Cover of the Aptum Magazine. 2024

The aim of this article is to theoretically substantiate antonymy as a discourse-linguistic category and to analytically examine it. The central question here is how antonymic relations are grammatically constituted in discourse and what communicative functions they fulfill. Following this interest, the main empirical part of the paper presents a case study on antonymy in grammatical constructions consisting of modal verbs, negations and two-part adversative connectors. A central result of the study is that the discourse-grammatical constitution of antonymy entails different functions for political discursive communication. Against this background, we argue that the study of antonymy provides important insights for discursive conceptions of contradictions and therefore offers a rewarding interface for interdisciplinary collaboration between linguistics and Contradiction Studies.


In Aptum. Zeitschrift für Sprachkritik und Sprachkultur 20 (01), 41–70.

print
ISBN: 978-3-96769-433-8

DOI:
10.46771/9783967694345_3

Back to overview
diversity and plurality

“Join us to create more diversity and plurality in knowledge production.”

Gisela Febel
ideal of a contradiction-free world

“Science has long been animated by the ideal of a contradiction-free world in which logical orders could merge with society, politics, culture and language. In the GRC Contradiction Studies we are working on ways of describing the multiplicity and complexity, the danger and beauty of our worlds that clearly go beyond concepts of freedom from contradiction.”

Michi Knecht
every day

“Living in contradictions is what we experience every day. Why do we know so little about it?”

Gisela Febel
sustained engagement

“The history of Western philosophy can be understood as a sustained engagement with contradiction.”

Norman Sieroka
prison of difference

“‘Contradiction is the prison of difference‘ writes the French philosopher Gilles Deleuze. Worlds of Contradiction asks: how can we explain and describe the world without making it more coherent and systematic than it is?”

Michi Knecht