Suchergebnisse

Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), au début du xx e siècle, est l'un des philosophes de la politique les plus originaux, en dehors des circuits académiques de la culture "haute" du Novecento, en Italie et en Europe. Grâce à une confrontation critique avec le représentant le plus éminent de cette culture, Benedetto Croce (1866-1952), Gramsci développe sa nouvelle philosophie de la culture, et la « philosophie de la praxis », qui prétend dépasser les frontières des États nationaux – à une époque où les nationalismes belliqueux et coloniaux ravageaient le monde entier – sur le socle de l'internationalisme marxiste lié à la Révolution russe de 1917 dont il s'inspire. L'un des volets de sa réflexion autour de la Révolution sera le problème de la traduction entre les différentes traditions "populaires-nationales", entre leurs différents langages (pour atteindre une universalité concrète et élargir ainsi les frontières de la nouvelle révolution prolétarienne), et celui de la traductibilité des cultures qui les sous-tendent.

The famous prohibition of the Société de Linguistique de Paris, issued on March 8th, 1866, which forbade its members to submit research papers about the origin of language, reflected the mood of a precise historical and cultural situation. It was an affirmation of victory achieved by linguistic idealism and German historicis, formalized through an "edict" against the French naturalist-materialist tradition (or a European tradition tradition in general: for instance, in Italy, represented by Giambattista Vico). It was a victory against the philosophy of the Enlightenment, linked to the French Revolution. It was a political and ideological choice and an reflection of the intellectual climate of the Second Restoration, after 1848.In fact, many various and interesting proposals were made in the eighteenth century by the Enlightenment thinkers on the subject of the origin of language. The approaches were empiricist and, at the time, they were meant to counter the theological clichés about the "divine" origins of the primordial language. This theological and metaphysical thesis was opposed by the Enlightenment with a naturalistic explanation. Therefore, those events mark the real prehistory of the protolanguage thesis, concerning human nature, being linked to natural modes of life of the "first men" and primitive humanity.Our paper aims to investigate some of the most original philosophical versions concerning the prehistory of the notion of a protolanguage[1], echoing the views of our contemporary "gesturalists" (Condillac) and "vocalists" (Rousseau) or "verbalists" (De Brosses).[1] I apologize that I will not adopt the notion of protolanguage in its technical sense, but rather in a historical and descriptive sense.

The famous prohibition of the Société de Linguistique de Paris, issued on March 8th, 1866, which forbade its members to submit research papers about the origin of language, reflected the mood of a precise historical and cultural situation. It was an affirmation of victory achieved by linguistic idealism and German historicis, formalized through an "edict" against the French naturalist-materialist tradition (or a European tradition tradition in general: for instance, in Italy, represented by Giambattista Vico). It was a victory against the philosophy of the Enlightenment, linked to the French Revolution. It was a political and ideological choice and an reflection of the intellectual climate of the Second Restoration, after 1848.In fact, many various and interesting proposals were made in the eighteenth century by the Enlightenment thinkers on the subject of the origin of language. The approaches were empiricist and, at the time, they were meant to counter the theological clichés about the "divine" origins of the primordial language. This theological and metaphysical thesis was opposed by the Enlightenment with a naturalistic explanation. Therefore, those events mark the real prehistory of the protolanguage thesis, concerning human nature, being linked to natural modes of life of the "first men" and primitive humanity.Our paper aims to investigate some of the most original philosophical versions concerning the prehistory of the notion of a protolanguage[1], echoing the views of our contemporary "gesturalists" (Condillac) and "vocalists" (Rousseau) or "verbalists" (De Brosses).[1] I apologize that I will not adopt the notion of protolanguage in its technical sense, but rather in a historical and descriptive sense.