Orientadores: Flavio Ribeiro de Oliveira, Marcos Aurelio Pereira / Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-13T21:59:24Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Fonseca_RiviaSilveira_D.pdf: 6276094 bytes, checksum: 1d4f710ddad347b5503c4983272811ed (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009 / Resumo: Este trabalho constitui-se de estudo e tradução das partes 1-6 do Perì hermeneías, de Aristóteles. Essas partes, de acordo com a crítica especializada, formam uma "seção lingüística", na qual o filósofo apresenta as linhas gerais de uma teoria da linguagem, que lhe serve de base para o desenvolvimento de um estudo a respeito das asserções, tipos de sentenças às quais se pode atribuir um valor de verdade ou de falsidade. Buscou-se, assim, analisar tais partes a partir de uma perspectiva lingüística e não estritamente filosófica, com o intuito de ressaltar a relevância do tratado para os estudos da linguagem, sobretudo, aqueles que se ocupam da questão da significação, incluindo-se nessa discussão o debate acerca da arbitrariedade do signo lingüístico e do convencionalismo da linguagem. / Abstract: This work constitutes a study and translation of parts 1-6 of Perì hermeneías, of Aristotle. These parts, according to specialized critics form a "language section", in which the philosopher presents the outlines of a theory of language, which serves as the basis for development of a study about the assertions, types of sentences to which it can assign a value of truth or falsehood. It was therefore examine such shares from a linguistic perspective and not strictly philosophical, in order to emphasize the relevance of the treaty to the study of language, especially those concerned with the question of meaning, including in this discussion the debate about arbitrariness of linguistic sign and the language conventionalism. / Doutorado / Doutor em Linguística

L’histoire de la pensée des signes se caractérise par une oscillation entre définition large et étroite de son objet. Le XVIIe siècle constitue par rapport à cette histoire une période charnière, marquée par la tendance à une conception particularisante du signe, qui exclut en particulier que les idées puissent être considérées sous cette notion. Mais ce retour ne se fait pas de façon homogène. C’est en effet à cette époque qu’apparaît, au sein de la scolastique tardive, un débat majeur autour de la définition du signe, qui se formalise par l’introduction, au sein des traditionnelles taxinomies, de la division entre ‘signum formale’, qui fait écho à la tendance médiévale à inclure les concepts sous le terme de ‘signes’, et ‘signum instrumentale’, qui correspond à une définition qui remonte à Augustin, et selon laquelle le signe est exclusivement sensible, et strictement différent de la chose signifiée. Cette thèse retrace les termes de ce débat scolastique tardif à partir du commentaire au Peri Hermeneias de Sebastião do Couto, afin de montrer que le XVIIe siècle se caractérise globalement par un retour à une conception strictement instrumentale du signe, qui se libère toutefois de la référence augustinienne qui lui avait donné lieu. Se démarquant de la voie qui avait fait de la Logique de Port-Royal le texte paradigmatique de la pensée sémiotique de l’Age classique, on montrera ainsi que celle-ci se définit par une translatio, visible surtout chez Bayle, Gassendi, et Hobbes, d’un modèle linguistico-psychologique à une sémiotique régie par le paradigme du signe naturel, emblématique d’une mutation de la logique désormais ordonnée au modèle de la physique. / All along its history, semiotic has oscillated between a large and a narrow definition of its object. The 17th century is, in this regard, a pivotal period, with a trend towards a narrower construal of the term ‘sign’, which, for most authors of that time,does not apply anymore to concepts and ideas. This move however is not an homogeneous one. The first half of the century witnesses, among late scholasticism, to an important debate about the definition of ‘sign’, stirred by the introduction, among traditional taxonomies, of the division between ‘signum formale’ and ‘signum instrumentale’. The former echoed the medieval inclusion of concepts under the category of ‘signs’. The latter matches the definition of Augustine, according to which the sign is exclusively sensible and strictly different from the thing signified. The reconstruction of the terms of this late scholastic debate, which originates in Sebastião do Couto’s commentary on Peri Hermeneias, shows that the 17th century authors have tended to return to a strictly instrumental conception of signs, but one from which the traditionnal Augustinian reference is absent. In contrast with the rather common interpretation according to which the definition of signs to be found in the Port-Royal’s Logic offered the new paradigm for representation, this works argues that the semiotic thought of this period is better defined as a translatio, especially visible among Bayle, Gassendi and Hobbes, from a linguistico-pschychological model to a natural semiotics, emblematic of a new logic that has been submitted to physical science.

Montréal Trigonix inc. 2018