D’où vient le jargon scientifique ? Quel lien l’éditeur et l’auteur entretiennent-ils dans l’écriture ? Pascal Rouleau, s’appuyant sur son expérience, montre qu’il faut distinguer trois domaines d’écriture, la création, le jargon et les langages techniques, et que l’éditeur ne doit pas chercher à vulgariser à tout prix.Where does scientific jargon come from? How do publishers and authors relate to each other in the writing process? Pascal Rouleau, drawing on his own experience, shows that a distinction has to be made (...) between three kinds of writing – creative writing, jargon and technical language – and that publishers should not attempt to « popularise » at any cost. (shrink)

In this essay I will suggest that part of what makes the young Jamaican poet Ishion Hutchinson so remarkable is the fact that much of his work – in this age of “anything goes” post-postmodernism – is clearly modernist poetry, in both structure and effect. This structure will be that explained in my expanded version of Michael Riffaterre’s semiotic theory of poetry, which deals with modernist work. I will suggest that one of the distinctive features of the latter is that (...) a modern poetic text is distinguished by two underlying “matricial” propositions, each of which generates a set of variant images having the same underlying semantic structure. This paradigmatic method of signifying is unique to poetry. Each matrix is reassembled by the reader from a comparison of the images of each set. The matrices are linked syntagmatically in a variety of relations such as negation or difference of scale. This bimatricial relation (subject-sign) has an intertextual counterpart (object-sign) of similar structure but different lexicon. The interpretant of these two complex signs has a sociolectic counterpart of similar lexicon but different structure. The semantic contrast thus established produces innovation, which is the other distinctive feature of modern poetry. It turns out that much of Hutchinson’s innovative work is structured in this way. (shrink)

It is well known that AI-based language technology—large language models, machine translation systems, multilingual dictionaries, and corpora—is currently limited to three percent of the world’s most widely spoken, financially and politically backed languages. In response, recent efforts have sought to address the “digital language divide” by extending the reach of large language models to “underserved languages.” We show how some of these efforts tend to produce flawed solutions that adhere to a hard-wired representational preference for certain languages, which we call (...) language modeling bias. Language modeling bias is a specific and under-studied form of linguistic bias were language technology by design favors certain languages, dialects, or sociolects with respect to others. We show that language modeling bias can result in systems that, while being precise regarding languages and cultures of dominant powers, are limited in the expression of socio-culturally relevant notions of other communities. We further argue that at the root of this problem lies a systematic tendency of technology developer communities to apply a simplistic understanding of diversity which does not do justice to the more profound differences that languages, and ultimately the communities that speak them, embody. Drawing on the concept of epistemic injustice, we point to the broader ethico-political implications and show how it can lead not only to a disregard for valuable aspects of diversity but also to an under-representation of the needs of marginalized language communities. Finally, we present an alternative socio-technical approach that is designed to tackle some of the analyzed problems. (shrink)

This essay assesses Quentin Meillassoux’s numerological approach to Mallarmé’s problematic but formally innovative poem “Un Coup de dés,” using a semiotic methodology to reveal the deficiencies of that approach from the viewpoint of literary theory. Section 1 describes my expanded version of Michael Riffaterre’s semiotic theory of the structure of modern poetry. Poems are generated by two underlying propositions, each of which governs the structure of a set of symbolic images on the textual surface. These “matricial” propositions are linked by (...) a syntagmatic relation. The primary text functions as subject-sign of the Peircean semiotic triad; its object-sign is an intertextual model. The interpretant of these two textual signs is assembled by the reader and has a sociolectic counterpart – or context – which has similar lexical content but contrasting internal structure. This contrast may produce a change in the preconceptions of the reader. Section 2 examines Meillassoux’s approach to Mallarmé’s poem, which is preoccupied with a “number” supposedly encrypted in the text. This is not convincingly related to the propositional structure of the poem. In Section 3, the text is interpreted using a semiotics-based methodology. The poem is generated by two matrices: one concerning the “Master” versus the storm, and the second concerning the power of Chance. The relation linking the matrices is clarified. This analysis is compared with that of Meillassoux throughout. Section 4 resumes the differences between Meillassoux’s concentration on the “number” and the “siren,” and my analysis which centres on the relation between the Master (symbolising traditional poets and their preferred metre) and the Constellation (symbolising the wide range of new future poetic metres and formats). Meillassoux’s approach turns out to be unconvincing. (shrink)

In a sociolinguistic perspective, this paper deals with the Aristophanic use of the technical languages, given that according to some recent research there is no room for them in this author. Our approach to the matter focuses on two technical languages, viz. medical and rhetorical. Methodologically, the main attention must be paid to the philological analysis of the textual evidence, always by means of the contrast of the attested linguistic data related to different sociolects. We also suggest that this analysis (...) must not be limited to the lexical level, as if technical languages were only determined by a special word selection. In both technical languages, medical and rhetorical, the Aristophanic comedies show a conscious borrowing and use of several terms and structures whose specialized function can be proved by texts from the Hippocratic corpus, Antiphon and the Athenian contemporary Kanzleisprache. (shrink)

