FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE
NATURE OF THE LINGUISTIC SIGN
Ferdinand de Saussure was Swiss linguist born in 1857 in Geneva. His radical views
on language and the concept of signs revolutionised all branches Western philosophy.
Beginning from the study of language, Saussure’s views were widely appreciated by
most philosophers of the time. With Claude Levi Strauss’ observations in
Anthropology, a new school of thought, Structuralism, got established.
His work Course in General Linguistics was published in 1916, three years after his
death. The book was edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye based on his
lecture notes. This became a seminal linguistics work, perhaps the most important
philosophical work, in the 20th century.
STRUCTURALISM AN INTRODUCTION
THE TERM
Structuralism is a way of thinking about the world which is predominantly concerned
with the perceptions and description of structures. At its simplest, structuralism claims
that the nature of every element in any given situation has no significance by itself,
and in fact is determined by all the other elements involved in that situation. The full
significance of any entity cannot be perceived unless and until it is integrated into the
structure of which it forms a part. Structuralists believe that all human activity is
constructed, not natural or "essential." Consequently, it is the systems of organization
that are important (what we do is always a matter of selection within a given
construct). By this formulation, "any activity, from the actions of a narrative to not
eating one's peas with a knife, takes place within a system of differences and has
meaning only in its relation to other possible activities within that system, not to some
meaning that emanates from nature or the divine"
EVOLUTION
The roots of Structuralism lie in the linguistic observations of the Swiss linguist
Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913), summarised in his seminal work, Course in
General Linguistics. Apart from Saussure, the anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss and
the literary critic Roland Barthes are The major figures on the lead. During the 50 ‘s the
movement was in vogue through out Europe and especially France.
Saussurian linguistics was innovative and radical in many ways. During the nineteenth
century, linguists were mainly interested in the historical aspects of language.
Saussure instead concentrated on the patterns and functions of language in use at the
time. His studies were mainly on the functions of grammatical structures and he
emphasized how meanings are maintained and preserved. Primarily, he argues that
language is a sign system:
Language is a system of signs that express ideas, and is therefore comparable to a
system of writing, the alphabet of the deaf/mute, symbolic rites, polite formulas,
military signals etc. But it is the most important of all these systems.
A sign is a complex of signifier (symbol) and signified (referent). The symbol could be
verbal or an image. Regarding the relation between the signifier and the signified,
Saussure made three major pronouncements:
1
a)
Arbitrary nature of Sign.
The foremost assumption is that meaning occurs through difference. Meaning is not
identification of the sign with object in the real world or with some pre-existent
concept or essential reality; rather it is generated by difference among signs in a
signifying system. Saussure argues that there is no natural or innate relation
between the signifier and the signified. What ever relation that exists is just imposed
and maintained by culture. Let’s take two examples.
Think about the common term water. In English we call it so. An Italian calls it acqua.
A Malayali terms it vellam and a Tamil thanni, and in Mumbai it is paani. The same
object, different names. Suppose one day we all decide to use another word to call this
thing. Will there be any problem, if all agree?
Second example. Think about the train running between Mangalore and Trivandrum
every night.
6348 Mangalore Trivandrum Express. What is common between the train that ran on
Monday and Tuesday? As Saussure suggests, the engine changes, compartments
change, travellers change, driver changes. What remains common? You would say
time. Sorry. Even when it runs hours late, it is called by the same name. Then what?
Oh the route, Mangalore Trivandrum. Suppose one day it runs only up to Quilon due to
technical problems. What will you call it?
6348 Mangalore Quilon Express? No. it
remains the same. 6348 Mangalore Trivandrum Express.
In this case the object
(signified) changes continually and the term (signifier) remains static.This is the case
of all signs. Hence Saussure concludes that the relation between the signifier and the
signified is arbitrary.
b) Meaning is Relational.
Saussure argued that signs only make sense as part of a formal, generalized and
abstract system. His conception of meaning was purely structural and relational rather
than referential: primacy is given to relationships rather than to things (the meaning
of signs was seen as lying in their systematic relation to each other rather than
deriving from any inherent features of signifiers or any reference to material things).
