Abstract
This book takes its origin from a first general observation: the ways to frame and convey scientific knowledge in texts are very diverse.
The research leading to this volume has received funding from the European Research Council Under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013)/ERC Grant Agreement No. 269804. The papers collected here were presented and discussed in the ‘History of Science, History of Text’ seminar, and in a workshop in July 2013, conducted by the SPHERE research group (CNRS, Université Paris Diderot).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this book written for the Advances in Applied Linguistics series, Bhatia offers an overview of the field of written discourse analyzed from a genre-based perspective. Taking discourse as text, as genre, as professional practice, and as social practice, Bhatia provides a clear analysis of genres and variations of genres within and across specific professional domains such as business, law and science. On the question of the rules that, historically, geographically and socially, preside over any discursive practice , one can refer to Foucault (1969) and his seminal notion of discursive formulation, later rethought by Pecheux (1975). One can also refer to Genette and Todorov (1986) and to Schaeffer (1989) for a reflection on genre from the domain of literature.
- 2.
On generic integrity and on identifying generic integrity, see pp.112–152; on the power and politics of genre in academic culture notably, see pp. 189–192.
- 3.
We borrow the term ‘continuum textuel’ from Michel Charolles (1995).
- 4.
For an overview of the historical development of discourse analysis and textual linguistics, one can refer to Adam (2008) and (1990), updated several times since then, notably with the correction of his former distinction between discourse and text, to Charolles and Combettes (1999), and Charolles et al. (1986). One can also refer to Bhatia (2004), which, while written within the framework of applied linguistics, provides another view of the chronological development of the field characterized, according to its author, in three main phases, ‘textualization of lexico-grammar’, the ‘organization of discourse’, and the ‘contextualization of discourse’.
- 5.
Halliday et al. (1976), p.3, decided to use the term ‘tie’ ‘to refer to a single instance of cohesion, a term for one occurrence of a pair of cohesively related items’.
- 6.
Halliday et al. (1976) have pioneered this sort of analysis, identifying the syntactic processes that bond or tie individual sentences to give a certain continuity to discourse or text.
- 7.
See notably Authier-Revuz (1997, 2001, 2004) for the different processes one person can use to represent the discourse of others in his/her discourse, and see Vernant (2005) and Compagnon (1979) for an investigation of the citation and quotation processes used by authors to incorporate the words, ideas and work of others in their own discourse or text.
- 8.
All translations from French to English in this book are by the editors. In footnotes, one will find the original text. ‘Les séquences résultent du découpage du matériau discursif. Il y a création d’une séquence lorsque le sujet, par exemple écrivant, indique comment il fractionne son texte. A l’écrit, les séquences sont faciles à repérer, elles correspondent notamment au découpage en paragraphes qui est une marque linguistique comme une autre, faisant sens au même titre par exemple qu’une expression relationnelle quelconque.’
- 9.
‘Les marques de séquentialité sont l’indice d’une activité métadiscursive chez celui qui les utilise. Elles dénotent un travail explicite d’organisation de l’énonciation visant en particulier à faciliter la tâche de l’interprétation.’
- 10.
‘toute unit é vi-lisible chargée, en fait, de souligner un PLAN de TEXTE’.
- 11.
Corresponding once, in rhetoric , to the ‘dispositio’, Adam underlines that there can be a very wide range of text structures: some may appear conventional in that they obey the rules defining the historical state of a genre of discourse but, most of the time, text structures are fortuitous.
- 12.
Adam (2005: 175–192) addresses the text as a compositional and configurational unit (‘Le texte comme unit é compositionnelle et configurationnelle’).
- 13.
‘la mise en “mots graphiques”, avec application des signaux de ponctuation a pour fonction d’induire une lecture visuelle, avec toutes les conséquences aux différents niveaux, lexical, syntaxique, sémantique. “Le donner à voir” ici commande la production de la signification.’
- 14.
- 15.
Virbel (1985).
- 16.
- 17.
‘Structurer implique segmenter, c’est à dire, à la fois rassembler et diviser.’
- 18.
Genette (1987: 413) explains how the consideration of paratext (including allographic prefaces, for instance) contributes to challenging this notion.
- 19.
- 20.
See Chemla and Virbel (2015).
