Author

The form of texts: possibilities and limitations of an «integral» text- typological model

Introduction

The form of texts: possibilities and limitations of an «integral» text- typological model. Explore Coseriu's "linguistics of sense" to define an integral text-typological model. This paper examines the possibilities and limitations of text type as the form of discourse for real texts.

Abstract

The paper explores the possibilities and limitations of a general text typology within the framework of Coseriu’s «text linguistics as a linguistics of sense» (Textlinguistik als Linguistik des Sinns). The investigation draws upon three sources: (i) explicit references to text-typological concepts in Coseriu’s work and the internal organization of this field as recoverable from his illustrations and analyses; (ii) an analogy with Coseriu’s concept of language type; (iii) a consistent pursuit of the theoretical premises of sense construction and sense articulation. We propose a definition of text type as the form of discourse, i.e. as a functionally distinct layer of textual organization – that of the principles which justify in a unitary way the orientation of sense construction in the individual text, beyond the heterogeneity of the text’s constitutive units and strategies. By discussing the presuppositions and consequences of this definition, we aim to ascertain in what way and to what extent it is possible to construct an «integral typology of real texts», as opposed to a mere classification of text-constitutive units, procedures or strategies.

Review

The paper "The form of texts: possibilities and limitations of an «integral» text-typological model" addresses a significant and complex challenge in text linguistics: the development of a comprehensive text typology. By grounding its investigation in Coseriu’s "text linguistics as a linguistics of sense," the authors position their work within a robust theoretical framework, promising a deep conceptual exploration rather than a purely descriptive approach. The abstract clearly articulates the ambition to move beyond fragmented classifications towards an "integral typology of real texts," signaling a valuable contribution to the ongoing discourse on how texts are structured and understood. A key strength of this paper lies in its methodologically sound approach, drawing from three distinct yet interconnected sources: explicit references to Coseriu’s work, an insightful analogy with his concept of language type, and a consistent pursuit of the theoretical premises of sense construction and articulation. The proposed definition of text type as the "form of discourse" – a "functionally distinct layer of textual organization" – is particularly compelling. This definition highlights the overarching principles governing sense construction, aiming to unify understanding across diverse textual units and strategies. This conceptual clarity is crucial for establishing a coherent framework for text typology. While the paper effectively outlines its theoretical foundations and definitional proposals, the abstract leaves some questions regarding the concrete operationalization of the "integral typology" itself. Future readers would likely benefit from more explicit details on how this proposed model tangibly addresses and integrates the "heterogeneity of the text’s constitutive units and strategies" in practice. Specifically, how does the model move from theoretical principles to an actionable typology that can classify "real texts" in a demonstrably integral manner? Nonetheless, the paper presents a highly relevant and theoretically rigorous exploration into a foundational aspect of text linguistics, offering a promising re-evaluation of text-typological models through a rigorous Coseriu-inspired lens.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.