Saussure did not define signs in terms of some 'essential' or intrinsic nature. For
Saussure, signs refer primarily to each other. Within the language system, 'everything
depends on relations'.
No sign makes sense on its own but only in relation to other signs. Both signifier and
signified are purely relational entities . This notion can be hard to understand since we
may feel that an individual word such as 'tree' does have some meaning for us, but its
meaning depends on its context in relation to the other words with which it is used.
The meaning of any word depends upon its relation with other words, which are
adjoining with it in meaning. This notion is explained by using the phonemic theory of
difference. We cannot arrive at a definition of the phoneme ‘b’ except by means of
distinguishing it from other phonemes like ‘p, d, k, t’ etc. For example, the meaning
of the word king is related with its position in the ‘syntagmatic chain’:
Girl, Lady, Woman, Spinster, Crone…
The meaning of any one of these will be altered if any one of the words is deleted from
the chain. Saussure even pronounced that in language there are only differences
without positive terms.
c) Language Constitutes Reality:
The traditional notion has been that language is a medium of communication and it
communicates a reality, which is pre-existent. On the contrary, Saussure argues that it
is language, which constitutes reality. How many seasons are there in a year? An
English teacher would say “four”. If we ask it in a Sanskrit class, the teacher would say
“six” and start naming them. Why? The Saussurian answer is that English language
2
has four terms and Sanskrit six. What is real about seasons? It is neither six nor four. It
is rather a process of gradual change. It is the word, which we use to describe a
person or object that defines its quality. Besides, Structuralism notes that much of our
imaginative world is structured of, and structured by, binary oppositions
(rough/smooth, hot/cold, terrorist/freedom fighter); these oppositions structure
meaning. What is the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter? Which word
shall we use to describe Bhagath Singh? You would say “freedom fighter”. Right. But
the white rulers then preferred the term “terrorist”. A Tamil suicidal Tiger who bombs a
military post in Colombo is a terrorist for the army while he is a freedom fighter for the
LTTE. For a Keralite, who is he? Freedom fighter or terrorist? If you use the first term,
he is a freedom fighter and if you go for the second, he is a terrorist. The fellow
remains the same. Which book you are reading right now? A Guide, Study aid,
reference book or is it a book on literary theory? For those who call it Guide, it is a
guide and for those who consider it a book on literary theory, it is so (am sure not
many won’t say so). But for me, it is a book I edited or wrote.
Saussure says,
language constitutes reality.
d) Langue and Parole
Langue
Langue is the whole system of language that precedes and makes speech possible. A
sign is a basic unit of langue.
Learning a language, we master the system of grammar, spelling, syntax and
punctuation. These are all elements of langue.
Langue is a system in that it has a large number of elements whereby meaning is
created in the arrangements of its elements and the consequent relationships
between these arranged elements.
Parole
Parole is the concrete use of the language, the actual utterances. It is an external
manifestation of langue. It is the usage of the system, but not the system.
By defining Langue and Parole, Saussure differentiates between the language and
how it is used, and therefore enabling these two very different things to be studied as
separate entities.
As a structuralist, Saussure was interested more in la langue than parole. It was the
system by which meaning could be created that was of interest rather than individual
instances of its use.
Application of Structuralism in literary studies:
•
•
•
Structuralism enables both the reading of texts and the reading of cultures:
through semiotics, structuralism leads us to see everything as 'textual', that is,
composed of signs, governed by conventions of meaning, ordered according to
a pattern of relationships.
Structuralism enables us to approach texts historically or trans-culturally in a
disciplined way. Whenever we have to look more objectively, when we are
transversing barriers of time, say, or of culture or interest, then the structural
method, the search for principles of order, coherence and meaning, become
dominant.
This sort of study opens up texts which had been closed to such study because
they were not considered as literature but as 'popular writing' or 'private
writing.' When the rules of literary meaning are seen as just another set of
rules for a signifying arena of a culture, then literature loses some aspects of its
privileged status, but gains relationship to other areas of signification. Now it
3
•
is possible to study literature, fashion, rituals, food habits etc as similar
signifying systems.
