University of Isfahan Metaphysics 2476-3276 10 26 2018 09 23 Revolution in Language:Theory of Meaning Based on Kristeva’s Attitude Revolution in Language:Theory of Meaning Based on Kristeva’s Attitude 17 32 22835 10.22108/mph.2018.109637.1091 FA Hassan Fatzade Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, University of Zanjan, Iran Marzieh Darabi MA, Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University North Tehran Branch, Iran Shamsolmolouk Mostafavi Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University North Tehran Branch, Iran Journal Article 2018 02 13 The significance theory posited by Kristeva may be assumed as influenced by two paradigms of phenomenology and psychoanalysis. In fact, Kristeva shows an evolutionary return to phenomenology and psychiatry by expressing function of significance or in other words exposure to signifying process, the semiotic and the symbolic. She referred to phenomenology to deepen interpretation of concept and description and interpretation of “the symbolic” and inherited “the semiotic” from Freudian psychoanalysis. Impressed by Husserl phenomenology, Kristeva relates phenomenology to psychoanalysis and tries thereby to propose a theory for signifying process. Confronting the phenomenological and psychoanalytical theories with each other prepares platform for Kristeva to develop her theory of meaning and subjectivity. In the age of dominance of the symbolic, she tries to set the possibility of refractoriness and reproducing of meaning to an arbitrary and continual process. By exploiting this dynamic concept, she is going to produce a different representation in language, a revolution in language and cultural structures. The present essay tends to examine effect of factors such as Freudian-Lacanian psychoanalysis and phenomenology in developing theory of meaning, after a review on the intervening elements in signifying process in Kristeva’s thought. In fact, Kristeva’s project is the other side of Derridean deconstructing of metaphysical language. The significance theory posited by Kristeva may be assumed as influenced by two paradigms of phenomenology and psychoanalysis. In fact, Kristeva shows an evolutionary return to phenomenology and psychiatry by expressing function of significance or in other words exposure to signifying process, the semiotic and the symbolic. She referred to phenomenology to deepen interpretation of concept and description and interpretation of “the symbolic” and inherited “the semiotic” from Freudian psychoanalysis. Impressed by Husserl phenomenology, Kristeva relates phenomenology to psychoanalysis and tries thereby to propose a theory for signifying process. Confronting the phenomenological and psychoanalytical theories with each other prepares platform for Kristeva to develop her theory of meaning and subjectivity. In the age of dominance of the symbolic, she tries to set the possibility of refractoriness and reproducing of meaning to an arbitrary and continual process. By exploiting this dynamic concept, she is going to produce a different representation in language, a revolution in language and cultural structures. The present essay tends to examine effect of factors such as Freudian-Lacanian psychoanalysis and phenomenology in developing theory of meaning, after a review on the intervening elements in signifying process in Kristeva’s thought. In fact, Kristeva’s project is the other side of Derridean deconstructing of metaphysical language. https://mph.ui.ac.ir/article_22835_85d710cf248e42dbdffea1d8773b6fea.pdf