469361

The Style of Greimas and Its Transformations
Author(s): Cesare Segre and John Meddemmen

Source: New Literary History, Vol. 20, No. 3, Greimassian Semiotics (Spring, 1989), pp. 679-
692
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/469361 .
Accessed: 09/06/2014 12:05
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
New Literary History.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 143.107.252.21 on Mon, 9 Jun 2014 12:05:47 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The
Style
of Greimas and Its Transformations
Cesare
Segre
ET US IMAGINE a chance encounter with the recent de
l'imperfection
(1987)
of A.
J.
Greimas on the
part
of a reader
who had never heard of its
author;
he
would,
I
believe,
at
once relate the book to the most recherche tradition of
contemporary
French
essay writing,
to Blanchot and Barthes.
Two
passages
in italics at the
beginning
and end of the book serve
to frame the
whole,
and the
way they
are constructed
manifestly
aims
for
syntactical
and rhetorical effect. The
opening
section,
in
prose,
is
made
up
of two
"strophes."
The two sentences of the first
"strophe"
are scanned
by
the
rhyme paraftre,
tre, vouloir- tre, devoir- tre,
followed
by paraftre, peut &tre, peut-
tre
(with
subtle semantic
correctio);
it con-
cludes with
syntagms
which fall outside this schema:
diviation
du
sens,
a
peine
vivible.1
The second sentence
opens
with an assertive
proposi-
tion followed
by
two
interrogative
elements of
increasing length.
The
final statement of the first
"strophe,"
and the first statement of the
second,
constitute the
underlying
theme: "Seul le
paraftre
en tant
que
peut
etre-ou
peut-
tre-est a"
peine
vivible.
Ceci dit,
il constitue tout de mime
notre condition
d'homme"
(Only seeming
as
possibility-or possibly-is
barely
tolerable. Nonetheless this is what constitutes our human con-
dition) (9).
But the final
interrogative
sees this
paraftre
as a founda-
tion,
albeit a
hypothetical
one,
fragile
and
elusive,
for crucial
ques-
tions of life and death:
"Et,
pour
solde de tout
compte,
ce voile de
fumee
peut-il
se
dichirer
un
peu
et
s'entr'ouvir
sur la vie
ou
la
mort,
qu'importe?"
(And,
all
things
said and
done,
if this veil of smoke clears a little and
opens
onto life or
death,
what does it
matter?) (9).
What we are
being
invited
to, then,
is a
journey
into the world of
paraftre,
on the
assumption
that it will reveal to
us,
in however
sibylline
a
fashion,
something
about
itre. It is a
journey
that takes the form of
an
analysis
of short
literary passages,
from
Tournier, Calvino, Rilke,
Tanizaki, Cortazar,
all
brought together
under the common
heading
"La
fracture,"
and of considerations of a more
general
nature,
enti-
tled
"Les
6chappatoires."
The
passage
which
brings
the book to a close is made
up
of three
prose "strophes,"
these too shot
through
with
rhyme
and assonance
(indicible, invisible,
unique, possible; tpanouies,
vie,
partie); they
are fur-
680 NEW LITERARY HISTORY
ther linked
together by parallelisms
in their
syntactical
construction:
"Vaines tentatives . . .
quete
de
l'inattendu
qui
se
derobe....
L'innocence: rave d'un retour aux sources.. ."
(Vain
attempts
... the
quest
for the
fleeting unexpected....
Innocence: the dream of a
return to
origins),
and so
on;
"l'imperfection,
deviante,
remplit
ainsi
en
partie
..."
(imperfection, divergent,
thus in
part
fulfills ..
.),
and
so
on;
"L'imperfection apparait
comme un
tremplin
.. ."
(imperfec-
tion
appears
as a
trampoline
..
.),
and so on
(99).
In this latter
passage, figures
of
being
(la chose,
unique,
la
vie),
or of
its revelation
(le sens),
stand in
sharp
contrast to marks of
impossibility
(indicible, invisible,
negativitW).
This
impossibility
finds
expression
as
longing,
and thus becomes a
temporary surrogate
of
being: "Nostalgies
et attentes nourrissent
l'imaginaire
dont les
formes, fanees
ou
panouies,
tien-
nent
lieu
de la vie"
(Nostalgias
and
expectations
feed the
imaginary
whose withered or full forms take the
place
of
life) (99).
But in the
event,
they
act as a means of
arriving
at
being;
it
is, then,
a
victory
of
the
very imperfection
which forms the
subject
of the volume:
"L'imperfection apparaft
comme un
tremplin qui
nous
projette
de
l'insignifiance
vers le sens"
(Imperfection appears
as a
trampoline
that
projects
us from
insignificance
toward
meaning)
(99).
That the
"nostalgies
et
attentes," or,
as we read a little further
on,
the
"quete
de
l'inattendu,"
should tend toward the
safeguarding
of
aesthetic values
("les
valeurs dites
esthitiques
sont les
seules
propres,
les
seules,
en
refusant
toute
nigativita, ci
nous
tirer
vers le haut"
[aesthetic
values are the
only
ones,
the ones
that,
in
refusing
all
negativity,
can
draw us
upwards] [99])
becomes
possible
once the word
"esthetique"
is taken back to its
original
root derivation and
regarded
as
"sensation" and
"sensibility."
