Remediation and enunciative praxis

Abstract

If remediation is concieved as the substitution of one medium for another, generating
the reconfiguration of the contents and the semiotics-objects conveyed by them
(media), it can be considerated a peculiar matter of enunciative praxis, this
conception of an enunciation according to which there would never be an original
enunciation but only enunciations that take up and transform other statements. There
are several questions arising from this premise, which are the subject of this
contribution
(1) First of all it may be attested that the manipulations of the medium (substitution,
combination, derivation or other ones) derive from enunciation: obviously, in
Benveniste’s idea, this is inconceivable and must evolve considerably.
(2) Jean-Marie Floch aproximates the enunciative praxis to the Levi Strauss’
bricolage, but as he conceives it, it does not take into account the medium of
communication, and concerns the innovations obtained by associations and
reconfigurations among several cultural artifacts that already exist. Than the notion
of “remediation” must be evolved to be compatible with that “bricolage”.
(3) The enunciative praxis, from Saussure to Greimas, must explain the persistence
of meanings, interpretations, intercomprehensions, despite the instability an incessant
reformulation of the forms that arouse them. From this angle, what is constant is
worth more than what changes, and remeadion, like bricolage, rests on an oponent
point of view.
This contribution will not solve all the questions but will mainly endeavor to propose
a theorical framework to bring to the enuncionation the ability of admiting the
answers in a coherent way.