gaqwifi.blogg.se - Empereur l empire du milieu crack cocaine

How strange it is that Paulhan is known only as a littérateur.

1 Michel Léon characterizes Paulhan as “ce personnage qui dépouillait si bien les mots sans jamais s (.)ĢForeseeing that unified project was Jean Paulhan (1884-1968), who drew no boundary between the oral and the written.

As Hymes conceived it, and as Dorothy Noyes phrases it (personal communication), “folklore” would be “a foundation for a unified philological project that would merge existing disciplines”. To regard the production and reproduction of literary studies as a totality is to reveal a continuum between written and oral literature, with Racine at one end and Griaule’s Ogotemmêli (1948) at the other, separated only by the channel of communication (speaking or writing), united by their dependence on metaphor and metonymy.

But the fate of this field, she goes on, was to submit to a division of labor, under diverse names like “Ethnology, Oral Literature, Folklife Studies, and traditions populaires” (Bendix, 2000, 3), and to lie apart from literary history. The coiner of the term, William Thoms, “hoped to see the growth of a more systematic inquiry into manners and customs,” says Regina Bendix. The invention of “folklore” marks a moment of division between fields. This is the formulation of the American anthropologist, linguist, and folklorist Dell Hymes (1964, 9), who tirelessly sought to unify fields that had long kept themselves separate. Using such a mental exertion as a window into a people and their values, the study of oral literature practices “the empirical field study of systems of signs in systems of use”.

Oral literature, whether conceived as the object of study or the study itself, is one of those arts and sciences that Friedrich Schlegel (1865, 10) labeled as “mental exertions which have human life, and man himself, for their object”. The other is the system of concepts and methods making up the discourse of scholars. One is “the system of poetic forms which make up the actual repertoire of a given community” (Jakobson and Bogatyrev, 1971, 93). 1The researcher in oral literature is the custodian of two discourses.