This is
why,
toward the end of the
book,
Greimas can
speak
of "esthesis" rather than of aesthetics:
"l'espoir
attentif
d'une esth'sis
unique..."
(the
expectant hope
for a
unique
aes-
thesis
...) (99). Sensation,
sensibility:
it comes down to a
longing
for
the
primordial activity
of the mind. This is
why
the
negative
terms
with in-
give way
at last to a
positive
in-: innocence:
"Que
reste-t-il?
L'innocence:
rove
d'un
retour aux sources alors
que
l'homme
et le monde ne
faisaient qu'un
dans
une
pancalie originelle"
(What
remains? Innocence:
the dream of a return to
origins
when man and the world were united
in an
original pancalia)
(99).
Thus the final
strophe, interrogative
at
its
beginning ("Que
reste-t-il?"),
ends on a note of invocation: "Mehr
Licht!",
and
not,
say, "plus
de sens!" or
"plus
d'etre!"
The book as a whole is
coherently
in line with this
approach.
Rather
than follow out its line of
reasoning,
I too will follow
up
the
faintly
discernible traces of a
technique
whose research is conducted
through
suggestions.
It should be noted in
passing
that semiotic technical
THE STYLE OF GREIMAS AND ITS TRANSFORMATIONS 681
terms and
visual,
and even
tactile,
sensations now coexist: "La nar-
rativisation du
comportement
de la
goutte,
manifest6e
A
l'aide
d'une
aspectualisation
spatiale-inchoativit6
lente,
allongement,
enflure-
s'acheive
par
un
figement
momentan6,
en forme de
poire, sugg6rant,
du fait d'une forte
path6misation,
certaines
galbes
du
corps
f6minin,
mais surtout les volumes et les courbures de
l'esth6tique
baroque"
(The
narrativization of the behavior of the
drop,
that is manifested
by
means of a
spatial aspectualization-slow inchoativity, lengthening,
swelling-ends
in a
momentary
coalescence,
in the form of a
pear,
suggesting, through strong pathemization,
certain curves of the fe-
male
body,
but
especially
the volumes and curvatures of
Baroque
aesthetics) (20).
Here we
have,
on the one
hand, narrativisation,
aspec-
tualisation, inchoativitW,
and so
on,
and on the
other,
allongement, enflure,
galbes,
courbures.
This movement from sensation to
knowledge
takes
place
amidst
perfumes
and
harmonies;
it is
subject
to
fascinations,
and
aspires
to a
carnal and
spiritual
union with the
sacred,
from which new
meanings
can be
expected;
the immanence of the sensible is rediscovered
by way
of the
changing
moods of the
subject:
Encore faut-il
que
des harmonies
parfumbes,
cachees sous ces
appellations
d'origine,
devoilent au
sujet
leurs coalescences et leurs
correspondances pour
le
guider, par
des fascinations atroces et
exaltantes,
vers de nouvelles
signi-
fications
que procure
une
conjonction
intime,
absorbante avec le
sacra,
char-
nelle et
spirituelle
A la fois
. .
Les humeurs du
sujet
retrouvent alors
l'immanence du sensible.
[Yet,
hidden under these
original designations, perfumed
harmonies must
unveil their coalescences and
correspondences
and,
through
dreadful,
exalt-
ing
fascinations,
guide
the
subject
toward new
significations produced by
intimate and
absorbing conjunction
with the
sacred, carnal,
and
spiritual
...
The
subject's temperament
hence
regains
the immanence of the
sensible.]
(78)
The sacred as a
perspective
of
knowledge
also
reappears
with
respect
to
poetic language,
whose
nonprofane
nature is underlined
(rhythm
of
expectations
and
expectations
of
expectations,
while
expectation
has as its
language,
music: "un fond
sonore,
musical sert de soubasse-
ment a cette
isotopie
de
l'attente" [a
background
musical noise serves
as a base for this
isotopy
of
expectation]
[40]);
it will
lead,
if not
directly
to the
sacred,
at least to its threshold
(93-94).
Engagement
with this
half-glimpsed
new
knowledge
involves tra-
ditional, time-honored entities like
body
and soul,
object
and
subject,
death and life. In
point
of fact, subject
and
object
come into contact
thanks to the "saisie
esthetique"
(the
syntagm
is recurrent in the
book);
but behind this contact there loom the
potentially eschatolog-
ical
hypostases
of
body
and
soul,
in the
expectation
of
attaining
to an
intuition of life and of death. The
conceptual
shifts involved are often
spelled
out: "Le
tressaillement,
concretisation de
l'esthesie,
se trouve
donc distribu6 a la fois
sur
le
suject
et
l'objet,
il
marque
le
syncretisme
de ces deux
actants,
une fusion
momentan&e de l'homme et du
monde,
reunissant en meme
temps, pour
dire comme
Descartes,
la
passion
de l'ame et celle du
corps"
(The
shudder that materializes
aesthesis is thus distributed over both
subject
and
object,
it marks the
syncretism
of the two
actants,
a
momentary
fusion of man and the
world,
joining
at the same
time,
to
quote
Descartes,
the
passions
of the
soul and the
body)
(31).
