Sel nädalal, 18. mail annab semiootika osakonnas külalisloengu professor Patrick Sériot Lausanne'i Ülikoolist Šveitsis

Ettekande pealkirjaks on "Biology for linguistists: obstacle or royal path to concept building?". Kell 16.15, Jakobi 2–306.

Tutvumiseks kirjandust:
 
-  СЕРИО, П.  1995.Лингвистика и биология: У истоков структурализма: биологическая дискуссия в России». In: Степанов, Ю. С. (ed.), Язык и наука конца 20 века. Москва: Институт языкознания РАН, 321-341.
- Sériot, Patrick 1999. The impact of Czech and Russian biology on the linguistic thought of the Prague Linguistic Circle. Travaux du Cercle linguistique de Prague 3: 15-24.
 
– Sériot, Patrick 2001. Trubetzkoy kaksikeku ehk süsteemide suletus. Akadeemia 11: 2290–2303; 12: 2586–2602. 

– Sériot, Patrick 2014. Structure and the Whole: East, West and Non-Darwinian Biology in the Origins of Structural Linguistics. (Semiotics, Communication and Cognition 12.) Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Abstrakt inglise keeles:

Abstract. The relationship of exchanging models, metaphors and analogies between biology and linguistics is well known, and A. Schleicher’s book Die Darwinsche Theorie und die Sprachwissenschaft (1863) is the typical work in this trend of thought. Nonetheless, there is a “counter mainstream” in this relationship, which is less well known, but which is extremely interesting to follow: orthogenesis, as an explicit anti-Darwinian theory in biology, the consequences of which are fascinating to follow in the history of linguistic ideas in Soviet linguistics as well as in Russian émigré linguistics in the inter-war period. Here the names of N. Trubetzkoy and R. Jakobson are of primary importance if we consider that they took most of their inspiration in Goethe’s “morphology” (Formenlehre) and L. Berg “nomogenesis”. The discussion between G. Cuvier and E. Goeffroy Saint-Hilaire in 1830 is also an important landmark to highlight the specificity of a Russian and Central European structuralism which is extremely different from Saussure’s.