Open AccessEst-il possible de se mettre d’accord sur le sens à donner au terme de pragmatème ?
Author(s) -
Krzysztof Bogacki
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
neophilologica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2353-088X
pISSN - 0208-5550
DOI - 10.31261/neo.2020.32.04
Subject(s) - subjectivity , intuition , merge (version control) , computer science , term (time) , epistemology , fuzzy logic , scope (computer science) , opposition (politics) , artificial intelligence , philosophy , linguistics , mathematics , physics , information retrieval , political science , quantum mechanics , politics , law , programming language
The term ‘pragmateme’ has been coined relatively recently and therefore its usage is still hesitant and its definitions lack precision. This makes it difficult to delimit the scope of all that relates to the intuition of the term. We believe that two criteria are crucial for the identification of the concept. First, it would signify an autonomous linguistic unit implying an act of enunciation, characterised by the adequacy between selecting an appropriate linguistic segment and its application, with all that it entails as constraints. This criterion derives from classical logic, based on the binary opposition of truth and falsehood. The other element of the definition of the pragmateme is difficult to apply due to its subjectivity. It can be described in terms of many-valued fuzzy logic. It requires that a privileged link be created in the consciousness of langage users between a particular formulation, conveying a given semantic content and other, competing formulations. Neither of the two criteria is correlated with formal exponents, which prevents them from being used in a database compiled for the purpose of creating a dictionary of pragmatemes