Controversy of the narrative revisited

THE CONTROVERSY OF THE NARRATIVE REVISITED

Abstract

This work defends the importance of the Typology of Action, belonging to the interlevel dimension that, due to the levels involved in the analysis, we call Narrative-Discursive: the Pragmatic Dimension, of the Narrative Level, and the Actor Dimension, of the Level Discursive. Its analysis, in addition to highlighting the syncretism of roles, brings to light the Controversy of the Narrative, which is rarely present in contemporary semiotic publications. The Typology is based, according to Barros (1988), on the type of action (acquisition or deprivation) and the actor/actant relationship in the Action Stage (same or different actors in S1/S2). The controversy lies in the presupposition relationship between the two types of action (acquisition/deprivation). Thus, we suggest two types of controversy, alienated and conscious, depending on the involvement of the state subject in the transformation in focus. Therefore, the first type we call Alienated Controversy, with little or no awareness or participation of S1 in the transformation of state: here Appropriation is the reverse of Spoliation. In the other type of controversy, the Conscious Polemic, the role of S1 is preponderant for the permission or awareness of the transformation, with Donation being the reverse of Renunciation. This article presents the theory and practice of the Action Typology.