Required Reading Saussure, General Principles (p 65-78, 88-91) Emile Benveniste, Four: The Nature of the Linguistic Sign RECOMMENDED: Benveniste, Three: Saussure After Half a Century

Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913 ) Swiss linguist, working on Indo-European philology came to reinvent the system, the way language is theorized. Course in General Linguistics posthumously compiled from notes and lecture notes of his students. Modern structuralism - rules of relations among elements Semiology (semiotics)

What is the origin of Language? Best guess seems that language developed in parallel with the species. We don’t know and we can never know. Bad question. Origins don’t necessarily explain what’s going on

Two modes of analysis Synchronic - description of the state of a language at a particular moment Diachronic - change through time, comes from comparing sequences of synchronic analyses Antecedents are not origins

Semiological point of view: system of signs An open-ended, arbitrary symbol system- A signal is transmitted from a sender to a receiver (or group of receivers) along a channel of communication. The signal will have a particular form and will convey a particular meaning (or message). The connection between form and meaning constitutes a code. open-ended, arbitrary symbol systems Semiotic point of view: A signal is transmitted from a sender to a receiver (or group of receivers) along a channel of communication. The signal will have a particular form and will convey a particular meaning (or message). The connection between form and meaning constitutes a code. A sender encodes a message and the receiver decodes it. language is medium-transferable (unlike animal communication systems) Arbitrary, flexible, open-ended Problem with this view is sometimes referred to as implicature: meanings are fuzzy in the sense that they don’t have clear boundaries, also modified by things such as tone and manner of speaking You can do that if you really want to. Logician lecturing on positive and negative statements for an entire hour concludes, “and while two negatives can be taken as a positive statement, two positives can never be taken for a negative.” From the back: “yeah, right”

Study Language (langue) not speech (parole) “The subject matter of linguistics comprises all manifestations of human speech, whether that of savages or civilized nations, or of archaic, classical or decadent periods.” Describe all observable languages Trace their histories (families), reconstruction Determine permanent, universal forces, deduce general laws Delimit and define the discipline

Saussurian Duality of Language 1) Oral - aural pairing 2) Union of sound-image and concept 3) individual and social 4) Synchronic and diachronic realities An established system on the one hand Always a product of the past “... the linguistics phenomenon always has two related sides, each deriving its values from the other.” 1) articulated syllabus aer acoustical impressions, but made by vocal tract 2) sound, a complex acoustical-vocal unit, combines in turn withan idea to form a complex physiological-psychological unit 3) both individual and social 4) Speech always implies both an established system andan evolution; at every moment it is an existing institution and a product of the past. The single parts of pairs are meaningless without the complementary side of the pair, each derives meaning in its opposition to the other.

Langue is the true object of study Parole (speech, speaking, articulation) is messy, hetereogeneous, variable, based in the individual Langue (language, competence) “is both a social product of the faculty of speech and a collection of necessary conventions that have been adopted by a social body to permit individuals to exercise that faculty.” must use language as the norm of all other manifestations of speech. langue “It is both a social product of the faculty of speech and a collection of necessary convetions that have been adobted by a social body to permit individuals toexercise that faculty.” speech is many-sided, hetereogeneous “we cannot put it into any category of human facts, for e cannot discover its unity.” execution of language is always individual =parole “Language, on the contrary, is a self-contained whole and a principle of classification. as soon as we give language first place among the facts of speech, we introducce a natural order into a mass that lends itself to no other classification.” “... beyond the functioning of the various organs there exists a more general faculty which governs signs and which would be the linguistic faculty proper.”