Now it is established that everything can be known by virtue of its belonging to
a signifying system. Text is a signifying system. So it can be concluded that
everything is textual. It has diverse implications: Firstly, All documents can be
studied as texts -- for instance, history or sociology can be analyzed the way
literature can be. Secondly, all of culture can be studied as text. Belief-systems
can be studied textually and their role in constructing the nature of the self
understood.
THE ESSAY: DETAILS
Saussure’s classical treatise, Course in General Linguistics was published in 1916,
three years after his death. The book was edited by Charles Bally and Albert
Sechehaye based on his lecture notes. Nature of linguistic Sign is an essay from
Course in General Linguistics.
The book is a summary of his lectures at the
University of Geneva from 1906 to 1911. Saussure examines the relationship
between speech and the evolution of language, and investigates language as a
structured system of signs.
The text includes an introduction to the history and subject-matter of linguistics;
an appendix entitled “Principles of Phonology;” and it has five main sections.
Part 1 General Principles, Part 2 Synchronic Linguistics, Part 3 Diachronic
Linguistics, Part 4 Geographical Linguistics, and Part 5 Concerning Retrospective
Linguistics.
Nature of linguistic Sign is taken from Part One: General Principles.
ANALYTICAL SUMMARY OF THE ESSAY
At the very beginning itself Saussure attacks the three common concepts regarding
language.
1. Some people regard language, when reduced to its elements, as a namingprocess only – a list of words, each corresponding to the thing that it names.
2. It assumes that ready-made ideas exist before words.
3. It lets us assume that the linking of a name and a thing is a very simple
operation.
Obviously his task is to rework these false concepts.
Linguistics is the study of language, or the study of the manifestations of human
speech. besides linguistics is concerned with the history of languages, and with the
social or cultural influences that shape the development of language.
Saussure then differentiates between language (langue) and the activity of speaking
(parole).
4
(See the earlier section to understand it well ) Speaking is an activity of the individual
and language is a system of signs that comes into existence through the activity of
speech. Written language is the record of spoken language.
Now he analyses the spoken language. Any spoken language is a link between
thought and sound, and is a means for thought to be expressed as sound. Thoughts
are be ordered, and sounds have to be articulated, for language to occur. This enables
communication. Saussure says that language is really a borderland between thought
and sound, where thought and sound combine to provide communication.
The linguistic sign unites, not a thing and a name, but a concept and a soundimage. The latter is not the material sound, a purely physical thing, but the
psychological imprint of the sound, the impression that it makes on our senses.
The sound-image is sensory, and if I happen to call it "material," it is only in that
sense, and by way of opposing it to the other term of the association, the
concept, which is generally more abstract.
Language is a product of the speaker’s communication of signs to the listener. Spoken
language includes the communication of concepts by means of sound-images from the
speaker to the listener. Saussure says that a linguistic sign is a combination of a
concept and a sound-image. The concept is the signified, and the sound-image is the
signifier. The combination of the signifier and the signified is arbitrary; i.e., any soundimage can conceivably be used to signify a particular concept.
The linguistic sign is then a two-sided psychological entity that can be
represented by the drawing:
Saussure illustrates his arguments with the help of a diagram.
“A linguistic sign is not a link between a thing and a name, but between a concept and
a sound pattern. The sound pattern is not actually a sound; for a sound is something
physical. A sound pattern is the hearer's psychological impression of a sound, as given
to him by the evidence of his senses. This sound pattern may be called a 'material'
element only in that it is the representation of our sensory impressions. The sound
pattern may thus be distinguished from the other element associated with it in a
linguistic sign. This other element is generally of a more abstract kind: the concept”
Saussure noted that his choice of the terms signifier and signified helped to indicate
'the distinction which separates each from the other' . Despite this, and the horizontal
bar in his diagram of the sign, Saussure stressed that sound and thought (or the
signifier and the signified) were as inseparable as the two sides of a piece of paper .
They were 'intimately linked' in the mind 'by an associative link' - 'each triggers the
other'. Saussure presented these elements as wholly interdependent, neither preexisting the other. Within the context of spoken language, a sign could not consist of
5
sound without sense or of sense without sound. He used the two arrows in the diagram
to suggest their interaction. The bar and the opposition nevertheless suggests that the
signifier and the signified can be distinguished for analytical purposes.
Then he puts forward the three basic concepts of language.
