Greimas ir Merleau-Ponty

LTStraipsnyje yra analizuojamas Maurice‘o Merleau-Ponty fenomenologijos santykis su Algirdo Juliaus Greimo semiotika, ir aiškinamasi, koks yra pastarosios indėlis į fenomenologinės kalbos sampratą. Greimas analizavo Merleau-Ponty veikalus. Filosofinis Erotas negali užleisti vietos vienos ar kitos pozicijos gynimui vien todėl, kad esi jai ,,įsipareigojęs“. Į tai ir atkreipė dėmesį Merleau-Ponty. Merleau-Ponty pabrėžia, kad diakritiškumas nežymi to, kad vienas lauko aspektas reiškia kitus aspektus, o daugiau fiksuoja vieno skirtumą nuo kito. Greimui pačios subjekto ir gamtos sąvokos yra antraeilės, kai sistemiškai aiškinami duoti ,,ženklo fenomenai“. Taip pat galima teigti, kad tai su kuo susiduriame, kaip su konkrečia figūra, iškyla iš lauko fono ir taip ji gali būti išlaikoma kaip išskirtinis objektas. Terminai patys savaime neturi reikšmės. Jiems būtini kiti terminai ir abipusis paaiškinimas sudarant atvirą sistemą. Šioje sistemoje terminai gali pakeisti vienas kitą. Šiai sampratai pritaria Greimas. Marleau-Ponty ir Greimo ontologinis pozicijų pagrindas neleidžia užbaigti analizės ir pilnai išskaidyti paviršinės raiškos į giliojo, bendrojo lygmens komponentus. Greimo semiotika yra pajėgi pratęsti kalbinių gestų variaciją.

ENThis essay is designed to develop the pheuomcnological philosophy of Mcrlcau-Ponty and its extension by the semiotics of Greimas. As is well known, Greimas was acquainted with phenomenology, beginning with Husserl's Logical Investigations and ending with his close relationship with Merleau-Ponty. For Greimas phenomenology demonstrated conclusively that it is possible to "think meaningfully about meaning" without any metaphysical prejudgments, whether they stem from empiricism or rationalism. It is also well known that Merleau-Ponty extended his phenomenological philosophy through the linguistic theory of De Saussure, leading to the possibility of further extension through the semiotics of Greimas. It is plausible, therefore, that through the works of Greimas and Merleau-Ponty, there can be a balance between experience and language. The most important relationship between Greimas and Merleau-Ponty appears in the "logic of action" lending itself to establish a metonymic magic in the transformation of meanings. The word "magic" means that the replacement of one word by another is not only a momentary exchange of terms in a vocabulary, but most importantly an active transformation of the entire vocabulary. At this level the quadrature of Greimas reveals its dynamic side and rejects the claims of his critics concerning the static nature of his semiotics. Meanwhile, the explication of perception by Merleau-Ponty discloses the "magic" of meaning such that one shift in meaning transmits its "force" across the entire phenomenal field.The extrication from staticity in the theories of both appears most importantly in the demonstration that every meaning is "diacritical." Thus it is possible to claim that a single term has no meaning; meaning appears as a function between terms - signifying differences one from the others without assuming a positive content. Finally, each act, emerging either in perceptual field or in a text, demands that the entire field or a text become a background allowing a specific figure and its action to appear in its significance. Both, the figure and the background have no meaning apart from each other. Obviously, in the logic of action both sides change in terms of the requirements of the perceptual field or the flow of the text. In this sense such shifts require most careful analyses. The quadrature of Greimas allows us to understand the relationship between background and active figure, just as Merleau-Ponty s notion of.involvement in the perceptual field discloses the dynamic of these transformations. It must be added that the conception of the logic of action by both, must maintain a universal principle: all of their claims must be involved in their own theories. This issue will be resolved in this essay. [From the publication]