The (un) classifications of time: theoretical languages, historiography and normativity.

In the past few decades, reflections on the subject of temporality have come to stand out in the historiographic research agenda. This paper aims to perform a comparative analysis of two theoretical proposals which have found repercussions in that agenda: Francois Hartog's, which concentrates in the categories of "historicity regimes" and "presentism," and Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht's, mainly focused on the categories of "chronotope," "slow present," and "latency." Although these categories are sometimes used interchangeably in some texts and debates, they yield important differences, regarding their epistemological (or ontological) foundations and heuristic scope, as well as the manner in which they deliver their diagnosis and prognosis of contemporary experiences, resulting in distinct disciplinary and ethical stances.