La tension constante qui s’instaure entre dictionnaires et approches théoriques de la signification s’avère une dynamique majeure de l’histoire et de l’historicité des idées linguistiques. Il s’agit dès lors de faire ressortir la perméabilité, les effets de continuité et les ruptures éventuelles entre les dictionnaires en tant qu’outils linguistiques et les approches théoriques qui se penchent sur le sens. La période retenue permet de suivre, sur le moyen terme, les formes de cette interaction. Il s’agit, dans un premier temps, de voir comment la lexicographie monolingue française de la seconde moitié du XIXe siècle contribue à la promotion du sens au rang d’objet d’étude. En effet, le dictionnaire s’avère un lieu heuristique révélateur des problèmes théoriques que pose la description sémantique. À partir des matériaux empiriques collectés dans le cadre de cette description de la langue, les linguistes de la fin du XIXe siècle cherchent à parvenir à une synthèse des observations. Une relecture du débat qui se développe autour de l’institutionnalisation de la sémantique au XIXe siècle permet de montrer, dans un deuxième temps, que les dilemmes du lexicographe sont susceptibles d’aboutir à des impasses théoriques. Néanmoins, les failles repérées dans les outils linguistiques sollicitent la réflexion et lui suggèrent de nouvelles hypothèses. Dans un troisième temps, il s’agit de retracer, au cours du XXe siècle, la dispersion de l’interaction entre dictionnaires et approches théoriques du sens et ce, dans des horizons de recherche différents qui adoptent l’outil linguistique comme modèle de la langue, de la compétence sémantique ou comme terrain d’expérimentation. / The constant strain between dictionaries and theoretical approaches to signification proves to be one of the major dynamics of the history and the historicity of linguistic ideas. Hence what matters is to bring out the permeability, the effects of continuity and the possible breaking points between dictionaries as linguistic tools and the theoretical approaches that look into meaning. The period considered here provides an understanding of the various forms of this interaction in the medium term. First, this study shows how French monolingual lexicography in the second half of the 19th century contributes to making meaning an object of study. As a matter of fact dictionaries prove to play a heuristic role which reveals the theoretical problems raised by semantic description. From the empirical evidence collected in the context of that description of language, late 19th-century linguists seek to come to a synthesis of observations. A new reading of the debate surrounding the institutionalization of semantics in the 19th century then shows that a lexicographer’s dilemmas are likely to end up in theoretical deadlocks. Nevertheless, the faults found in linguistic tools trigger off further reflection and suggest new hypotheses. Finally, this study aims to trace back the dissipation of the interaction between dictionaries and theoretical approaches to meaning, during the 20th century, thanks to different research perspectives which take on linguistic tools as the model for language, for semantic competence, or as an experimental field.

The aim of this thesis is to contribute to the knowledge of linguistic tools typical for French political discourse. The thesis is based on an analysis of selected political speeches of former French President Nicolas Sarkozy. It tries to capture how a change in a specific political situation of a particular author can affect communicative strategies, discursive practices, and then select the linguistic tools due to the addressee in a particular communicative situation and the communicative intention. The first part of the thesis is focused on the rhetoric and stylistics, which contribute to the typological definition of texts falling within the French political discourse. The second part is based on an analysis of three essential political speeches Nicolas Sarkozy.

