Linguistique Imaginaire

séduisants, providentiels, agaçants : les points de suspension laissent rarement indifférent. mais que nous dit ce signe exactement ? Pourquoi l’emploie-t-on ? Depuis quand ? Et où ? Pourquoi faire le choix, curieux, de dire tout en ne disant pas ? En suivant la trace en trois points laissée dans l’écrit au fil des époques, cet essai propose un parcours littéraire et historique, dans une forme inédite : celle de la biographie d’un signe de ponctuation. un signe en forme de mi-dire équivoque, transgressif, auquel on peut attribuer une valeur hautement réflexive, mettant en jeu la langue même : la latence. Depuis le théâtre français du xviie siècle jusqu’aux emplois les plus contemporains, dans la presse, les textos, l’ouvrage se veut une invitation à entrer dans la langue par une porte minuscule, pour mieux ouvrir, par ailleurs, sur les enjeux essentiels de notre rapport singulier au langage, aux autres et au monde.

Malaysians of various ethnic origins have used standard British English (SBrE) in both its spoken and written variants in the postcolonial era but current globalisation discourses appear to be increasingly colonised by American English, including in ESL/EFL settings, perhaps powered largely by the “mcdonaldisation” of the world’s economy and the attendant shifts in geopolitical balance of power. Hence, despite the putative universals of academia in terms of its normative values and conventions, discourse communities both at the centre and the periphery may be said to be “divided by one language” with respect to the British and American standards. Assuming that there is an emergent trend towards the appropriation of extant linguistic norms into a “glocal” variety of English as Lingua Franca (ELF), which of the two dominant varieties do Malaysian academic users prefer, in what contexts of their academic discourse practice, and with what outcomes in terms of global/local identity construction? The study reported here drew on recent questionnaire survey data pertaining to selected spelling, pronunciation and vocabulary/grammar items, as well as identity construction vis-à-vis geopolitical entities and aspects of potential multilingual competence to find the expected preferences for British English for sustained use in various areas of academic activity amongst the university faculty in question. However, it also found alternative lexical forms enjoying currency with the standard British/American English standards in selected situations. Further, while there was only limited support for significant correlates in identity formation orientated towards British/American cultures as well as geopolitical entities other than the local/regional but with a possibly expedient orientation towards acquiring multilingual competence. The study concluded that the findings were consistent with a World Englishes perspective on the continuing development of a local Malaysian English standard, and another on a global standard that is subject to local/regional variation but which is evolving in the periphery as a strategic albeit resistant variety in the ELF mould. Perspectives on further research are considered.

Malaysians of various ethnic origins have used standard British English (SBrE) in both its spoken and written variants in the postcolonial era but current globalisation discourses appear to be increasingly colonised by American English, including in ESL/EFL settings, perhaps powered largely by the "mcdonaldisation" of the world's economy and the attendant shifts in geopolitical balance of power. Hence, despite the putative universals of academia in terms of its normative values and conventions, discourse communities both at the centre and the periphery may be said to be "divided by one language" with respect to the British and American standards. Assuming that there is an emergent trend towards the appropriation of extant linguistic norms into a "glocal" variety of English as Lingua Franca (ELF), which of the two dominant varieties do Malaysian academic users prefer, in what contexts of their academic discourse practice, and with what outcomes in te...

El presente artículo busca echar luz sobre la mentalidad de los autores castellanos puristas de los siglos XVI y XVII, mediante el análisis de las representaciones (imágenes, metáforas, ideas) asociadas con la lengua bella y pura, en el corpus de elogios de la lengua publicado por Germán Bleiberg en 1951. Nos apoyamos en las teorías antropológicas de Mary Douglas para mostrar que los puristas llevan a cabo una forma de sacralización del idioma. Además, mostramos que se caracterizan menos por un conjunto de doctrinas explícitas que por un apego sentimental a la lengua materna, un amor superlativo e irracional. Esto se percibe a través del uso de una retórica hiperbólica, así como de las personificaciones femeninas, que erotizan a la lengua.

Palabras claves: "imaginaire linguistique", purismo, sentimiento de la lengua, antropología, pureza.

[ENG] I would like to try a quite simple but much needed experiment by introducing new considerations concerning the theory and practice of translation. In this way, we will attempt to develop new reflections on how to compare language practices and imaginaries. In this attempt, it is crucial to take into consideration the ways in which the imagination is involved in the socio-symbolic elaboration of translation practices.
I intend to take a closer look at the paratexts, the essays, the influences as well as the intertextual alliances that enrich the work and the imaginary of translators. This theoretical inspiration could eventually lead to a wide variety of analyses, methods and interpretations, which aim to create critical tools thus enhancing the development of a new concept: imaginary of translation.
In order to explore the imaginaries of translator, we can synthesize the approaches of translation by means of two mythological figures: Hermes and Orpheus. The first is a metaphor of an hermeneutical translation which transposes the meaning, in other words it’s a source-oriented translation. On the other hand, we find Orpheus, a figure that fumbles around in the darkness of form: it’s a metaphor of a target-oriented translation. However, we can assume another type of translation, Apollo’s translation: it’s the mysterious way of recreation and revelation. We will explain those metaphors through four French translations of the first sonnet of Petrarch’s Canzoniere: Louis Aragon, Gérard Genot, Yves Bonnefoy and Jean-Yves Masson translations. // Cfr. Riccardo RAIMONDO, «Orphée contre Hermès : traduction, herméneutique et imaginaire (esquisses)», Meta, vol. 61 (déc. 2016).