The need for such a fusion of
subject
and
object
is
repeatedly
stressed
("le
desir d'une
conjonction
'r'elle'
avec
l'objet"
[the
desire for a real
conjunction
with the
object]
[39];
"une
fusion totale du
sujet
et de
l'objet"
[a
total fusion of the
subject
and the
object]
[73]),
and its realization on the
physical plane
is insisted
upon:
"C'est sur
le
plan physique,
au niveau de la sensation
pure-les par-
celles de la matiere
resplendissant
de toutes les couleurs et allant
s'introduire
dans les
yeux-que
se fait la
conjonction
de
l'objet
et du
sujet
ou,
plut6t,
I'envahissement
du
sujet par l'objet"
(It
is at the
physical
level,
that of
pure sensation-particles
of matter
radiating
all
the colors and
penetrating
the
eyes-that
the
conjunction
of -he ob-
ject
and
subject
occurs
or, rather,
the invasion of the
subject by
the
object),
and so on
(52).
In this fusion
(it
is a
metaphor,
but one which
clearly points
to the domain of
vision,
if not of
ecstasy)
an
important
aspect,
underlined
elsewhere,
is the chromatic element:
"Ainsi, meme
dans le monde rationalise de la
visualit6,
le
plus superficiel
des
sens,
on
distingue
des
paliers
&chelonnes
de
l'eidetique,
du
chromatique
et,
en derniere
instance,
de la lumiere"
(Hence,
even in the rationalized
world of the
visual,
the most
superficial
of the
senses,
we can distin-
guish
a
gradation
in levels of the
eidetic,
of the
chromatic,
and
finally
of
light)
(73). Nor,
to
go
back to
primary
forms of
contact,
is the tactile
aspect
absent
(30),
or even the
olfactory (42).
The
process seemingly
sketched out in these
pages
of Greimas
ap-
pears
to start from the
subject
and move to a
reality
that is seized
upon
as
vision;
it then moves back to the
subject,
absorbed now into the
bosom of a
reality
whose outlines have been enriched at its surrealist
margins.
The
starting point
is the woman's bare breast
glimpsed by
Palomar
("la
saisie
esthetique
est une
transfiguration
du sein nu en
une vision surnaturelle"
[the
aesthetic
apprehension
is a transforma-
tion of the naked bosom into a
supernatural
vision]
[23]);
by way
of
the
antinomy vision/reality,
the aesthetic
isotopy
is endowed with an
extension which leads from
reality
to the surreal
(32).
The
conclusion,
based on a
tragic
narrative of
Cortaizar,
is that
"ce n'est
qu'a
ce
prix,
en
acquerant
une dimension
tragique
universelle,
qu'une
fiction
peut
se transformer en
surrealite,
susceptible
d'accueillir dans son
sein,
lors
de la saisie
esthetique,
le
sujet
lui-meme"
(It
is
only
at this
price,
in
acquiring
a universal
tragic
dimension,
that fiction can be trans-
formed into
surreality, capable
of
enveloping
the
subject
himself,
during
aesthetic
apprehension)
(64).
This fusion of the
subject
with a
reality
which almost
entirely
absorbs it is the conclusive moment of the
aesthetic
experience,
but it is
also,
and
contemporaneously,
the dis-
solution of the
subject
itself,
ultimately
its annihilation: "Car
enfin,
l'efficacit6
supreme
de
l'objet
litteraire- ou
plus generalement
esth&-
tique-,
sa
conjonction
assumee
par
le
sujet,
n'est-elle
pas
dans sa
dissolution,
dans le
passage oblige par
la mort du
lecteur-spectateur?
Mort ou vie
extatique, peu importe,
n'est-ce
pas
l'esthesis
revee?"
(For,
finally,
is not the
supreme
effect of the
literary
or,
more
gen-
erally,
aesthetic
object-that
is,
its
conjunction
assumed
by
the sub-
ject-to
be found in its
dissolution,
in the
obligatory passage
of the
reader-spectator through
death? Death or ecstatic
life,
it does not
matter,
is this not the aesthesis one dreams
of?) (67).
That there is
something
erotic here is undeniable
since,
in the clos-
ing pages,
female attire is so
insistently regarded
both as an obstacle
and stimulus to
transgression;
for what we are offered in outline is a
theory
of
expectation,
or, rather,
of an "attente de l'inattendu"
(ex-
pectation
of the
unexpected).
What has
happened
to the theoretical
approach?
There is some intimation of it when Greimas
suggests
that
we should "resemantiser la vie en
changeant
'les
signes
en
gestes'
"
(resemanticize
life
by changing signs
into
gestures)
(90),
or when he
suggests transcending
the aesthetics of taste with the aim of
attaining
to "l'intuition d'une
esthetique imaginaire"
(the
intuition of an
imag-
inary
aesthetics) (91); or,
again,
when he
goes
so far as to reflect:
On
peut
rever: et
si,
au lieu d'une ambition totalisante
qui
cherche 'a trans-
figurer
toute la vie et met
enjeu
l'ensemble du
parcours
du
sujet,
on
pouvait
proceder
a la
parcellisation
de ses
programmes,
a la valorisation du detail du
"vecu," si un
regard metonymique
et soutenu
s'exer;ait
"a aborder serieuse-
ment les choses
simples.
