Page 147 - Communication Processes Volume 3 Communication Culture and Confrontation

122 Guy Poitevin

By cognitive forms are understood internal structures of significa-
tion. A broad canvas of sorts, they point to the semantic texture of the
fabric. Their function is to circumscribe fields of cognition, project
modes of apprehension and organization of the lexemes and mythemes
available to the narrator. Each of these forms shows a particular per-
formative capacity.
By hermeneutics are understood a set of interpretative perspectives.
These are categories similar to the weft, those threads woven across a
warp to give the fabric a composite structure. They help to semantically
make sense of the discursive concatenation of events. Several interpre-
tative perspectives are possible and may overlap without exclusivity,
depending upon the level, the angle or the context of reading. The first
immediate level is that of the motivation that prompts the narrator
to recount the myth, often in response to a query of the collector. In
general the referential context in which the myth is remembered give
us the narrator’s point of view. This is the interpretation immediately
offered to the collector and analyst. It may appear partial, limited or ad
hoc to an analyst who is no party to the myth. It may look like a close
sight, prompted by immediate needs. The need is naturally being felt
for a sight from a distance, from a wider perspective or another vantage
position. The second set of two analytic categories comprise attempts
to define two such broader or deeper perspectives. They are gener-
ally complementary hermeneutical viewpoints that specify the inter-
pretative framework of the narrator. They may differ from the narrator’s
viewpoint.
Process refers to the dynamic profile of the discourse as a whole. This
points to the overall achievement, the global discursive aim of the nar-
rative, that is to say, what it actually performs as an act of cognition.
Once the vision displayed by the narrative is realized, one may
further try to fulfil the destiny of the text through reactivating its
objective meaning, here and now, in our present time and space. This
amounts to bringing the internal dynamics of the narrative to bear
upon the context of the present reader or recipient. This exercise looks
for semantically homologous historical referents in different contexts.
We call this a re-contextualization, and it amounts to understanding
ourselves through a confrontation of our condition with the vision and
intentionality of the text.