Bibliography
Adam, Jean-Michel. 2005. La linguistique textuelle des discours. Paris: Armand Colin.
Adam, Jean-Michel. 1990. Eléments de linguistique textuelle, théorie et pratique de l’analyse textuelle. Liège: Mardaga.
Adam, Jean-Michel. 2008. Note de cadrage sur la linguistique textuelle. Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française 2008: 1483–1489. https://doi.org/10.1051/cmlf08329.
Authier-Revuz, Jacqueline. 1997. Modalisation autonymique et discours autre, quelques remarques. Modèles Linguistiques 35: 33–51.
Authier-Revuz, Jacqueline. 2001. Le discours rapporté. In Une langue: le Français, ed. R. Thomassone, 192–201. Paris: Hachette, Collection Grands Repères Culturels.
Authier-Revuz, Jacqueline. 2004. La représentation du discours autre: un champ multiplement hétérogène. In: Le discours rapporté dans tous ses états, ed. J.M. Lopez Munoz, S. Marnette, and L. Rosier, 35–53. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Bessonnat, D. 1988. Le découpage en paragraphes et ses fonctions. Pratiques 57: 81–105.
Bhatia, Vijay K. (2004). Worlds of written discourse, a genre-based view. London: Continuum.
Charolles, Michel. 1995. Cohésion, cohérence et pertinence du discours. Travaux de linguistique 20: 125–151.
Charolles, Michel. 2002. Organisation des discours et segmentation des écrits. In Actes de la rencontre : Inscription spatiale du langage: structures et processus, ed. IRIT, Toulouse: Prescot.
Charolles, Michel, Janos Petöfi, and Emel Sözer. 1986. Research in text connexity and text coherence. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.
Charolles, Michel, and Bernard Combettes. 1999. Contribution pour une histoire récente de l’analyse du discours. Langue Francaise 121 (1): 76–116.
Charolles, Michel. 1988. Les plans d’organisation textuelle: périodes, chaînes, portées et séquences. Pratiques 57 (9): 1–11.
Châtillon, Jean. 1985. La notion de paragraphe. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
Chemla, Karine and Virbel, Jacques. 2015. Texts, textual acts and the history of science, vol. 42. New York: Springer, Archimedes.
Compagnon, Antoine. 1979. La seconde main ou le travail de la citation. Paris: Seuil.
Dionne, Ugo. 2008. La voie aux chapitres. Poétique de la division romanesque. Paris: Seuil.
Dürrenmatt, J. 1988. Bien coupé, mal cousu. De la ponctuation et de la division du texte romantique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.
Foucault, Michel. 1969. L’archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard, collection nrf (La Nouvelle Revue Française).
Genette, Gérard and Todorov, Tzvetan (Eds). 1986. Théorie des genres. Paris: Seuil.
Genette, Gérard. 1987. Seuils. Paris: Seuil.
Halliday, Michael, Alexander Kirkwood, and Hasan Ruqaiya. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Jacques, Marie-Paule. 2005. Structure matérielle et contenu sémantique des écrits. Corela 3 (2): 2–24.
Luc, Christophe and Jacques Virbel. 2001. Le modèle d’architecture textuelle: fondements et expérimentation. Verbum 23 (1): 103–123.
Pécheux, Michel. 1975. Les vérités de la Palice. Paris: Maspéro.
Péry-Woodley, Marie-Paule. 2001. Modes d’organisation et de signalisation dans les textes procéduraux. Langages 35 (141): 28–46.
Schaeffer, Jean-Marie. 1989. Qu’est-ce qu’un genre littéraire?. Paris: Seuil.
Vernant, Denis. 2005. Pour une analyse de l’acte de citer. In Citer l’autre, ed. M.-D. Popelard, and A.J. Wall, 179–194. Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle.
Virbel, Jacques. 1985. Langage et métalangage dans le texte du point de vue de l’édition en informatique textuelle. Cahiers de Grammaire 10: 5–7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bretelle-Establet, F., Schmitt, S. (2018). Introduction. In: Bretelle-Establet, F., Schmitt, S. (eds) Pieces and Parts in Scientific Texts. Why the Sciences of the Ancient World Matter, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78467-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78467-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78466-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-78467-0
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)