Darcilia Simões | UNIRIO - Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (original) (raw)

Papers by Darcilia Simões

Whereas Mario de Carvalho, in the children/juvenile story O homem que engoliu a lua-The Man Who S... more Whereas Mario de Carvalho, in the children/juvenile story O homem que engoliu a lua-The Man Who Swallowed the Moon-uses the intersemiotic translation (Plaza, 1982) when retelling the same tale, formerly published as O tombo da lua (Casos do Beco das Sardinheiras)-The Fall of the Moon (Cases from Sardinheiras Alley), which was intended for adult audience, we sought, in the semiotic considerations about instances of communication, to discuss the resources used in the former and later versions of the text, in the composition of the presentation context. We sought to create an interpretative framework of distinct semiosis – practiced between the verbal and the nonverbal – in order to describe the processes of narrative present in both texts. Looking at O tombo da lua-The Fall of The Moon and O homem que engoliu a lua-The Man Who Swallowed the Moon, created for different instances of communication (Geraldi, 1996), the study conducted a survey of icons and indexes which combine themselves in the creation of the narrative, apparently aiming to involve/conduct the audience during the development of the motif, through the signal instruments available in each one of the-verbal and nonverbal-systems used in the creation of the two texts. Contemplating the signs through the lens of Peircean semiotics, we outlined an analytical framework to compare the schemes implemented in building different presentation contexts: a) adult reading, complicated by the experiences of the interlocutors/readers, which are almost always protected from dreaming; b) children or juvenile reading, uncomplicated by the availability to new experiences, usually full of dreams and fantasies, opened for the unusual. The 21st century calls for the preparation and development of proficient readers. The Internet boom has promoted new ways to read, and readers must have tools and skills which enable them to face multiple texts with reliability. That means, in general, there is no more room for a naive reader (Eco, 1995). The semantic readers-who suffice themselves with the meaning of the words in the dictionary-would nowadays be the ones with more limited reading conditions, because the contemporary texts-especially the ones on the Internet-gather more than one code, more than one language, which are associated for the creation of a text with dynamic characteristics, to capture and keep the attention of the reader, besides provoking reflection, discussions; or at least establishing a healthy imbalance that leads the reader to think. Eco (1995: 11-12) presents a distinction between semantic readers and semiotic readers. The first ones, guided by the data on the surface of the text, would fill it of shallow meaning, while the semiotic readers would seek the structural reasons for text to produce such semantic interpretations, leading the reader to raise a central semiotic concern: why does it mean what it means and not something else? In accordance with Eco, we believe texts can be read in a superficial way, without any major political or ideological commitment, readers would suffice themselves with meanings found in a dictionary and also with the aid of some common sense. However, the commitment to the training and development of proficient readers, lead us to seek the semiotic-or critical-readers, since they will be

Whereas Mario de Carvalho, in the children/juvenile story O homem que engoliu a lua-The Man Who S... more Whereas Mario de Carvalho, in the children/juvenile story O homem que engoliu a lua-The Man Who Swallowed the Moon-uses the intersemiotic translation (Plaza, 1982) when retelling the same tale, formerly published as O tombo da lua (Casos do Beco das Sardinheiras)-The Fall of the Moon (Cases from Sardinheiras Alley), which was intended for adult audience, we sought, in the semiotic considerations about instances of communication, to discuss the resources used in the former and later versions of the text, in the composition of the presentation context. We sought to create an interpretative framework of distinct semiosis – practiced between the verbal and the nonverbal – in order to describe the processes of narrative present in both texts. Looking at O tombo da lua-The Fall of The Moon and O homem que engoliu a lua-The Man Who Swallowed the Moon, created for different instances of communication (Geraldi, 1996), the study conducted a survey of icons and indexes which combine themselves in the creation of the narrative, apparently aiming to involve/conduct the audience during the development of the motif, through the signal instruments available in each one of the-verbal and nonverbal-systems used in the creation of the two texts. Contemplating the signs through the lens of Peircean semiotics, we outlined an analytical framework to compare the schemes implemented in building different presentation contexts: a) adult reading, complicated by the experiences of the interlocutors/readers, which are almost always protected from dreaming; b) children or juvenile reading, uncomplicated by the availability to new experiences, usually full of dreams and fantasies, opened for the unusual. The 21st century calls for the preparation and development of proficient readers. The Internet boom has promoted new ways to read, and readers must have tools and skills which enable them to face multiple texts with reliability. That means, in general, there is no more room for a naive reader (Eco, 1995). The semantic readers-who suffice themselves with the meaning of the words in the dictionary-would nowadays be the ones with more limited reading conditions, because the contemporary texts-especially the ones on the Internet-gather more than one code, more than one language, which are associated for the creation of a text with dynamic characteristics, to capture and keep the attention of the reader, besides provoking reflection, discussions; or at least establishing a healthy imbalance that leads the reader to think. Eco (1995: 11-12) presents a distinction between semantic readers and semiotic readers. The first ones, guided by the data on the surface of the text, would fill it of shallow meaning, while the semiotic readers would seek the structural reasons for text to produce such semantic interpretations, leading the reader to raise a central semiotic concern: why does it mean what it means and not something else? In accordance with Eco, we believe texts can be read in a superficial way, without any major political or ideological commitment, readers would suffice themselves with meanings found in a dictionary and also with the aid of some common sense. However, the commitment to the training and development of proficient readers, lead us to seek the semiotic-or critical-readers, since they will be