1. Arbitrary nature of the sign
2. Meaning is relational.
3. Language constitutes reality.
Linguistic signs are by nature linear, because they represent a span in a single
dimension. Auditory signifiers are linear, because they succeed each other or form a
chain. Visual signifiers, in contrast, may be grouped simultaneously in several
dimensions.
Saussure maintains that written language exists for the purpose of representing
spoken language. A written word is an image of a vocal sign.
Language is a structured system of arbitrary signs. On the other hand, symbols are not
arbitrary. A symbol may be a signifier, but in contrast to a sign, a symbol is never
completely arbitrary. A symbol has a rational relationship with what is signified.
A sign must have both a signifier and a signified. You cannot have a totally
meaningless signifier or a completely formless signified . A sign is a recognizable
combination of a signifier with a particular signified. The same signifier (the word
'open') could stand for a different signified (and thus be a different sign) if it were on a
push-button inside a lift ('push to open door'). Similarly, many signifiers could stand for
the concept 'open' (for instance, on top of a packing carton, a small outline of a box
with an open flap for 'open this end') - again, with each unique pairing constituting a
different sign.
Linguistic signs may, to a varying extent, be changeable or unchangeable. Deterrents
to linguistic change include: the arbitrary nature of signs, the multiplicity of signs
necessary to form a language, and the complexity of the structure of language.
Next comes the concept of Synchronic linguistics and diachronic linguistics. Synchronic
(static) linguistics is the study of language at a particular point in time. Diachronic
(evolutionary) linguistics is the study of the history or evolution of language.
Diachronic change originates in the social activity of speech. Changes occur in
individual patterns of speaking before becoming more widely accepted as a part of
language. Speaking is an activity which involves oral and auditory communication
between individuals. Language is the set of rules by which individuals are able to
understand each other.
Nothing enters written language without having been tested in spoken language.
Language is changed by the rearranging and reinterpreting of its units. The units of
language can have a synchronic or diachronic arrangement.
The linguistic value of a word (a signifier) comes from its property of standing for a
concept (the signified). The value of the signified comes from its relation to other
concepts. The value of the complete sign comes from the way in which it unites the
signifier and the signified.
6
The meaning of signs is established by their relation to each other. The relation of
signs to each other forms the structure of language. Synchronic reality is found in the
structure of language at a given point in time. Diachronic reality is found in changes of
language over a period of time.
Language has an inner duality, which is manifested by the interaction of the synchronic
and diachronic, the syntagmatic and associative, the signifier and signified.
We cannot say that it is Saussure who first of all put forward these arguments. The
concept of structure is as old as the philosophy. Aristotle had noted that 'there can be
no natural connection between the sound of any language and the things signified' In
Plato's Cratylus, Hermogenes urged Socrates to accept that 'whatever name you give
to a thing is its right name; and if you give up that name and change it for another, the
later name is no less correct than the earlier, just as we change the name of our
servants; for I think no name belongs to a particular thing by nature' 'That which we
call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet', as Shakespeare put it. It is in the
first two decades of the 20th century that it got established in Western thought.
Saussure was the most important figure to bring about this kind of a shift in focus, let’s
say.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1.
Explain Saussure’s concept of the arbitrariness of the sign?
The concept of the arbitrariness of the sign is foundational in Saussurian linguistics. In
the first part of the essay Saussure writes: “The bond between the signifier and the
signified is arbitrary. Since I mean by sign the whole that results from the associating
of the signifier with the signified, I can simple say: the linguistic sign is arbitrary”.