In Eco’s work between around 1960 and 1992, “openness” in a modern literary text can mean (a) “permitting more than one interpretation,” and (b) “requiring a good deal of decoding work from the reader,” which is close to my own position. These two aspects of openness are demonstrated using Baudelaire’s Les Chats, in regard to which Eco denies that the text may be cristallin in Lévi-Strauss’s sense, while still requiring constructive effort from the reader. It is apparent that this term (...) is equivalent to Riffaterreʼs textual “monumentality.” Eco does not go into detail about the reader’s work in assembling the text’s global propositional structure. It is left to Riffaterre and myself to detail the various stages of this work, involving comparison of images in order to discover their common underlying generative proposition. In contrast to Riffaterre, I have long suggested that the modern poetic text is built on two such propositions. It is at the stage of relations between text and sociolect that Eco contributes much to modern poetics. Openness (b) seems to be a prerequisite for perceptual change in the reader, produced by contrast between textual structure and its sociolectic context. Riffaterre prefers to remain within the text/intertext/interpretant triad, preventing him from describing the text-sociolect relation, where the propositional innovation of the modernist text takes effect. (shrink)

This article discusses the conceptual difficulties that are involved in the understanding of several basic linguistic notions: namely language, dialect, sociolect, register, style, genre, and in particular, variety. Using the definitions provided in various sources, particularly introductory textbooks and dictionaries of linguistics, I examine the ways in which these terms are explained, and discuss how there is actually no consensus on how they are understood and conceptualised. This is particularly true for the term variety, which is regarded by many (...) linguists as a neutral and ideology-free unit for research. In this article, I show that whether a set of linguistic features is regarded as a variety depends on three main factors; there is no absolute – and thus, ideologically neutral – way that linguists can refer to this concept when considering what is or is not a linguistic variety. (shrink)

The article examines bilinguism from the social and political perspective, discussing such phenomena as the language situation, language policy, language rights. The author defines the concept of a language situation and reveals the features of various types of a bilingual situation: horizontal and vertical bilingualism, balanced and unbalanced bilingualism. The article analyzes the language policy under the conditions of bilingualism and specifies the main points of its possible problematization. Diglossia is analyzed as a factor of language development; special attention is (...) paid to the evolvement of bilingualism in a diglossic situation. The article considers the possible statuses of national languages in a diglossic context and their statuses from the perspective of the balance of political forces. The author models the prospects for the development of national languages in diglossic contexts and analyzes destructive relation of diglossia to language evolution. The article reveals the phenomenon of exoglossia, its demonstrates its negative impact on the language process, the mechanisms of its influence through the education system. The phenomenon of bilingualism is related to the process of the formation of national identity, of the development of various models of diglossia and especially exoglossia. The article discusses language issues arising in the social and political life, determines the conditions of its actualization and aggravation on various historical stages. The author assesses prospects for the development of national languages in the context of globalization, in particular the possibility of the formation of the diglossic situation of the dominance of “global English” over national languages. The article concludes with the ways to overcome language conflicts and imbalances. (shrink)

In the process of natural language functioning, in the speech communication, new regulations and requirements are constantly emerging that become normative. In the paper, in focus are (1) the interaction of meaning and normativity, and 2) the process of norm construal through socio-linguistic practice, namely – through the concept of deference, the phenomenon of borrowing concepts, knowledge, information from other people, linguistic communities and sources of information is considered. With the help of deference, the other side of the meaningful relationship (...) is indicated and described when we rely on other people's thoughts, knowledge that we believe to be true and authoritative. This can happen both consciously (deliberately), and unconsciously (by default). The bearers of the norm we rely on can be individuals, groups and large linguistic communities. The deferential mechanism described in the paper captures the fact that the communication participants can effectively use and reason with the help of concepts, with little or no understanding of their true meaning. The tendency towards normativisation, unification of language and speech and corrections of all that does not agree with the common usage of words, meanings, norms in society is disclosed in the paper. A distinction is also parsed between how norms work in closed language communities and research expert groups capable of "structural cooperation" and functional definition of norms. Lastly, the author emphasizes that deference substantially complements the language in which we describe guidance, in relation to the real and symbolic worlds, where our view goes, what we remember and what we design; it is our habitual, conscious or unconscious, but not always correct, use of words, which is an important part of living communication between the social and linguistic communities. This is the case where, in some sense, a defect, a violation of norms, or a hindrance of speech communication becomes (may be) a creative means of distinguishing between what is and is not an extension of the term. (shrink)