[We
can dream: and
if,
instead of a
totalizing
ambition that seeks to trans-
figure
all of life and
brings
into
play
the
subject's
entire
trajectory,
we could
begin by fragmenting
these
programs, by valorizing
the detail of the
"lived,"
if a
metonymical
and concentrated
gaze attempted seriously
to consider sim-
ple things.] (97)
The closer one comes to the end of the
book,
the more
questions
one
finds
being posed-evidence, surely,
of a deliberate intention to
avoid
apodictic
conclusions,
of an effort to remain within the area of
suggestion
and of as
yet unexpressed
desire.
Indeed,
the
expository
section ends on an
interrogative
note,
the
question
itself
being explic-
itly
founded
upon
the soft
inconsistency
of sand: "Batir sur du
sable,
n'est-ce
pas
cultiver l'attente de l'inattendu?"
(Does
building
on sand
not constitute
cultivating
the
expectation
of the
unexpected?)
(98).
I
imagined
at the outset a
reader,
should such
exist,
entirely igno-
rant of all that Greimas had earlier
produced;
but for those who do
know his
work,
the amazement is all the
greater. Having
attained his
seventieth
year,
Greimas has abandoned
(momentarily
or for the time
being,
who can
tell?)
a
path
he had till now followed
consistently.
Maupassant
(1976),
his most
wide-ranging undertaking
in the
literary
field,
had in itself been an occasion for
astonishment,
coming
as it did
from an author whose attachment to the cloisters of semiotics was all
but monklike. His
analyses
there
were,
though,
semiotic in
kind,
and
if
light
was
thrown,
as indeed it
was,
on the text in terms of its
ap-
preciation,
this was the end result of a strenuous
in-depth investiga-
tion of the
field
of
meanings
traversed
(more
than 250
pages
of com-
ment dealt with fewer than 6
pages
of
text);
it did not derive from
any
overt
quest
for aesthetic values.
With
Maupassant,
Greimas in effect
brought
the whole of his im-
posing
semiotic arsenal into
play
(actants,
isotopies,
modalities,
the
semiotic
square),
and was attentive above all to the
general validity
of
his
findings,
even
though
these involved no more than
particular
points
and
events;
he was also concerned that the
techniques
he
adopted
for the individuation of a
general
discourse should be co-
herent:
"L'effet
de
sens
global que produit
une telle
organisation
textuelle est clair: le texte se
pr
sente comme un
signe
dont le dis-
cours,
articule en
isotopies figuratives multiples,
ne serait
que
le
sig-
nifiant
invitant
At
dchiffrer
son
signifie"
(The
global meaning
effect
that such a textual
organization produces
is clear. The text
appears
as
a
sign
whose
discourse,
articulated into
multiple figurative isotopies,
could be considered the
signifier inviting
the
deciphering
of the
signified).2
Greimas,
along
the same lines as
Propp,
succeeded in
showing
that narrative action is much more
complex,
even in its se-
mantic
organization,
than the Russian Formalists and the French
Neo-Formalists had ever
imagined.
To conclude this brief
parenthesis,
let me state that
Maupassant
is
far closer to the earlier
activity
of
Greimas,
despite
the
impressive
reemergence
in it of a
literary interest, than it is to a book like de
l'imperfection.
In
1976,
there was as
yet
no
sign
of the kind of
engage-
ment with
style
that is so characteristic an
aspect
of the ecriture of de
l'imperfection.
There were none of those vibrations and
openings,
none
of the
"dissipations"
to which the latest volume is so inclined. Nor was
there
any
surrender to the
suggestions
of the text of the kind we meet
with
continually
in de
l'imperfection.
It is well-known that the fame and
authority
of Greimas owe their
origin
to
Semantique
structurale
(1966).3
Among
the
many products
of
semiotics,
which in those
years
was in the
process
of
establishing
itself,
Greimas's book stood out because its
approach
was
systematic.
The
impression
it
gave
was that the new science was not still
awaiting
construction,
but that it had
already
been constructed. Greimas had
ties with the more creative
conceptions
of
anthropology
(Levi-
Strauss),
and with structural
linguistics
as
well,
and was
especially
close to innovative
semantics,
like that of Bernard Pottier. In the
semantic and semiotic
fields,
the various
hypotheses
formulated be-
fore the
appearance
of Greimas's work were all more or less
pioneer-
ing
in
character;
only rarely
did
they
offer
anything
like a self-
contained
system.
Greimas's
book,
on the
contrary,
while it did
indicate some areas as
needing
further
investigation,
was character-
ized
by
its
thoroughly systematic approach.
To this
approach
a name can be
given: Hjelmslev.
The Danish
author is
repeatedly
cited
by
Greimas,
who indeed derived the basic
definitions for his semiotics from the
Prolegomena
to a
Theory of
Lan-
guage
(1943);4
it is a fact which
very clearly
marks him off from the
American school.
Now,
the whole of
Hjelmslev's linguistics
is of its
very
nature
programatically
and
systematically
deductive:5
both as a
theoretical
position,
and as a heuristic
technique (moving
from the
text to the
process,
from the class to its
components).
Greimas
adopts
a similar
stance,
although
his
contribution,
given
its
anthropological
foundations,
is at once more concrete and more flexible.
