Abstracts of the Articles / Résumés des articles


Nº 25



 

Bernard LAMIZET : " Sémiotique politique appliquée "

L'énonciation articule trois instances, le réel, le symbolique et l'imaginaire, qui ont été élaborées dans le champ du psychisme par J. Lacan, mais dont on peut faire apparaître une autre articulation, dans le champ du politique. Dans ce champ, le réel désigne la contrainte et les pouvoirs : il s'agit de l'ensemble des éléments irréductibles qui structurent les pratiques symboliques de la communication politique et qui la situent dans l'espace et dans le temps. Le symbolique est l'instance propre de l'énonciation : il s'agit des structures de la communication et de la représentation des acteurs, des pouvoirs et des identités. L'imaginaire, enfin, désigne les projets dont sont porteurs les acteurs, les orientations des politiques, des stratégies et des discours, l'ensemble de ce à quoi peuvent croire les acteurs politiques ou de ce qui peut susciter la peur. La sémiotique politique consiste à montrer comment s'exprime la confrontation entre les pouvoirs et comment se définissent, en s'exprimant, les identités dont sont porteurs les acteurs. Il s'agit de comprendre la signification de l'articulation réalisée par l'énonciation politique entre la représentation de l'identité des acteurs, celle de la confrontation des pouvoirs dont ils sont porteurs, et celle des événements et des situations dans lesquels ont lieu ces confrontations. L'analyse sémiotique du discours de N. Sarkozy permet de mieux comprendre les logiques propres de l'énonciation politique et les modalités particulières de sa mise en ouvre, dans un discours qui se caractérise par le fait qu'il est, finalement, à la fois écrit et parlé.      [Article en français]



Peeter SELG: "Toward a Semiotic Model of Democracy "

First, this article proposes a model of democracy, based on Roman Jakobson's well-known functions of communication on the one hand and Tartu-Moscow school of semiotics and the Essex school's theory of hegemony, discourse and democracy on the other. Second, using concrete examples and general insights from both political science (including political psychology, and political theory) and semiotics it proposes six ideal-types for analysis of democratic communication: 1) "authoritarian populism" associated with phatic public communication; 2) "democratic populism" associated with poetic public communication; 3) "clientelist democracy" associated with conative public communication; 4) "deliberative democracy" associated with referential public communication; 5) "radical democracy" associated with metalingual public communication; 6) "totalitarian populism" associated with emotive public communication. Third, it provides brief methodological guidelines for future research (including how the categories are to be utilized in contextual descriptions, classifications, and explanations of the tendencies in democratic public communication).      [Article in English]



Zeynep Cihan KOCA HELVACI: "Spears and Shields of Discourse in the Political Battlefield: Israeli and Turkish Accounts of the Gaza Flotilla Raid"

Discourse, which in general terms means language in use, provides us with a grid through which perception, signification, production and interpretation of communicative practices happen. As Benveniste (1995)stated 'reality' is reproduced by language and 'discourse' is the usage of language by a Subject who undertakes the production and transfer of a message to the recipients. Instead of intersubjectivity, there is interdiscursivity which means that apart from the concrete reality, the subjects are experiencing the world the discourse constructed for them. As Subjects of discourse, we produce texts and talks to inform, give a message, persuade or manipulate the other subjects within the intertwined web of other discourses. Political discourse as a field of intrigue power plays, argumentation, persuasion and manipulation requires an exhaustive analysis now that the politicians use intricate and subtle discursive strategies to influence and sometimes manipulate the masses by presenting carefully shaped and generated discursive versions of objective realities. In this study, two versions of 'the Gaza Flotilla Raid on 31.05.2010' will be studied on two political texts; one by the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon and Turkish Foreign Affairs Minister Ahmet Davutoglu. The speeches of both politicians will be studied by means of the principles of Critical Discourse Analysis and the discursive strategies considering positive-Self and negative Other presentation, legitimation, de-legitimation will tried to be found out by means of an in-depth look at the syntactic, lexical and semantic configurations.      [Article in English]


Ana SILVA: "A decade of photography and political communication in Argentina (1999-2010)"

The purpose of this work has been the analysis of the relationship between different types of graphical political discourse and the political scenario over the last ten years in Argentina, while attempting to make a contribution to the study of political discourse in context. The sample of pictures analyzed include several photographs used in campaign advertising (the electoral struggle for the presidency in 1999 and 2007, and that for legislative seats in 2005) and in the political news sections of two of the largest newspapers in Argentina, Clarín and La Nación (1999-2001, 2005 and 2007).      [Article in English]


Andreas VENTSEL: "The Construction of the Stalinist post-war (1944-1953) "Soviet People": a concept in the political rhetoric of Soviet Estonia"

This article emphasizes that post-war (1944-1953) construction of "we" in political rhetoric was based on the principle of national self-determination. But Stalinist nationality (i.e. soviet patriotism) meant particularly the subordination of Estonian nationality to the Russian one. As a whole, the Estonian "we" among "the Soviet people" was positioned much lower than the Russian "we". Within this ideological u-turn "the soviet people" lost its particular content, which earlier was determined solely in terms of class struggle. "The Soviet people" now attained its meaningful content through the utterances of Stalin. Its determination depended on the needs of power itself. Thus, the "soviet people" created by Stalin was identical to his "we" subordinated by his "I". Stalin and "the Soviet people" became the two sides of the same coin. Analysing this topic, the author tries to build a bridge between the Essex School's theory of hegemony (Ernesto Laclau), Emile Benveniste's linguistic tradition, and the Tartu-Moscow School (Juri Lotman) of cultural semiotics. Keywords: "Soviet people" in Stalinist era, semiotics of culture, theory of hegemony, deixis, political discourse.      [Article in English]








AS/SA Nº25 (2010.09.03)   ISSN 1204-6150

Editors/Rédacteurs : Pascal G. Michelucci & Peter G. Marteinson
University of Toronto




© 2010 AS/SA, Peter Marteinson

E-mail the editors
Pour écrire à la rédaction

2010.09.03