Although the signifier is treated by its users as 'standing for' the signified, Saussurean
semioticians emphasize that there is no necessary, intrinsic, direct or inevitable
relationship between the signifier and the signified. Saussure stressed the arbitrariness
of the sign - more specifically the arbitrariness of the link between the signifier and
the signified He was focusing on linguistic signs, seeing language as the most
important sign system; for Saussure, the arbitrary nature of the sign was the first
principle of language arbitrariness was identified later by Charles Hockett as a key
'design feature' of language . The feature of arbitrariness may indeed help to account
for the extraordinary versatility of language . In the context of natural language,
Saussure stressed that there is no inherent, essential, 'transparent', self-evident or
'natural' connection between the signifier and the signified - between the sound or
shape of a word and the concept to which it refers Note that Saussure himself avoids
directly relating the principle of arbitrariness to the relationship between language and
an external world, but that subsequent commentators often do, and indeed, lurking
behind the purely conceptual 'signified' one can often detect Saussure's allusion to
real-world referents . In language at least, the form of the signifier is not determined
by what it signifies: there is nothing 'treeish' about the word 'tree'. Languages differ, of
course, in how they refer to the same referent. No specific signifier is 'naturally' more
suited to a signified than any other signifier; in principle any signifier could represent
any signified. Saussure observed that 'there is nothing at all to prevent the association
of any idea whatsoever with any sequence of sounds whatsoever' 'the process which
selects one particular sound-sequence to correspond to one particular idea is
completely arbitrary'
7
2. Explain Saussure’s concept of the sign.
Saussure offered a 'dyadic' or two-part model of the sign. He defined a sign as being
composed of: a 'signifier' - the form which the sign takes; and the 'signified' - the
concept it represents.
The sign is the whole that results from the association of the signifier with the signified.
The relationship between the signifier and the signified is referred to as 'signification',
and this is represented in the Saussurean diagram by the arrows. The horizontal line
marking the two elements of the sign is referred to as 'the bar'.
If we take a linguistic example, the word 'Open' (when it is invested with meaning by
someone who encounters it on a shop doorway) is a sign consisting of:
a signifier: the word open;
a signified concept: that the shop is open for business.
A sign must have both a signifier and a signified. You cannot have a totally
meaningless signifier or a completely formless signified . A sign is a recognizable
combination of a signifier with a particular signified. The same signifier could stand for
a different signifieds. (As in the case of the train, 6348 Mangalore Trivandrum Express)
Similarly, many signifiers could stand for the same signified. (As in the case of the
words, water, vellam, thanni, paani)
Saussure noted that his choice of the terms signifier and signified helped to indicate
'the distinction which separates each from the other'. Saussure stressed that sound
and thought (or the signifier and the signified) were as inseparable as the two sides of
a piece of paper . They were 'intimately linked' in the mind 'by an associative link' 'each triggers the other'. Saussure presented these elements as wholly
interdependent, neither pre-existing the other. Within the context of spoken language,
a sign could not consist of sound without sense or of sense without sound.
3. How does Saussure establish that meaning is relational?
Saussure argued that signs only make sense as part of a formal, generalized and
abstract system. His conception of meaning was purely structural and relational rather
than referential: primacy is given to relationships rather than to things (the meaning of
signs was seen as lying in their systematic relation to each other rather than deriving
from any inherent features of signifiers or any reference to material things). Saussure
did not define signs in terms of some 'essential' or intrinsic nature. For Saussure, signs
refer primarily to each other. Within the language system, 'everything depends on
relations'.
No sign makes sense on its own but only in relation to other signs. Both signifier and
signified are purely relational entities . This notion can be hard to understand since we
may feel that an individual word such as 'tree' does have some meaning for us, but its
meaning depends on its context in relation to the other words with which it is used.
The 'value' of a sign depends on its relations with other signs within the system - a sign
has no 'absolute' value independent of this context. Saussure uses an analogy with the
game of chess, noting that the value of each piece depends on its position on the
8
chessboard. The sign is more than the sum of its parts. Whilst signification - what is
signified - clearly depends on the relationship between the two parts of the sign, the
value of a sign is determined by the relationships between the sign and other signs
within the system as a whole.
The meaning of any word depends upon its relation with other words, which are
adjoining with it in meaning. This notion is explained by using the phonemic theory of
difference. We cannot arrive at a definition of the phoneme ‘k’ except by means of
distinguishing it from other phonemes like ‘p, d, b, t’ etc. For example, the meaning of
the word house is related with its position in the ‘syntagmatic chain’:
Shed, Hut, Hovel, House, Flat, Mansion, Bungalow, Palace…
The meaning of any one of these will be altered if any one of the words is deleted from
the chain. Saussure even pronounced that in language there are only differences
without positive terms.
