I so much agree with You!
But 'formula' propses, that it is a....thing. well i
suspect that it is not thing, but more like......
"previousness" and "individuality" opposed to the
abstractness of the logical and grammar analisis,
nevermind how silly does that sounds.
As I see, i am replying to my own question:-)))
thanks for the answer!
--- Lionel Boxer <lboxer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I agree with Jivko
> First a question:
> The word ontic - is that like a piece of a larger
> ontology; for it to be
> ontological, it needs to be combined with out
> enonces or expaned into an
> There is likely something useful in l'enonce.
> I get the feeling that enonce is an important
> concept or tool in the
> designation of a collection of texts to a proper
> name. Perhaps a 'formula'
> that enables a oeuvre to be realised or articulated.
> So from observing a discourse, it is possible to see
> patterns that can be
> connected by an enonce to form some sort of
> component element that is built
> into the whole oeuvre. I get the impression that
> the idea of oeuvre is to
> develop some sort of unity.
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.