within the sign. It under­scores the "auto-referentiality" (Faryno) of an artistic statement. Pragmase­man­tics and aes­thetic-functional concepts of poetic reference both contribute to a reduction, albeit from oppo­site angles: pragmasemantics locates the referents of the poetic sign within ‘possible’ (artistic) worlds but somewhat overlooks the unique characteristics of poetic language. In contrast, functionalism sidelines the question of a sign's objective references, steering artistic discourse entirely toward linguistic elements. A potential resolution to this polarity in analytical ap­proaches involves viewing the poetic sign as a bi-referential phenomenon, simultaneously engaging along two axes — extralinguistic and linguistic. This approach enables the consid­eration of an artistic statement not as deficient but, conversely, as abundant in its referential connections. It helps reveal the common semiotic mechanisms at play in any work of art, which motivate the ‘definition of poetry’ as a distinct statement about a unique world.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent
Slovoru baltiiskii aktsent Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信