A função nomeadora da linguagem: A nominação nas obras de Walter Benjamin, Sigmund Freud, Hans Blumenberg e na Literatura

Abstract

Starting from the theoretical observation, that has already been done, on the subject of naming by Walter Benjamin in “On Language as Such and on the Language of Man” (1916), Sigmund Freud in Totem and Taboo (1913), and Hans Blumenberg in Work on Myth (1979), the present work proposes an investigation on the function that names have in language – the naming function of language. Furthermore, based on the authors' hypotheses, this study sought to connect Literature to the theme of naming through a reflection that relates it to the naming function of language, as opposed to the communicative function of language, as well as a reflection that ponders the relation between naming and narrative. Being it a research belonging to the field of Literary Theory and Comparative Literature, the methodology used was the reading and the critical analysis of the works of Benjamin, Freud and Blumenberg, and the comparative study of their theories, as is the case of Blumenberg and Freud. Still, Blumenberg's idea that there would be a logos for the myth inspired an epistemological analysis in the following chapters. This analysis sought to understand the aesthetic form used by the authors to present their theories – their own myths and metaphors –, pointing to a way of thinking about the literary theory that is present in theoretical literature. It turned out that, for Benjamin, the name reveals a knowledge; for Freud, names are related to a magical conception of the world; and, for Blumenberg, the name functions as identification, being an defense mechanism against anxiety. These findings suggest that the name extrapolates a designative function, as it is also a mythical, metaphorical and rational operation. The scientific activity itself can be understood as an example of naming, given that it makes use of imagination, metaphor and narratives. Calling into question the myth versus logos binarism does not mean homogenizing literary and scientific discourse, but understanding the particularities of literary discourse and the particularities of scientific discourse, as well as the points where these discourses converge and diverge. Finally, this study brings Literary Studies closer to Linguistic Studies, breaking the dualisms that separate form – expression – from meaning, and languagefrom thought.