ABSTRACT
This article focuses on the principal question of how to manage the confrontation or alliance between language structure and its functioning to reflect its significance in/of this relationship. To tackle this question, we will mobilize two objectives, which disturb semanticists of any affiliation, i.e., how to stabilize, in Linguistics, the theoretical aspects in view of (a) semantically ambiguous obsolete structures; (b) structures that include various uses and therefore, express/produce various meanings. To accomplish this, we utilize the definition of “paradox” as a corpus, which will enable us to operate the object of this study, viz., the semantic paradox, the present-day concept that perceives interdependent contraries, and which we have employed as a technical notion within the Theory of Semantic Blocks proposed by Carel and Ducrot, the principal theoretical support of this research. Our hypothesis is confirmed by the results obtained: regardless of the strategic procedure one works with or names oneself, structural signification is both the starting and returning point in semantic analysis, which assists us to draw the conclusion that, if it is not possible to understand movement without the concept of inertia, it is not possible to work the enunciative meaning without the structural signification. Such a condition appears to be imperative in Semantics.
Semantic paradox; Structural argumentation; Contextual argumentation
Source: Based on