A whole
history
of his
activity
and
teaching might
be based
entirely
upon
this
systematicity.
It is
clearly
a characteristic that lends itself to
the
requirements
of a
school,
and it at once attracted imitators. What
is
more,
a doctrine of an inductive cast
gives
an illusion of
being
somehow definitive: once the fundamental axioms have been ac-
cepted, progress
will
predominantly
take the form of
deductions,
of
deductions from
deductions,
as in mathematics. It is a
way
of over-
coming
an
inferiority complex
on the
part
of the humanities. In the
wake of
Simantique
structurale,
a Greimassian
vulgata
came into
being;
the
techniques
of the master would be
applied
over and over
again
without
any investigation
of their bases, researchers
accepting
them
686
NEW LITERARY HISTORY
uncritically,
in block. It is indeed obvious that a doctrine whose char-
acter is so deductive
is,
in
fact,
a
philosophy.6
The success of the Greimas
vulgata,
however,
did not
depend
on the
consequentiality
of the doctrine alone. Greimas has shown that he is
perfectly capable
of
creating
a semiotic
language
that is both wide-
ranging
and
useful,
and a
great many
of its elements have become
part
of the
usage
even of those who do not follow him.
Greimas's
lexical inventiveness takes the
following
forms:
(1)
acceptance,
or en-
hancement,
of terms used
by
individual
linguists,
or derived from
other scientific fields
(for
example,
from
physics);
(2)
creation of de-
rivatives,
of abstract
terms,
and so
on;
and
(3)
constitution of clusters
of terms which serve to
enlarge
an entire semantic field.
Here are a few
examples
of the terms Greimas has taken from
others and turned into words
commonly
used in his own
language,
and which have become common in the
language
of others as well. I
have used the Dictionnaire raisonni to locate the
sources,
which are
given
in
parentheses:7
actant
(Tesnibre);
biplane, semiotique
(Hjelmslev); catalyse (Hjelmslev);
classeme
(Pottier);
competence
(Chom-
sky);
conversion
(Hjelmslev); correilation (Hjelmslev);
destina-
taireldestinateur
(Jakobson); diegese
(Aristotle, Genette);
donateur
(Propp); effet
de sens
(Guillaume); embrayeur
(Ruwet,
as a translation of
shifter, Jakobson); endotaxiquelexotaxique (Rengstorf);
t
nonc
/
enonciation
(Benveniste);
?pist`me
(Foucault);
expression, plan
de
l'
(Hjelmslev);
extiroceptivit/IintiroceptivitM
(psychology
of
perception);
figure (Hjelmslev); focalisation
(Genette);
gineralisation, principe
de
(Hjelmslev); gineration (Chomsky); generative
and
transformationnelle
grammaire (Chomsky);
icone
(Peirce); illocution, locution,
perlocution
(Austin);
immanence,
principe
d'
(Hjelmslev);
indicateur
(or
marqueur)
syntagmatique (Chomsky);
index
(Peirce); intertextualitM (the
concept
is
attributed to
Bakhtin);
isotopie (physics
and
chemistry);
lexie
(Hjelmslev); manifestation (Hjelmslev);
matiere
["purport"] (Hjelmslev);
metasemiotique (Hjelmslev); monoplane, semiotique (Hjelmslev);
narrateur/narrataire
(Genette);
paradigmatiquelsyntagmatique
(Hjelmslev); performatif
(Austin);
pheme
(Pottier);
pluriplane, semiotique
(Hjelmslev); proces/systeme (Hjelmslev); recatigorisation
th
matique
(L.
Panier);
schema linguistique (Hjelmslev);
sememe
(Pottier);
solidarite
(Hjelmslev);
virtueme
(Pottier).
The enormous influence of
Hjelmslev,
even on the
terminology,
is
immediately
evident,
as is a certain
affinity
with the
techniques
of
Pottier. But the most
interesting aspect
is the number of occasions on
which a
single
term
proliferates, giving
rise to a whole series of der-
ivations, compounds, syntagms.
Take the successful actant, borrowed
from the debatable but
pioneering study
of Lucien
Tesniere;8
we now
find
actantiel(le)-catigorie
actantielle,
role
actantiel,
statut
actantiel,
and so
on;
protoactant,
and also actants de la
communication,
de la
narration,
syntaxiques, fonctionnels,
and so on. Another term
successfully
"launched"
by
Greimas is
isotopie;
a number of terms are based on
it,
bi-isotopie
and
pluri-isotopie,
and with the addition of
attributes,
isotopie
grammaticale, sbmantique, simiologique,
actorielle,
partielle,
totale,
figura-
tive,
thbmatique, complexe,
and so on. Sometimes the
multiplication
of
terms is the outcome not
only
of the addition of attributive
adjuncts,
but of the
application
of the
"carr6 s6miotique":
thus
destinateur,
as
well as
assuming
the attributes of
manipulateur
and of
judicateur, gen-
erates out of its own bosom an anti-destinateur and a nonanti-
destinateur.
The same
techniques
(creation
of new
terms, derivation,
and
setting
up
of lexical
fields)
are to be found even when it is Greimas himself
who has taken the lexical initiative. Here a
complete
census is an even
more
precarious undertaking,
because Greimas does not
always
do
what on some occasions he does:
give
clear indications that the initia-
tive is indeed his own
(by saying,
for
example,
"on
entendra
par ..."