4. Explain ‘binary opposites’?. Or
5. The concept of negative differentiation.
In simple terms, binary opposites are pairs of signs with opposite meanings. Many
examples are there in English. Hot/ cold, good/ bad, black/ white and so on. Saussure
thinks beyond this. He emphasized the negative, oppositional differences between
signs, and the key relationships in structuralist analysis are binary oppositions (such as
nature/culture, life/death). Saussure argued that 'concepts... are defined not positively,
in terms of their content, but negatively by contrast with other items in the same
system. What characterizes each most exactly is being whatever the others are not'.
We understand day as what is not night. A population which hasn’t ever experienced
the pains of war will not fully understand the sense of the term peace. This notion may
initially seem mystifying. The concept of negative differentiation becomes clearer if we
consider how we might teach someone who did not share our language what we mean
by the term 'thick'. It is impossible to show them a range of different objects which are
thick. Because an object is neither thick nor thin until it is differentiated from another
one. So we would place two books. One has 100 pages the other 500. The second one
is thick. The listener understands very clearly. The word ‘thick’ derives its meaning
from its opposition to the term ‘thin’. As for his emphasis on negative differences,
Saussure remarks that although both the signified and the signifier are purely
differential and negative when considered separately, the sign in which they are
combined is a positive term.
6.
Language is a system of differences: Explain.
or
7.
‘ In a language there are only differences’. Explain
9
Saussure's relational conception of meaning was specifically differential. He
emphasized the differences between signs. Language for him was a system of
functional differences and oppositions. 'In a language, as in every other semiological
system, what distinguishes a sign is what constitutes it'. What gives the letter ‘C’ its
meaning is its difference from other letters like, O or D or G or Q or U and so on. We
can beautify the letter C as much as we can. But it should not be O or D or G or Q or U.
Another example is that of dress which is a language. It is a sign system. The clothes
that we wear send certain messages. Certain dress we wear only at home and in class
or outside, certain others. For example, churidar is a respectable dress on campus. But
a maxie is not. But the element of respectability has nothing to do with the extent of
the body being covered or so. The same thing as a maxie when in black is a
respectable religious dress for women on campus. The value that these clothes have is
arbitrary just as in the case of signs in a language. The concept of difference turns very
clear once we think it in terms of dress code. What makes a costume meaningful,
fashionable or respectable is its difference from other clothes. Advertising furnishes
another good example of this notion, since what matters in 'positioning' a product is
not the relationship of advertising signifiers to real-world referents, but the
differentiation of each sign from the others to which it is related. In other words,
relation/difference is a pair of binary opposites. Saussure's concept of the relational
identity of signs is at the heart of structuralist theory. Structuralist analysis focuses on
the structural relations which are functional in the signifying system at a particular
moment in history. 'Relations are important for what they can explain: meaningful
contrasts and permitted or forbidden combinations'. We can safely conclude that ‘ In a
language there are only differences’.
8. Language Constitutes reality; Explain.
This is a major conclusion from Saussure. At the very beginning of the essay he writes:
“Some people regard language, when reduced to its elements, as a naming-process
only – a list of words, each corresponding to the thing that it names … This conception
is open to criticism at several points. It assumes that ready-made ideas exist before
words.”
As cited by Peter Barry, the case of seasons in a year is a good example. How many
seasons are there in a year? An English man would say four. You ask it to a Sanskrit
scholar. He would say six and start naming them. Why? The Saussurian answer is that
English language has four terms and Sanskrit six. What is real about seasons? It is
neither six nor four. It is rather a process of gradual change. The signified is clearly
arbitrary if reality is perceived as a seamless continuum. It is the word, which we use
to describe a person or object that defines its quality. We know AIDS is a fatal disease.
An allopath treats AIDS patients. But what about an Ayurvedic medical practitioner? Of
course they will treat that patient, but not for AIDS. As per the age old texts of
Ayurveda, there is no disease named AIDS. The signified is there but no signifier. It is a
matter of language. Besides, Structuralism notes that much of our imaginative world
is structured of, and structured by, binary oppositions and these oppositions structure
meaning. Who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter? A Tamil suicidal Tiger who
bombs a military post in Colombo is a terrorist for the army while he is a freedom
fighter for the LTTE. For a Keralite, who is he? Freedom fighter or terrorist? If you use
the first term, he is a freedom fighter and if you go for the second, he is a terrorist. The
fellow remains the same.
