Appréhendée à partir de son fonctionnement dans les régimes totalitaires, la « langue de bois » a été traitée comme une langue étrange, et étrangère aux sociétés démocratiques. En rapprochant ses procédés des figures de la rhétorique classiquement dessinées, elle perd quelque peu de sa singularité. Elle est liée, en fait, à des potentialités, des tendances, des dispositions de la « langue naturelle » – une permanente propension à métaphoriser, notamment – qu’elle exploite ou accentue, radicalise et pervertit. Les affinités (...) que présente alors la langue de bois avec des pratiques langagières très courantes, tel le « politiquement correct », font voir en elle non plus un dialecte exotique, un parler vernaculaire, mais un mode de communication effectivement véhiculaire.Based on its functions in totalitarian regimes, the type of language George Orwell called « newspeak » has been treated as an oddity, a language foreign to democratic societies. However, when compared with the classic figures of rhetorical speech, its singularity begins to fade. It is related, in fact, to a potential, a tendency or a predisposition of « natural language » to create metaphor – a propensity that « newspeak » exploits, accentuates, radicalises and subverts. But the affinities that appear between this particular type of language and other very common forms, such as the language of « political correctness », suggest that rather than an exotic dialect, it is actually very much a kind of « lingua franca ». (shrink)

The Catholic Monarchy is the short-lived dynastic union (1580-1640) between the kingdoms of Spain and Portugal. By returning on the legal, political and pragmatic foundations of this empire which cannot be called Empire (because this name belongs to the Holy Roman Empire of the cousins of Vienna), the article tries to seize better the internal functioning of this heterogeneous political set, by adopting two points of view: that of America (how the notion of Catholic Monarchy is understood in the reynos, (...) far from Madrid and Lisbon) and that of Rome (how Holy See reaches - or not - to exist in the heart of this space). It emerges from it that the pope and the Catholic King are natural allies (around the Roman Christianity) but not objectives (their purposes do not match), and that Rome and Mexico as well picture themselves not as margins of the Catholic Monarchy, but as real centers. (shrink)

The Catholic Monarchy is the short-lived dynastic union (1580-1640) between the kingdoms of Spain and Portugal. By returning on the legal, political and pragmatic foundations of this empire which cannot be called Empire (because this name belongs to the Holy Roman Empire of the cousins of Vienna), the article tries to seize better the internal functioning of this heterogeneous political set, by adopting two points of view: that of America (how the notion of Catholic Monarchy is understood in the reynos, (...) far from Madrid and Lisbon) and that of Rome (how Holy See reaches - or not - to exist in the heart of this space). It emerges from it that the pope and the Catholic King are natural allies (around the Roman Christianity) but not objectives (their purposes do not match), and that Rome and Mexico as well picture themselves not as margins of the Catholic Monarchy, but as real centers. (shrink)