[we
shall
define
by
..
.],
"Nous
d6signons
par l'expression..
."
[By
the
expression
we
designate ...],
"Nous
proposons d'appeler
..
." [We
propose
to call ..
.],
"on est
oblige
d'introduire le
concept
op6ratoire
de .. ."
[we
need to introduce the
operational concept of...],
"on
appellera
.. ."
[we
shall call ..
.],
"on
peut designer
comme
..." [we
can
designate
as
...],
"on
peut
r6unir
sous le nom de .. ."
[we
can
designate by
the term ..
.],
and so
forth;
and it should be borne in
mind that the
Dictionnaire
raisonne has a second
author,
Joseph
Cour-
tes).
Here
too,
though,
I shall
provide
an
exemplary
list which
is,
I
believe,
sufficiently comprehensive:
actorialisation;
configuration
discur-
sive;
connecteur
d'isotopies;
constitutional, modele;
debrayage, debrayeur
(compare embrayeur
in the earlier
list);
discursivisation or mise en dis-
cours;
existence
simiotique; figuratif, parcours; figurativisation; figurativite;
generatif, parcours; macrosimiotique;
micro-univers;
narratif, parcours;
ob-
servateur; occultation;
pivot
narratif;
pratique semiotique; presence; program-
mation
spatio-temporelle; programme narratif;
reduction;
simantique fonda-
mentale;
spatialisation;
subcontrarizte;
syntaxe
discursive;
syntaxe
fondamentale; syntaxe
narrative de
surface; syntaxe
textuelle;
temporalisa-
tion; textualisation;
thymique, catigorie; topique, espace (paratopique,
heterotopique).
In
my opinion,
it is of considerable interest even on the theoretical
plane
to remark that
very rarely
indeed does Greimas
forge
actual
neologisms.
More
frequently
he has recourse to derivation
(actoriali-
sation, discursivisation,
figurativisation, spatialisation, temporalisation),
to
metaphor (configuration,
and
figuratif,
pivot, espace),
to
specialized
use
of
everyday
terms
(observateur,
presence,
rhduction) or,
lastly,
to elative
terms
(constitutionnel, modle,
grammaire, simantique,
and
syntaxe fonda-
mentale).
In the case of
metaphor
and
specialized
use of
everyday
terms,
we have moved into a
freer,
more inventive
sphere,
one that is
less
implacably
deductive.
It should be made
perfectly
clear,
though,
that Greimas's
style,
down to
1976,
smacks of the
treatise;
it is
certainly
not that of an
essayist.
Its ideal is
scientific
language, though
it is true that
semiotics,
in the more adventurous recesses of its
procedure,
does not neces-
sarily reject
the
power
of words or use of the
figurative expression.
Some
elementary
but
symptomatic examples might
be adduced sim-
ply by turning
to the titles of the
paragraphs
which subdivide the
chapters
of
Maupassant.
For
example, chapters
3 and 4 of
"Sequence
II,"
on the one
hand,
present paragraphs
with titles like "Le
pro-
gramme
discursif"
(The
Discursive
Program),
"La valorisation du
programme"
(The
Valorization of the
Program),
"L'installation de
l'actant
duel"
(The
Installation of the Dual
Actant),
"Reconnaissance
des valeurs"
(The
Identification of
Values),
"Le carre
semiotique"
(The
Semiotic
Square), alongside
others like "Les
transfigurations
du
soleil"
(The
Transfigurations
of the
Sun),
"La buee
aquatique"
(Aquatic
Mist),
"La buee
celeste" (Celestial Mist),
"Le
sang
solaire"
(Solar Blood),
"Le
paraitre
du Ciel"
(The
Seeming
of the
Sky).
In
reality,
Greimas
is,
at
every
moment,
systematic;
but his under-
taking, although
it is deductive in
type,
at each
stage posits conceptual
standpoints
at once more
all-embracing
and differentiated. The
first
considerable revolution is attested
by
the Dictionnaire
(1979)
and
by
Du
sens 11 (1983):
the former is concerned with the
sketching
out of new
categories
and new
approaches,
while the latter
regards
the revolu-
tion as
already
achieved
("la
rupture
radicale entre deux 'etats de
choses' "
[the
radical break between two 'states of
things']; "Qu'il
s'agisse
d'une crise de croissance ou d'un retournement
decisif,
un
nouveau
visage
de la
semiotique
se dessine
peu
a
peu"
[Whether
one
is
dealing
with a crisis of
growth
or a decisive turn of
events,
a new
phase
of semiotics is
slowly emerging]).9
To
put
it
briefly,
what has
happened
is that the
study
of discourse
articulations and the
study
of narrative articulations
(Propp)
have
been made to
converge
and have
coalesced;
the actants of narration
have installed themselves inside the
discourse,
and have become the
protagonists
of the communication. Communication
types,
seen in the
light
of their
finalities,
have revealed their modal
foundations,
in a
dimension that Greimas
defines
as
altogether cognitive.
It
might
be
said that the different
spheres
of Greimas's earlier research, seem-
ingly
unconnected until
now,
have all been drawn into a
single,
com-
prehensive
movement.
