The author presents an outline of the comprehensive theory of style the structure of which is composed of three levels: philosophical (ontological and epistemological assumptions), theoretical and metaphorical (a network of highly abstract key notions and terms conceptualising and structuring the theoreticised world), and empirical (a set of empirical notions and statements asserting something directly about the analysed world). After philosophical ontology, it adopts the assumption of four methods of existence of the linguistic reality and, accordingly, style (which is treated as a humanistic text structure, its highest organisational rule): 1. specifi c language actions and their textual products as well as the style of a given text; 2. a language system and stylistic patterns in the standard; 3. individual language awareness and individual style; 4. language awareness of specifi c human populations and collective styles. This outline can constitute the basis for creating more developed forms of the theory.
The term ‘charisma’ (Greek: χάρισμα (khárisma) meaning ‘a gift’) was introduced by Paul the Apostle in his apostolic letters and on the lay ground it was adapted by M. Weber at the beginning of the 20th century. From the domain of sociology it found its way into psychology and pedagogy. The author of the present article undertakes to introduce the following terms: language charisma and charismatic style into the cognitive space of linguistics. He analyzes the figure of Jesus as a prototype specimen of a person with the gift of charisma. The cognitive representation of this specimen as well as the admissible size of this transformation mark out the structure of the title notion. The most important semantic features of the notion of charisma include wisdom and creativity. The charismatic style is defined as an unusual manner in which somebody – with the expression that is exclusively typical ofthemselves – reveals to us their deepest spiritual world, exerting an impact on us. This style exists in the form of: 1) a style of concrete text, 2) a systemic individual style (a variation of idiostyle), 3) a subjective individual style, and 4) a collective intersubjective style.
The term positive linguistics implies that linguistics is joining the transdisciplinary research orientation, which examines the idea of individual and social well-being and is called positive humanities (with reference to the term positive psychology coined by A. Maslow). This idea has immemorial roots and has been taken up in various cultures, cf. universal virtues (wisdom, bravery, humanity, fairness, restraint, and spirituality) as mental and moral personality traits supported by cultural patterns, social roles and institutions as well as language. The stimuli for developing this orientation in linguistics include the disturbing situation of the contemporary world and impacts of numerous disciplines (not only within the humanities, and hence the name valeology from Latin valeo ‘to be strong, healthy, not only in the medical sense’ is proposed) and one’s own traditions related to language culture and ethics of the word. Positive linguistics is underlain by the theory of language which assumes the mutual interactive impact of the world, mind and language, and various manners in which the linguistic reality exists. Positive linguistics is interested also in such a good speech as is accompanied in various spheres and situations of the human life above all by moral responsibility assumed by individual and collective entities.
The term and the category of national style was introduced in the period of pre-romanticism in Germany (Winckelmann, Herder, Goethe) in response to radical social and cultural transformations. At that time in Europę, the modem understanding of the nation was being formed, with national societies being constituted and national identities dominating over other forms of collective identity. In the twentieth century, it was accepted that a nation is not a naturally formed community of people, but rather a cultural project - a construct based on ideology and realized in discourse (Gellner, Anderson, Hobsbawm). The notion of national style reąuires a retraction from the rhetorical (elocutionary)conceptualization of style based on the opposition between language and thought (cf. res vs. verba). It is theoretically grounded in the monistic tradition (cf. Ganzeit). As a result, the category of national style integrates various previous typologies of styles (e.g., formal/casual/colloąuial register, functional styles). According to the classical understanding of style, a given national style can be regarded as a repository of stylistic devices (marked or expressive linguistic elements or properties). In the new, holistic approach, where style is the highest organizing principle XXIof expression (in terms of both content and form), national style is said to pervade national discourse (i.e. the textual realizations of national identity and national ideology). It can be postulated that specific nations are characterized by their unique perception of social reality, organization of information and patteming of interaction, which is evidenced in what is accepted as socially appropriate textual (stylistic, generic) forms.Slavic national styles can be researched from the perspective of individual nations, as well as from the comparative perspective.
The consciousness of a crisis of university inclines towards its reformation. In the thinking about its revival it is necessary to take into account the archetypical idea behind university, traditions to date, contemporary conditions and visions of the future. It is also getting indispensable to take into consideration such values that ought to steer the development of university in the framework of global civilization. The tasks of university are as follows: 1) to conduct research in striving for truth in the conditions of autonomy and freedom, as well as responsibility for the present day and the future of man; 2) to educate students, which introduces them in the world of science and life, as well as teaches them to be responsible; 3) to practice public science which is present in debates undertaking to solve vital social problems. The academic community and its elites should defend the conception of university against the dictate of their political and economic counterparts who attempt to impose the idea of an entrepreneurial university which produces a utilitarian knowledge and “human principles”.
Współczesne przemiany świata (w tym rzeczywistości językowej) wywołują wzmożoną refleksywność (także refleksywność językową). Jej następstwem jest wzrost podmiotowości jednostkowej i zbiorowej. Razem stwarza to warunki do wyłonienia się w wyniku nowego podziału pracy naukowej lingwistyki publicznej i zarządzania językiem.
EN
The transformations of the contemporary world (including linguistic reality) enhance reflectivity (also linguistic reflectivity). In consequence, we encounter more and more of both individual and collective subjectivity. Together they create conditions for the emergence — as a result of a new divisions of research work — of public linguistics and language management.
An inalienable property of the linguistic reality is the multi-language nature of the world and the multi-variation character of the ethnic-national communication space. As regards Polish pace, one can distinguish a series of axes around which the processes of long lasting concentrate. The author discusses the following five axes: (1) idiolectal (individual languages), (2) one determined by the dichotomy: spoken language – written language (contemporarily it assumes the form: spoken language – media language – written language), (3) one connected with the opposition: dialects – literary language (today in the form: dialects – mixed languages – general language), (4) functional variations (their ‘canonical’ series: colloquial language – scientific language – journalistic language – language of the administration – religious language – artistic language), and (5) one of three styles (high – medium – low).
The author reflects on a new interpretation framework in research on terminology. Referring to the philosophy of science and modern science studies, he distinguishes two types of doing science: traditional science and modern science. The centre of the linguistic cognitive space is located in traditional science. The naturalistic cognitive perspective determined also the shape of terminology studies. After philosophical ontology, the author adopts four ways in which a term can exist: in specifi c texts and in the system as well as in the individual and collective consciousness. This requires giving consideration to various perspectives (including the anti-naturalistic one) in terminological research and diverse cognitive methods, as well as a theoretical consolidation of the obtained results.
Dyskusja miała miejsce w czasie V konferencji Tertium w dniu 13.03.2008. Po raz pierwszy została opublikowana w roku 2008 w tomie Język a komunikacja 23 pod redakcją Władysława Chłopickiego i Stanisława Gajdy.