83

The study of an open-ended inquiry on energy savings highlights the differences between stigma, which reflects the existence of a social standard justified by sanctioning transgression, and condemnation, which criticizes particular aspects of public policies implementing this social standard.The paper first describes the method of investigation and analysis used to identify statements stigmatizing a social standard that is being institutionalized. This approach combines a grammatical analysis of these statements and a semantic analysis of themes identified with a vocabulary of emotions. Using the distinction made by Laurence Kaufmann between the semantic use of On and the semantic use of Nous (“They” and “We”), the analysis attempts to define the kind of community evoked by such statements. Expressions that stigmatize seem to update a community legacy, made up of habits and traditions, whereas statements of condemnation project a community based on the agreement of individuals, thereby constituting a political proposal. This paper shows, however, that these two forms of expression, clearly distinct analytically, can lead to hybrid, or “protopolitical,” forms, which can be useful in understanding the instruments of politicization.