The efficacy of Semiotic and interactive model of Landowski in the analysis of the educational discourses

Author
M. B. Moein
Associate Professor of French Language and Literature, Islamic Azad University, Central Branch, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
Eric Landowski; the postgreimassien semiotician, defines his semiotic and interactive model as the program of discipline, conviction, coincidence and adjustment, according to the principles of "rule", "intentionality", "luck" and " sensible" paradigm respectively. Naturally, this model can be encompassed in the social domain in which we encounter with the interactive practices of subjects.


If we accept that basically educational activity is defined on the basis of the interaction between the three different factors: the subject of the educator, the subject of the learner, and the object and method on which the training is based, we can study and explore the diversity and the difference for the training practices with this model.


In the present article we tried to examine carefully this model and the characteristics of each of these semiotic and interactive systems. We will present another model, the virtuous and vices one in order to read the possible interactions between the educator's actor and the educator actor in a social welfare class to say the classroom.


Accordingly, different educational methos of analysis and fundamental philosophy upon which each of them has been founded will be explored and examined by introducing various educational goals and patterns.

Keywords

Subjects

• Courtés J, (1991). Analyse Sémiotique du Discours. De l’énoncé à l’énonciation. Paris: hachette,.
• Greimas , A. J. & J. Courtés (1979). Sémiotique.Dictionnaire raisonnée de la théorie du langage. Paris : Hachette.
• Landowski, E. (1997). Présences de l’autre. Paris: P.U.F.
• Landowski, E. (2004). Passions sans nom. Paris: P.U.F.
• Landowski, E. (2005). Interactions risquées. Limoges: PULIM.
• Landowski, E. (2013). "plaidoyer pour l’impertinence". Actes sémiotiques. N°116.
• Courtés J. (1991). Semiotic Analysis of Discourse. Paris: Hachette. [In French].
• Dhotel, André (1967). Luminous Returns to home, Paris: Gaillimard. [In French].
• Greimas, A. J. & J. Courtés (1979). Semiotic, Reasoned Dictionary of the Theory of Language. Paris: Hachette. [In French].
• Landowski, E. (1997). Presences of the Other. Paris: P.U.F. [In French].
• Landowski, E. (2004). Passions Without Names. Paris: P.U.F. [In French].
• Landowski, E. (2005). Risky Interactions. Limoges: PULIM. [In French].
• Landowski, E. (2013). “ Defense of the impertinent”. Actes sémiotiques. No. 116 [In French].
• Moein, M. B. (2017). Lost Dimension of the signification in Classical Narrative Semiotics, Semiotic System of Adjustment or Dance in Interaction. Tehran: Scientific cultural Publishing. [In Persian].
Language Related Research
Volume 9, Issue 3 - Serial Number 45
July and August 2018
Pages 297-317