Although
Greimas
may
now
speak
of the
reel,
of
objet
and of
sujet,
he
is
clearly
not
doing
so in
any experimental
or inductive
sphere;
in
short,
he is not
(philosophically speaking)
a realist. Suffice it to see
how,
even in his overall semiotic
organization, semiotique
naturelle and
the monde naturel itself are linked to
something
that is construit and
scientifique,
and
substantially
subordinated to it. Nor is this all.
By
positing
the "carre
semiotique"
as the
logical
articulation of
any pos-
sible semantic
category,
the actants of the
narration,
who are
progres-
sively
transformed into the actants of communication in
general,
in
practice give
rise to a series of entities
(near
hypostasies,
one
might
say),
such as the non-destinateur and the
non-anti-destinateur,
the anti-
sujet,
and so forth. In
short,
it is the
overriding
character of the
system
as such which
brings
on
stage
a number of characters whose
necessity
arises out of the coherence of the construction
itself,
independent
of
any
observable
descriptive exigency.
And so it is that an inveterate
empiricist
like the
present
writer can
only rejoice
when he finds himself
reading
a declaration like
the
following,
whose
clarity
and
sincerity
of
expression
are
readily
appreciable:
la
s6miotique qu'on
avait
rev6e,
loin de se satisfaire de la
pure contemplation
de ses
propres concepts,
devait
mettre,
a tout instant et a tout
prix,
la main a
la
pate
et se montrer
efficace
en mordant sur le
"rdel":
l'objet
a construire
d6terminait
alors,
dans une
large
mesure,
la visee du
sujet.
[the
semiotics of our dreams could not be content
simply
with the
pure
con-
templation
of its own
concepts,
but
urgently
and at all costs had to
get
in-
volved and
confirm
its effectiveness
by getting
a handle on
"reality."
In this
case,
the
object
to be constructed determined to a
great
extent the
objectives
of the
subject.]
(7)
It is a declaration which is
integrated by
another,
even more clear-cut
perhaps
and
theoretically
clear-minded: "La reflection
theorique,
pour peu qu'elle
soit
f6conde,
comporte
l'inconv6nient
de
d6passer
presque toujours
les
concepts qu'elle
se
forge
et les termes
qu'elle
choisit
pour
les
designer" (Though
theoretical reflection
may
be fruit-
ful,
it has the inconvenience of almost
always outstripping
the con-
cepts
it creates and the terms used to
designate
them) (17).
And there
is even more occasion for
rejoicing
when we observe that, once
Propp's
model has been
transposed
to a communication schema, what
is underlined in the communication in
question
is its
intersubjective
character,
and that this is further
recognized
as
being
"fiduciaire,
inquiet,
tatonnant,
mais en
meme
temps
ruse et dominateur"
(fidu-
ciary, uneasy, groping,
and at the same time
cunning
and dominat-
ing
) (11).
The fundamental introduction to Du
sens
II thus
opens up perspec-
tives which Greimas's initial semiotic
presuppositions
had
hardly
glanced
at,
or which
they
had
totally ignored:
the semiotics of
action,
it is now
understood,
entails a further semiotics of
manipulation
and
of
sanction;
one should note as well the
explicit
attention now devoted
to behavior and situations. Semiotics of the
subject/semiotics
of the
object
is a
pair
that
gives
due
weight
to the level of
perception,
while
the
eventuality
is considered that the
"figures
du monde"
(figures
of
the
world)
may
have
repercussions
on the
subject,
that
they may
even
participate
in his construction. The
point
is reached of
calling
for a
systematic investigation
of the theories of
passion,
and
questions
are
asked
about
the
"possibilites
d'une
esthetique" (possibilities
of an aes-
thetics) (13).
How are we to set about
delineating
the "nouveau
visage
de la
semiotique"
(new
phase
of
semiotics)
which Greimas now offers us?
One
possible approach
is
suggested by
the
Dictionnaire: there,
under
the word
simiotique,
reference was
made,
in
ascending
order, first
to
"une
grandeur
manifest e
quelconque, que
l'on
se
propose
de
connaitre"
(any
manifested
entity
under
study)-natural languages
are
part
of
it,
as are
"contextes
extra-linguistiques,"
considered as
"r6servoirs
de
signes"
and defined,
globally,
as
"macros~miotiques";
second,
to an
object
of
knowledge,
as it
appears
in the course
of,
or as
the outcome
of,
a
description
(we
are
dealing
with an
object-semiotics
regarded
as an
object
of
description,
as itself
subject
to
analysis,
and
last as a constructed
object-so
that,
on the one
hand,
we have a
typology
and a
hierarchy
of
semiotics,
and on the
other,
the
possibility
of varied
syncretistic
kinds of
semiotics); last, we are offered a
theory,
that
is,
a
global
account of the means that make
knowledge possible.
This
formulation,
seemingly
univocal,
not to
say
inductive,
is in
reality
biunequivocal,
because there is talk of semiotics
right
from the earliest
phase
of
research,
contact with the world
itself;
this means that the
domain of
theory
is
being retroactively enlarged,
almost as if one were
afraid that
any
item of data, left in its natural, crude, unelaborated
state,
might
somehow
slip through
the net.
This,
in
turn,
is tanta-
mount to
saying
that
absolutely everything
is
semiotic,
even when
semiotics has not
yet
taken it into consideration.
