جدلية النص والعرض في المسرح "مفهومات نظرية"

تتناول هذه الدّراسة النص والعرض المسرحيَّين , والعلاقة بينهما , محاوِلةً بيان مفهومهما وطبيعة كلٍّ منهما ؛ إذ يعدُّ النصُّ المكتوب وثيقة تحفظ المسرحية من الضياع , وهي الأساس لكلِّ عرضٍ مسرحيّ , وكذلك لا يمكن لنصٍّ مسرحيٍّ أن يحيا من دون أن يتجسّد في عرضٍ مرئيٍّ ومسموعٍ على خشبة المسرح أمام مجموعةٍ من المتفرجين جاؤوا ليحكموا بنجاحه أو إخفاقه , مبيِّنةً أوجه الاختلاف بين نص الكاتب ونص المخرج , ومن هنا فقد قُسِّم البحث إلى أربعة أقسامٍ , هي : النص المسرحي ؛ مفهومه وطبيعته , والعرض المسرحي ؛ مفهومه وطبيعته , وأفضلية النص والعرض , وثنائية نص الكاتب ونص المخرج , وجاءت الدراسة في ضوء النظرية السيميائية

The theory of arguments in language for Ducrot & Anxomber

  Modern linguistic studies which delt with the concept of argumentation have varied according to their philosophical, logical and linguistic origins. Each of them made its way by using its own cognitive tools. But most of them belong to wider and more comprehensive science  called pragmatic. Argumentation   in language which is the theme of our research according to Ducrot and Anxomber is a pure linguistic research because it is in language it makes saying follow each other and link in accurate way that they support one another. What distinguishes Ducrot's theory of argumentation is that it is linked with many concepts which helped to explaining and framing this theory. These concepts include the concept of argumentative scale and the concept of argumentative orientation. The argumentative scale depends on the principle of presenting argumentation gradually. It uses the criterion of strength and weakness which says that argument never undergo to the concept of truth and lying. But argumentative orientation is formed by imposing a kind of results as the only destination that the destinateur  can go through. In  Ducrot's argumentation theory, we can see two main characteristics that can be summered up into two ideas: Stressing the argumentative function of the linguistic structure. Stressing  the instructive feature of discovers

The concept of Argumentation for Aristotle

  Studies and research about rhetoric have varied concerning the definition of  rhetoric, but most of them look at rhetoric from on side only. Rhetoric was classified as being a kind of research concerned with the art of persuasion in its techniques, means and components. But it is certain that the political and social conditions of the greak life, led these philosophical studies and linguistic research especially, rhetoric. This made Aristotle divide rhetoric into three sections. The research delt with two main titles, the first one was Rhetoric according to Aristotle. It combines between mans ability to speak and express on one hand becavse man is a speaker and expressor who naturally looks for persuasion. In his speech, he tries to convince as many people as possible. To do this, he uses many instinctive means. Aristotle was concerned with rhetoric due to its mental and psychological sides. He tried to find a kind of balance between the means of persuasion and means of influence. He made convincing help infuencing. He diffentiated between kinds of proofs, the made proofs and the non made proofs. The other ones were the base of the rhetoric structure for Aristotle. The argumentative linguistic text is different from other texts that it builds an interactive structure based on some means that aim to persuade and affect the recipient