Advertisement

The Silent Work of Speech. On an Enactive Grammar’s Insight

  • Francesco La MantiaEmail author
Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology book series (PEPRPHPS, volume 23)

Abstract

Many research programs have been worked out in recent years in order to account for an apparently trivial aspect of the human language activity. We refer to the fact that every speaker hears the sound of his own words. Our paper aims to embed this empirical insight in the theoretical framework of the so-called enactive grammar. This choice is justified by the fact that the enactive grammar introduced a formal distinction which allows to provide a clear formulation of the jakobsonian assert. In order to highlight this point, the paper will be subdivided into seven sections. The first section will be devoted to the experience of the hearing oneself speak. The second one will examine this experience from an enactive point of view. The third and forth section will try to show in which sense every speaker is his own interpreter (or co-speaker). The fifth one will analyze some theoretical consequences deriving from the remarks developed in the first four parts of the paper. Finally, the sixth and seventh section will seek to outline a realistic description of the so-called self-listening process. In the conclusion, we will give a synthetic résumé of the principal steps of our analysis.

Keywords

Hearer Listener Enaction Self-Monitoring Other-Monitoring 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Albano Leoni, F. (2002). Des sons et des sens. La physionomie acoustique des mots. Lyon: ENS éditions.Google Scholar
  2. Authier-Revuz, J. (2004) Ces mots qui ne vont pas de soi. Boucles réflexives et non-coïncidence du dire. Limoges: Lambert-LucasGoogle Scholar
  3. Berthoz, A. (1997). Le sens du mouvement. Paris: Odile JacobGoogle Scholar
  4. Berthoz, A. (2009). La simplexité. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
  5. Bottineau, D. (2006). L’émergence du sens par l’acte de langage, de la syntaxe au submorphème. In M. Banniard & D. Philps (Eds.), La fabrique du signe, Linguistique de l’emergence (pp. 299–325). Toulouse: Presses Universitaires du Mirail.Google Scholar
  6. Bottineau, D. (2008). Co-experiencing prosody: the distributed motives and effects of prosody in languaging processes, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  7. Bottineau, D. (2010). Language and enaction. In J. Stewart, O. Gapenne, & E. Di Paolo (Eds.), Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for cognitive science (pp. 267–306). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bottineau, D. (2011). Parole, corporéité, individu et société: l’embodiment entre le représentationnalisme et la cognition incarnée, distribuée, biosémiotique et enactive dans les linguistiques cognitives. Intellectica, 56, 187–220.Google Scholar
  9. Bottineau, D. (2012). La parole comme technique cognitive et incarnée et sociale. La Tribune internationale des langues vivantes, 52–53, 44–55.Google Scholar
  10. Bottineau, D. (2013). Pour une approche enactive de la parole dans les langues. Langages, 192, 11–27.  https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.192.0011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bottineau, D. (2017). Incarnation langagière et grammaire des langues naturelles: vers la fin d’un clivage. In La cognition incarnée (pp. 251-294). Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  12. Brownell, J. (2012). Listening: Attitudes, principles, and skills. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Coursil, J. (2000). La fonction muette du langage. La Martinique: Ibis.Google Scholar
  14. Coursil, J. (2015a). Valeurs pures. Le paradigme sémiotique de Ferninand de Saussure. Limoges: Lambert-Lucas.Google Scholar
  15. Coursil, J. (2015b). Hidden principles of improvisation. SEMEIOTIKE Signs Syst Stud, 15, 226–234.  https://doi.org/10.12697/SSS.2015.43.2-3.05.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coursil, J. (2017). Semiotica dell’ascolto. Scienze e ricerche, 44, 21–27.Google Scholar
  17. Culioli, A. (2014). L’arco e la freccia. Scritti scelti. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
  18. De Cristo, A. (2013). La prosodie de la parole. Bruxelles: De Boeck éditeur.Google Scholar
  19. Derrida, J. (1972). Marges de la philosophie. Paris: Les éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
  20. Derrida, J. (2010). La voce e il fenomeno. Milano: Jaca Book.Google Scholar
  21. Ducrot, O. (1984). Le dire et le dit. Paris:Les éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
  22. Emmert, P. (1994). A definition of listening. Listening Post, 51 (6), 6–25.Google Scholar
  23. Hartmann, F. (2011). L’imaginaire, c’est le sens. Quelques remarques sur la théorie de Jacqueline Authier-Revuz. La revue lacanienne. La psychanalyse et le langues, 11, 181–186.  https://doi.org/10.3917/lrl.113.0181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hartsuiker, R.J., & Kolk, H.H.J. 2001. Error monitoring in speech production: A computational test of the perceptual loop theory. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 113–157,  https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2000.0744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hofer, B. (2015). On the dynamics of early multilingualism. A psycholinguistic study. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoffman, R. (1997). What Neural Network Studies suggest regarding boundary between Conscious and Unconscious mental processes. In D.J. Stein (Ed.), Cognitive science and unconscious (pp. 121–140). Washington: American Psychiatric Press.Google Scholar
  27. Horn, L. (2004). A natural history of negation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Lacan, J. (2007). Le séminaire, Livre III, Les Psychoses 1955-1956. Paris: Les éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  29. Lapaire, J.-R. (2013). Gestualité cogrammaticale: de l’action corporelle spontanée aux postures de travail métagestuel guidé. Maybe et le balancement épistémique en anglais. Langages, 192, 57–72.  https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.192.0057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Levelt, W. (1993). Speaking: From intention to articulation, Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book, MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Malabou, C. (2017). Les noveaux blessés. De Freud à la neurologie, penser les traumatismes contemporaines. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  32. Maturana, H. (1978). Biology of language: The epistemology of reality. In G. Miller & E. Lennenberg (Eds.), Psychology and biology of language and thought: Essays in honor of Eric Lennenberg (pp. 27–64). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  33. Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Olivier, G. (2012). La cognition gestuelle. Ou de l’écho à l’égo. Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.Google Scholar
  35. Pêcheux, M. (1992). Automatic discourse analysis. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  36. Peter, D., & Elliot, P. (2016). The speech chain: The physics and biology of spoken language. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  37. Szendy, P. (2017). Prêter l’oreille. Petite conférence sur l’écoute. Paris: Bayard.Google Scholar
  38. Tomatis, A. (1990). L’oreille et la vie. Itinéraire d’une recherche sur l’audtion, la langue et la communication. Paris: Réponses-Santé/ Robert Laffont.Google Scholar
  39. Tomatis, A. (2013). L’orecchio e il linguaggio. Milano: Ibis.Google Scholar
  40. Tomsen, O.N. (2006). Competing models of linguistic change: Evolution and beyond (CURRENT ISSUES IN LINGUISTIC THEORY). Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1993). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Wilkinson, S. (2014). Accounting for the phenomenology and varieties of auditory verbal hallucination within a predictive processing framework. Consciousness and Cognition, 30, 142–155.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2014.09.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Scienze UmanisticheUniversità degli studi di PalermoPalermoItaly

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options