L'ontotype : une sous-catégorie pertinente pour classer les insultes ?
In this study, we consider a specific category of insults that we defined in a previous work as “ontotypical” (Ernotte et Rosier 2001). In parallel to sociotypes (Lafont) and ethnotypes (Bres) which classify the individual on a scale of ideological values based on supra-individual and extra-linguist...
Zapisane w:
| Główni autorzy: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Język: | Français |
| Wydane: |
2004
|
| Dostęp online: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Streszczenie: | In this study, we consider a specific category of insults that we defined in a previous work as “ontotypical” (Ernotte et Rosier 2001). In parallel to sociotypes (Lafont) and ethnotypes (Bres) which classify the individual on a scale of ideological values based on supra-individual and extra-linguistic criteria (this scale being evaluated as such by the very speakers), ontotypical insults target the addressee’s own self (ontologically). The typically linguistic forms of ontotypical insults call into question the addressee in two main, nominative ways: either in relating to a part of his being allegedly linked to a specific situation (situational insult: Feignasse !) or in referring to fundamental membership in a class, not limited to the praxeological context motivating the insult (essentialist insult: Pédale !). The line between these two categories is examined here in order to establish whether phonetic, semantic and pragmatic differences supports or defeats such a distinction; we’ll evaluate as well the mechanism of ideological bleaching involved in ontotypes. |
|---|