L’objectif de cette étude est de rechercher les facteurs qui sous-tendent les comportements politiques chez les étudiants. L’approche développée est cognitive et conative. À ce titre, les connaissances, les représentations et les mécanismes de raisonnement sont invoqués comme éléments explicatifs des comportements. Ces processus sont appréhendés à l’aide d’outils linguistiques. L’analyse des résultats suggère l’existence de représentations politiques plutôt négatives, au sein de la population. Ces représentions génèrent des raisonnements qui induisent des d’attitudes critiques, méfiantes, à l’égard de la sphère politique, avec en toile de fond l’expression de nombreuses attentes. Pour autant, ces représentations, globalement négatives, ne doivent pas occulter la présence de perceptions positives à l’égard de l’univers politique, développées par les sujets experts qui envisagent la politique dans ses liens avec des domaines connexes. En outre, l’analyse des choix politiques fait ressortir deux formes de raisonnement sous-jacentes : des raisonnements motivés, davantage utilisés par les sujets sans proximité partisane, et des raisonnements plus heuristiques, fondés sur un savoir mémorisé adoptés par les répondants plus politisés. / . The objective of this study to seek the factors which underlie the political behaviors in the students. The developed approach is cognitive. For this reason knowledge, representations, and the mechanisms of reasoning are called upon like explanatory elements of the behaviors. These cognitive processes are apprehended using linguistic tools. The analysis of the results suggests the existence within the population of the political representations rather negative. These represented generate reasoning which induces of critical attitudes, being wary with regard to the political sphere within background the expression of many waiting. For as much, these overall negative representations should not occult the presence of positive perceptions of the political universe developed by the expert subjects which consider the policy in its bonds with related fields. Moreover, the analysis of the political choices emphasizes two subjacent forms of reasoning: the reasoning justified, more used by the subjects without proximity partisan, and the more heuristic reasoning founded on a memorized knowledge adopted by the more politicized guarantors

The aim of this essay was to demonstrate whether the descriptions of Donald Trump’s inauguration 2017 differed from Joe Biden’s inauguration 2021 in three of the biggest British newspapers: The Guardian, The Independent and The Telegraph. One article from each newspaper concerning the inaugurations 2017 and 2021 was investigated. Different linguistic tools such as path strategy, the inverted pyramid, whether passive or active voice was used, polysemy, quantitative iconicity, denotation or connotation, binary oppositions, metaphors and newsworthiness were focused on. The results have shown that the British newspapers reported in favor of Biden. Trump was often described with words of negative connotations such as dark, fears, anxious, grim, uncertain and testy, while Biden was often described with words of positive connotations such as rejoin, repeal, unity and fulfill. Further, Trump was often actor in sentences making him a bad guy, while Biden was often actor in sentences making him a good guy. Since Trump was often connected with negativity, news about him was considered to be of higher newsworthiness, and he was mentioned considerably more in the articles about Biden’s inauguration than the former President Obama was mentioned in the articles about Trump. Furthermore, Trump was described more than Biden, as for instance his high age was referred to, but not Biden’s age, which is higher than Trump’s. The metaphors ARGUMENT IS WAR and POLITICS IS WAR are used in articles about both presidents.

This study is based on the presumption that language is fundamental to the construction of knowledge. In addition, linguistic demands are incorporated in the policy documents of the upper secondary edu­cation of Sweden; students shall, during their education, be given the opportunity to appropriate certain linguistic tools. The purpose of this thesis is to investigate how teachers and students in upper secondary education manage and utilize the discourse of social science in both speech and writing. More specifically, two classes are studied during three terms. The teachers’ ability to organize and support the students vocally and in written is examined, so are the effects of the teaching on students’ writing. The origin of the study is constituted by a sociocultural stance provided by Vygotskij, Bakhtin and Halliday. A combination of a functional perspective on language and a cognitive is probed, where the study is comparative in nature consisting of an experimental class and a control class. The importance of language for the creation of knowledge has been communicated to the teachers of the experimen­tal class, with provided complementary subject didactic literature. This literature offers support for teachers to augment the use of explicit teaching and enhance student awareness of how conceptual structures mould social science. Qualitative analyses are performed on the basis of teacher-student dialogue and written tasks by a group of selected students. The ana­lytical tools object language – metalanguage, linguistic operations and knowledge structures are developed for the purpose of processing data, and have been combined with the tools activity analysis, subject-related concepts and text activity. The results from the analyses display no difference in the handling of the discourse of social science between the experimental class and the control class. The teachers of the experimental class, like the teacher of the control class, are primarily utilizing object language where knowledge structures are visible, as opposed to a combination of object language – metalanguage. Furthermore, they exhibit diminutive use of dialogue in their teaching. The students of both classes, on their hand, demon­strate an equal progress in textual development. This study concludes that the experimental class has not been provided with sufficiently explicit support to advance in the struc­turing of knowledge and in level of reasoning. A more efficient support to teachers to manage these analytical tools would, in all probability, give them, and through this the students, an increasingly profound insight into structuring of text activities, the meaning and signalling of linguistic operations, the construction of subject-related concepts and, most importantly, how these three tools are interrelated.