Barthes y la epanortosis
Cargando...
Fecha
Authors
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Humanidades y Artes. Centro de Estudios de Teoría y Crítica Literaria
Resumen
Descripción
En las investigaciones académicas se trabaja, muchas veces, con dos tipos heterogéneos de lenguaje: el lenguaje objeto y el metalenguaje del investigador. Ahora bien, Roland Barthes, además de reflexionar explícitamente sobre este tópico, emplea ciertos procedimientos en su escritura que terminan por subvertir este orden de lenguajes. Uno de ellos es la epanortosis. Definida por Pierre Fontanier como una figura del lenguaje, la epanortosis es un procedimiento conocido por la retórica clásica: se trata de un movimiento de retroacción en el cual el discurso corrige una afirmación anterior, considerada poco apropiada. Para Fontanier la epanortosis tiene un alcance restringido: los ejemplos que esta provee tienen un comienzo y un fin bien delimitados. Sin embargo, percibimos que el uso sistemático de esta figura por parte de Barthes termina por modificar su función: el autor crea una inestabilidad que disuelve los límites que separaban a la escritura de la descripción metódica de un objeto.
In academic research, we normally work with two distinct kinds of language: the object-language and the metalanguage of the researcher. Roland Barthes, who reflected intensely about this question, uses certain procedures on his writing that subvert this division. One of them is the epanorthosis. Epanorthosis is seen, by Pierre Fontanier, as a figure of speech. It is described by classical rhetoric as a movement of retroaction, in which a statement, deemed incorrect or not appropriated, is corrected in a subsequent sentence. However, to Fontanier, epanorthosis has a limited scope: in his examples, we clearly see when the figure begins and when it ends. Nevertheless, the systematic use of this figure by Bartheschanges its function: it creates an instability that dissolves the limits that separated writing from the methodical description of objects.
In academic research, we normally work with two distinct kinds of language: the object-language and the metalanguage of the researcher. Roland Barthes, who reflected intensely about this question, uses certain procedures on his writing that subvert this division. One of them is the epanorthosis. Epanorthosis is seen, by Pierre Fontanier, as a figure of speech. It is described by classical rhetoric as a movement of retroaction, in which a statement, deemed incorrect or not appropriated, is corrected in a subsequent sentence. However, to Fontanier, epanorthosis has a limited scope: in his examples, we clearly see when the figure begins and when it ends. Nevertheless, the systematic use of this figure by Bartheschanges its function: it creates an instability that dissolves the limits that separated writing from the methodical description of objects.
Palabras clave
Citación
Aprobación
Revisión
Complementado por
Referenciado por
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/