10
The arbitrariness principle can be applied not only to the sign, but to the whole signsystem. The fundamental arbitrariness of language is apparent from the observation
that each language involves different distinctions between one signifier and another
(e.g. 'tree' and 'free') and between one signified and another (e.g. 'tree' and 'bush').
(which is how Saussure sees the initially undifferentiated realms of both thought and
sound): where, for example, does a 'corner' end? Commonsense suggests that the
existence of things in the world preceded our apparently simple application of 'labels'
to them (a 'nomenclaturist' notion which Saussure rejected and to which we will return
in due course). Saussure noted that 'if words had the job of representing concepts
fixed in advance, one would be able to find exact equivalents for them as between one
language and another. But this is not the case' Reality is divided up into arbitrary
categories by every language and the conceptual world with which each of us is
familiar could have been divided up very differently. Indeed, no two languages
categorize reality in the same way. As John Passmore puts it, 'Languages differ by
differentiating differently' Linguistic categories are not simply a consequence of some
predefined structure in the world. There are no 'natural' concepts or categories which
are simply 'reflected' in language. Language plays a crucial role in 'constructing
reality'.
9. Explain the terms langue and parole.
Langue is the whole system of language that precedes and makes speech possible. A
sign is a basic unit of langue.
Learning a language, we master the system of grammar, spelling, syntax and
punctuation. These are all elements of langue.
Langue is a system in that it has a large number of elements whereby meaning is
created in the arrangements of its elements and the consequent relationships between
these arranged elements.
Parole is the concrete use of the language, the actual utterances. It is an external
manifestation of langue. It is the usage of the system, but not the system.
By defining Langue and Parole, Saussure differentiates between the language and how
it is used, and therefore enabling these two very different things to be studied as
separate entities.
As a structuralist, Saussure was interested more in langue than in parole. It was the
system by which meaning could be created that was of interest rather than individual
instances of its use.
Subject+ present form of the verb….
Langue.
Prime Minister goes to UN tomorrow… Parole
11
10.
How do Saussure’s views become radical?
A movement or theory is radical when it is capable of favoring fundamental or extreme
change in scientific, social or cultural spheres. Structuralists argue that the entities
that constitute the world we perceive (human beings, meanings, social positions, texts,
rituals…) are not the works of God or the mysteries of nature. It is an effect of the
principles that structure us. The world without structures is meaningless. It will then be
a random and chaotic continuum. Structures order that continuum and organise it
according to certain set of principles. And thus we make sense of it. In this way
structures make this world meaningful and real. Many of the propositions put forward
by Saussurian linguistics was radical in substance and result. The foundational
argument about the arbitrariness of the sign is a radical concept because it proposes
the autonomy of language in relation to reality. The Saussurian model, with its
emphasis on internal structures within a sign system, can be seen as supporting the
notion that language does not 'reflect' reality but rather constructs it. We can use
language 'to say what isn't in the world, as well as what is. And since we come to know
the world through whatever language we have been born into the midst of, it is
legitimate to argue that our language determines reality, rather than reality our
language' some later critics have criticized Saussure for 'neglecting entirely the
things for which signs stand' They have lamented his model's detachment from
social context Robert Stam argues that by 'bracketing the referent', the Saussurean
model 'severs text from history' . Moreover it was the Saussurian concepts that led to
the most radical assumptions of Deconstruction.
11. Explain the term Semiology?
Semiotics is the science of signs. Semiology proposes that a great diversity of our
human action and productions--our bodily postures and gestures, the social rituals we
perform, the clothes we wear, the meals we serve, the buildings we inhabit--all convey
"shared" meanings to members of a particular culture, and so can be analyzed as signs
which function in diverse kinds of signifying systems. Linguistics (the study of verbal
signs and structures) is only one branch of semiotics but supplies the basic methods
and terms which are used in the study of all other social sign systems. Major figures
include Charles Peirce, Ferdinand de Saussure, Michel Foucault, Umberto Eco, Gérard
Genette, and Roland Barthes.
_
__________________________________________________________________________________
12
13