Pomysł zaprezentowania i krytycznej analizy koncepcji nazw własnych sformułowanej Romana Ingardena wynika z konieczności uzupełnienia swoistej luki w pracach na temat jego ontologii, estetyki czy teorii dzieła literackiego. Refleksja o nazwach własnych pojawia się w nich bowiem nader rzadko, najczęściej w kontekście rozważań głównych, dla których stanowi jedynie przyczynek, uzupełnienie czy dygresję.
The present paper is aimed at a short presentation of the non-dualizing way of speaking formulated by Josef Mitterer, the Austrian philosopher. In the first part I focus on metaphilosophical conception of the non-dualism which is assumed as alternative for the dualizing way of speaking (dominating not only in the philosophical discourses but also in ordinary acts of speech). According to the from-object-cognition (which is understood as the option for traditional epistemology directed towards the object), there is no distinction between object and description. Thus, in the non-dualizing way of speaking, one speaks from the object, not about the object. This is impossible to present the object without a rudimentary description. As a consequence, the discourses are directed towards the change, not toward the truth (which is understood as the aim of the dualizng discourses). In the second part of the paper there is a short critique of Mitterer’s analyses, especially the notion of contingency and the notion of description. Assuming that one can formulate any kind of description from the object, Mitterer reaches the idea of anything goes which is unacceptable also from constructivist point of view (S. Fish’s notions, especially institutional nesting, are used in order to provide more acceptable solution: our conceptions are always based on pre-understandings and conventions). The notion of description, the central point of Mitterer’s deliberations, is involved in dualizing and this seems not to be the best way to present the different way of speaking.
The aim of the article is to reflect on the philosophical foundations of foreign language teaching on the example of teaching Polish as a foreign language. The starting point of the considerations is the constructivist epistemology (mainly radical constructivist by Ernst von Glasersfeld) and the notion of language / language behavior (languaging - formulated by the biologist and constructivist Humbert Maturana). I am arguing that the teaching of language behavior / orienting behaviour should be an integral part of the didactic process. Language is a much more complex phenomenon, and understood as linguistic behavior refers to emotions, bodily reactions, conventions adopted in a given interpretation community, and the areas of consensual domain we achieve during communication with our interlocutors. Although the constructivist approach is known in the world, it can be observed that the practice of teaching is still dominated by the belief about the passive transmission of knowledge. The constructivist perspective applied to the organization of the didactic process may have practicalconsequences for formulating certification rules or organization of work during the lesson.
PL
Celem artykułu jest refleksja nad filozoficznymi podstawami nauczania języków obcych na przykładzie nauczania polskiego jako obcego. Punktem wyjścia rozważań jest konstruktywistyczna epistemologia (głównie radykalnie konstruktywistyczna Ernsta von Glasersfelda) i pojęcie językowania/zachowania językowego (languaging – sformułowane przez biologa i konstruktywistę Humberta Maturanę). Stawiam tezę, że nauczanie zachowania językowego/zachowania orientującego powinno stanowić integralną część procesu dydaktycznego. W ten sposób problem tego, jak uczyć kultury i jak je połączyć z kształceniem językowym w ogóle nie powstaje. Język jest znacznie bardziej złożonym fenomenem, a rozumiany jako zachowanie językowe odnosi się do emocji, cielesnych reakcji, konwencji, przyjętych w danej wspólnocie interpretacyjnej, i osiąganych przez nas dziedzin zgodności (consensual domain) w czasie komunikacji z naszymi interlokutorami. Chociaż podejście konstruktywistyczne jest znane na świecie, to jednak można zaobserwować, że w praktyce nauczania wciąż dominuje przekonanie o pasywnym przekazie wiedzy. Perspektywa konstruktywistyczna zastosowana do organizacji procesu dydaktycznego może mieć konsekwencje praktyczne dla formułowania programów nauczania, zasad certyfikacji czy organizacji pracy podczas lekcji.
The purpose of this article is to consider an answer to the ques- tion whether Searle’s idea of sentence in a literary text is still relevant. Understanding literary utterances as specific speech acts, pretended illocu- tions, is inherent in the process of considering the sentence in a literary text in broader terms. Accordingly, it appears necessary to outline it. Ref- erence to other ideas formulated both in the theory of literature as a speech act [R. Ohmann, S. Levin] as well as in logic, ontology and the theory of literature [J. Pelc, H. Markiewicz, R. Ingarden] will render it possible to adequately place and assess Searle’s theory. Confronting Searle’s theory with the order in a literary work (the relation between the text and the literary work, the status of the presented world, the issue of reference and fiction) will in turn render it possible to determine how empirically adequate Searle’s theory is.
The aim of the article is the attempt to read anewZbigniew Herbert’s poems. The commonly accepted interpretations in Polish literary discourse place them in the context of realistic paradigm. Meanwhile the model of cognition in the poet’s works is not so clear. It is possible to understand it in the constructivist way, taking into consideration Herberts own view that cognition has always active, dynamic, sensual and linguistic character. Ttherefore, it may be perceived as the correlate of languaging/linguistic behaviour of H. Maturana and E. von Glasersfeld.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.