Archives par mot-clé : laurent cesalli

PROGRAMME Journée d’étude: “Que veut dire ‘signifier’?”, 13 Avril 2018, GENEVE

Le séminaire  “Logique et grammaire chez deux Antoine (Arnauld et Marty)”  se conclura par une journée d’études, le 13 Avril 2018 – Uni Bastions, salle B101, Genève:

Que veut dire ‘signifier’? Quelques réponses modernes et contemporaines.

Journée d’études organisée par Hélène Leblanc et Laurent Cesalli

(ANR/FNS SÊMAINÔ – Inbegriff – Geneva Seminar for Austro-German Philosophy


9h30-11h : Earline Jennifer Ashworth (University of Waterloo) – « Signs and signification as treated by Iberian logicians from Domingo de Soto to John of St Thomas »


11h30-13h : Lucien Vinciguerra (Université de Lille 3) (titre en attente)


14h30-16h : Martine Pécharman (CRAL, UMR 8566, CNRS-EHESS) « Sémantique et sémiotique selon Condillac »


16h30-18h : Claudio Majolino (Université Lille 3) « Phénoménologie des actions langagières. Husserl et Marty »


*    *    *


Séminaire SÊMAINÔ II (Roger Bacon)(Genève 2017)

«Roger Bacon, De signis: questions d’interprétation”

Lieu : Université de Genève

Dates : Les lundi 30 janvier, 20 février, 13 mars, 3 avril et 24 avril 2017, 13h00-16h00

Responsables: Laurent Cesalli (Université de Genève / SÊMAINÔ) ; Frédéric Goubier (Université de Genève / SÊMAINÔ)

Contact : ;

Congrès International: “Semantic and psychology in medieval semantics”, Genève, Novembre 2017

Congrès International:

Sémantique et Psychologie dans la Philosophie Médiévale Arabe et latine

Semantics and Psychology in Medieval Arab and Latin Philosophies

23-25 Novembre 2017, Genève

Responsables: Laurent Cesalli (Université de Genève / SÊMAINÔ) ; Frédéric Goubier (Université de Genève / SÊMAINÔ)

Contact : ;



Théories du langage et de la signification dans la philosophie antique, Genève, 20 et 21 octobre 2016

Théories du langage et de la signification dans la philosophie antique

Theories of Language and Meaning in Ancient Philosophy

Genève, Fondation Hardt, 20-21 octobre 2016

Jeudi 20 octobre

12h30-14h00 Déjeuner à la Fondation

14h00-15h30 Session 1

Oratrice Maddalena Bonelli (Università degli studi di Bergamo)

Le commentaire disparu d’Alexandre d’Aphrodise sur le De interpretatione

Commentateur Ioannis Papachristou (University of Athens)

Président Claudio Majolino (Université de Lille III)

15h30 Café

16h00-17h30 Session 2

Oratrice Laura Castelli (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München)

Aristotle’s views about signifying the same / signifying one <thing>

Commentatrice Annamaria Schiaparelli (Université de Genève)

Présidente Katerina Ierodiakonou (Université de Genève)

19h00 Dîner en ville

Vendredi 21octobre

09h00-10h30 Session 3

Orateur Leone Gazziero (CNRS, Lille)

πειρος πρτος τν ψφον βαλέτω”. Mots, cailloux et autres choses dans le prologue des Sophistici elenchi d’Aristote

Commentatrice Carla Di Martino (Université de Lille III)

Président André-Louis Rey (Université de Genève)

10h30 Café

11h00-12h30 Session 4

Orateur Nicolas Zaks (Université Libre de Bruxelles)

L’analyse platonicienne de la négation dans le Sophiste 257b-c

Commentateur Alexander Bown (Université de Genève)

Président Paolo Crivelli (Université de Genève)

12h30-14h00 Déjeuner à la Fondation

cf. aussi le site du Département de Philosophie de L’université de Genève




Leone Gazziero (Directeur Lille)

Laurent Cesalli (Directeur Genève)

Claudio Majolino (Co-Directeur Lille)

Carla Di Martino (Post-doc Lille)

Aurélien Djian (Post-doc Lille)

Frédéric Goubier (Post-doc Genève)

Hélène Leblanc (Post-doc Genève)



Why do we need linguistic signs?”

What is a linguistic sign and how does it mean what it means?”

What effects do linguistic signs have and what precautions are called for when we avail ourselves of them in order to convey our thoughts and feelings, argue with other people or try to move them in any way?”

This complex set of issues, whose roots go back at least as far as Plato and Aristotle, is still of paramount importance today, insofar as it governs the most fundamental questions we ask about language, its meaning and its uses. Throughout debates whose emphasis has shifted hence and forth between logic, grammar, theology, as well as rhetoric and literature, our understanding of what it takes for a linguistic expressions to be meaningful has come in a variety of ways. In order to make sense of this diversity, the consideration of results, even the most recent ones in linguistics, cognitive sciences and information sciences, however essential, is not enough. What is required first and foremost is a second-order model allowing us to catalogue, classify and differentially analyse theoretical patterns that have been implemented throughout history in order to account for the complex phenomenon of meaning as a property of linguistic expression, as a correlate to contents of thought, or else as a product of communication practices.

SÊMAINÔ research project is meant to develop such a methodological device by way of historical comparison between relevant authors and theories. Used as a heuristic filter, it will help us discover and assess (filter “in” and “out”) differences and similarities between them.

These as well as other elements of continuity and discontinuity, whose charting is one of the project’s priorities, will be instrumental in identifying both past patterns and margins for future development. Philosophical inquiries into how language works and what signification is have much to gain from comparative description and mapping of transformations. As a matter of fact, on the one hand, we are confronted with a wide variety of theories which differ one from another by the emphasis they place on different aspects, be it physical (linguistic signs have a materiality and a physiology of their own), semantic (meaning, reference and everything that falls between), psychological (the actual handling of signs in its intellectual and affective dimension) or pragmatic (usage situations of linguistic expression, both successful and biased). On the other hand, for all their differences and peculiarities, linguistic and semantic theories are rooted in conceptual networks whose divergences often reside in matters of detail and local calibration: a number of different authors, who all have their own historical contexts, have been asking time and again similar questions about what are, in fact, linguistic signs, how can they be lent significance and what precautions are required when we make use of them.