Interincomprehension and argumentation in discourse

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a theoretical reflection about the possibilities of articulation between the concept of interincomprehension and the way of considering argumentation in French Discourse Analysis. Based on Maingueneau (1983, 2005), we understand interincomprehension as lack of mutual understanding in interdiscourse. Our perspective of argumentation, in turn, is taken from Orlandi (1998) and Amossy (2006, 2007, 2011). From the finding that interincomprehension establishes the impossibility of a discursive place to access another than itself, we problematize which would be argumentation's role on a discourse theory that does not ignore the fact that interpretation of utterancesstated by the ‘other’ is always a translation, made throughthe rules of the ‘same’. We conclude that argumention still plays an extremely important role, since it is what ensures the existence of each discourse (even temporarily), while it also participates in History order, being this one responsible for changesinthose responses that are provided to attend thetruth aspiration of a given society at one point. To illustrate, in the end, we present an exemplary case in which the relation between interincomprehension, argumentation and history order is evidenced.