In the introduction to Du sens II, what we are offered is a
seemingly
more modest
formulation,
one based on the
setting up
of
analytical
strategies:
Se consacrant d'abord timidement a l'dlaboration et a la formulation
rigoureuse
d'un
petit
nombre de
sequences canoniques, [la
pratique
semiotique]
en arrive a se construire
petit
A
petit
de nouveaux
dispositifs
et de
nouveaux
objets
iddels
qui
se substituent
progressivement,
dans la
strategie
de la
recherche,
'a des
explorations
des
semiotiques
definies
par
les canaux
de transmission de leurs
signifiants
de
par
des domaines culturels
qu'elles
articulent.
[At
first it was
cautiously
concerned with the elaboration and
rigorous
for-
mulation of a small number of canonical
sequences.
In the
strategy
of re-
search
adopted,
it has
progressively
and
slowly
constructed new
procedures
and new intellectual constructs that are
replacing
semiotic
explorations
de-
fined both
by
the channels of transmission of their
signifiers
and
by
the
cultural domains
they
articulate.] (14)
This is the breach: and
through
it,
in the more recent semiotics of
Greimas,
that of de
l'imperfection,
minute sensations have found their
way,
chromatic, tactile,
and
olfactory
elements in full
flood;
there is
now
respect
for
(or
recognition
of)
imperfection; through
it too the
sacred, life,
death have
begun
to reveal themselves. The sentence
from
p.
97 of de
l'imperfection
(see
my
discussion on
p.
683-84
above)
seems to be the
continuation,
though
a more decisive
continuation,
of
the
phrase just quoted
from Du sens
II.
Indeed,
in the sentence from
de
l'imperfection any
"ambition totalisante"
(totalizing
ambition) had,
at
least
hypothetically,
been
abandoned,
whereas in Du sens
II,
Greimas
had
only
limited the
"dlaboration
et formulation
rigoureuse
d'un
petit
nombre de
sequences canoniques
(elaboration
and
rigorous
formula-
tion of a small number of canonical
sequences)
while still
nursing
his
ambitions;
the construction
"petit
A
petit"
(little
by
little)
of "nouveau
dispositifs"
(new
procedures)
and of "nouveaux
objets"
(new
objects)
gives way
before a
"parcellisation
de
...
programmes" (parceling
of
... programs)
and a "valorisation du detail du
'vecu'
"
(valorization
of
the detail of the
"lived").
What does Greimas offer us to
compensate
for these sacrifices?
(I
too use the
interrogative
modes to which he himself now so
willingly
has
recourse.)
The first answer is: the
style
he uses. The less
apodictic
and
problematic
the
exposition
becomes,
the more the
style
inter-
venes to
integrate, suggest,
allow
glimpses.
The
subjective,
the ec-
static, the sacred are
spheres
dominated
by
the
ineffable-spheres
where
style, however, may
continue to move forward while demon-
strative
reasoning
remains blocked. But
only
Greimas's future work
will be able to
provide
an answer to the fundamental
problem.
What
we want to know is whether this radical
about-face,
all too
evident,
is
the
prelude
to a new
semiotics,
or whether it announces a shift to
different heuristic
methods,
different kinds of
problems.
I am sure that we are all
looking
forward with
great
interest to the
reply
Greimas will
give.
I
do,
though,
consider that it has been an
interesting
and
happy parabola
which has taken him from a
program-
matically
closed
system,
with all its inherent
dangers
of
dogmatism
and
sclerosis,
to a new
phase,
in
which,
with a
potential
we are not
yet
able to
measure,
the
game
has been
opened
anew,
so that
Greimas,
with his
customary lucidity,
can
place
new
objectives
before us.
UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI PAVIA
(Translated
by John
Meddemmen)
NOTES
1
Algirdas Julien
Greimas,
de
l'imperfection (P&rigueux,
1987), p.
9;
hereafter cited in
text. Here and
elsewhere,
unless otherwise
noted,
translations are
by
Paul Perron.
2
Algirdas Julien
Greimas,
Maupassant:
La
simiotique
du texte: exercices
pratiques
(Paris,
1976),
p.
267;
hereafter cited in text.
3
Algirdas Julien
Greimas,
Simantique
structurale: Recherche de mithode
(Paris, 1966).
4 Louis
Hjelmslev, Prolegomena
to a
Theory of Language
(1943),
tr. Francis
J.
Whitfield
(Madison, Wisc., 1963).
5
Hjelmslev,
?13.
6 See Cesare
Segre,
"Greimas's
Dictionary:
From
Terminology
to
Ideology,"
Semiotics,
50
(1984), 269-78.
7
Algirdas Julien
Greimas and
Joseph
Court6s,
Simiotique:
Dictionnaire raisonnr
de
la
thiorie du
langage
(Paris, 1979).
8 Lucien
Tesnitre,
1/lments
de
syntaxe
structurale
(Paris, 1969).
9
Algirdas Julien
Greimas,
Du
sens
II: Essais
simiotique
(Paris, 1983),
pp.
7, 18;
here-
after cited in text.

469361

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

469361

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Style of Greimas and Its Transformations

Author(s): Cesare Segre and John Meddemmen

You might also like