Social crystalization of langue “Among all the individuals that are linked together by speech, some sort of average will be set up: all will reproduce—not exactly of course, but approximately—the same signs united with the same concepts.” The social, the essential Not the individual, accidental, accessory “Among all the individuals that are linked together by speech, some osrt of average will be set up: all will reproduce—not exactly of course, but approximately—the same signs united with the same concepts.” SOCIAL CRYSTALLIZATION OF LANGUAGE “In separating language form speaking we are at the same time separating: (1) what is social from what is individual; and (2) what is essential from what is accessory and more or less accidental. “Language is not a function of the speaker; it is a product that is passively assimilated bu the idividual.” “Speaking, on the contrary, is an individual act” “Language is a well-defined object in the heterogeneous mass of speech facts. It can be localized in the limited segment of the speaking-circuit where an auditory image becomes associates with a concept. It is the social side of speech, outside th eindividual who can never create nor modify it by imself;”

langue is no less concrete than parole “Whereas speech is heterogeneous, language, as defined is homogeneous. It is a system of signs in which the only essential thing is the union of meanings and sound-images, and in which both parts of th sign are psychological. linguistic signs are not abstractions “Language, unlike speaking, is something that we can study separately. ... We can dispense with the other elements of speech; indeed, the science of language is possible only if the other elements are excluded.” “Whereas speech is heterogeneous, language, as defined is homogeneous. It is a system of signs in which the only essential thing is the union of meanings and sound-images, and in which both parts of th sign are psychological. linguistic signs are not abstractions can reduce linguistic signs to conventional written symbols, impossible for acts of speaking “Language is a system of signs that express ideas, and is therefore comparable to a system of writing, the aphabet of deaf-mutes, symbolic rites, polite formulas, military signals, etc. But is the most important of these systems.”

Science of signs - semiology science that studies the life of signs wthin society shows what consititute signs, what laws govern them language is the prototypical semiological system semiology is the sceince that studies the life of signs wthin society shows what consititute signs, what laws govern them linguistics is a science insofar as it is a subset of semiology language is the prototypical semiological system “If we are to discover the ture nature of language we must learn what it has in common with all other semiological systems”

Linguistics as a model for general semiology “Language is comparable to a symphony in that what the symphony actually is stands completely apart from how it is performed; the mistakes that musicians make in playing the symphony do not compromise this fact.” “By studying rites, customs, etc., as signs, I believe that we shall throw new light on the facts and point up the need for including them in a science of semiology and explaining them by its laws.” “Language is comparable to a symphony in that what the symphony actually is stands completely apart from how it is performed; the mistakes that musicians make in playing the symphony do not compromise this fact.”

Emile Benviniste’s explanation of Structuralism Saussure never uses the word ‘structure’: “Language is a system that has its own arrangement.” The system is an interdependent whole. If one part is modified, the whole system is affected because it remains coherent. Saussure doesn’t use the term structure, he uses the term system language forms a system, not a conglomeration of elements “Language is a system that has its own arrangement.” the system is primary “... to consider a term as simply the union of a certain sound with a certain concept is grossly misleading. To define it in this way would isolate the term from its system; it would mean assuming that one can start from the terms and construct the syste by adding them together hen, on the contrary, it is from the interdependent whole that one must start and through analysis obtain its elements.” his students were earlier publishing similar statements and attributing them to Saussure Grammont: “There are no isolated phonetic changes. ... The whole set of articulations ina language in effect constitutes a system in which everything hold together, in which everything depends strictly on everything else. As a result, if a modificati is produced in one part of the system, there is a good chance that the whole system will be affected, for it is necessary that the system remain coherent.”

Saussurian principles Language is form, not substance Units of language can only be defined by their relationships Structuralism first enunciated by Prague School of Linguists following these principles (Roman Jakobson, Nikolay Trubetzkoy) add to this Saussurian principle that language is form, not substance unites of langauge can only be defined by their relationships structuralist doctrine first articulated by Roman Jakobson, S. Karchevski, and N. Trubetskoy - who founded the Linguistic Circle of Prague “ .... structural comparison and genetic comparison/” laws of structure of linguistic systems andtheir evolution.” “The sensory content of phonological elements is less essential than their reciprocal relationships within the system (structural principle of the phonological system).”

Structuralism Trubetskoy: A science of the whole - system of relations “One cannot determine the place of a word in a lexical system until one has studied the structure of the said system.” A science of the whole - system of relations system is formed of units that mutually affect one another distinguished from other systems by the internal arrangements of these units arrangement is structure Trubetskoy: “One cannot determine the place of a word in a lexical system until one has studied the structure of the said system.” this idea of structure - organization of the system - was connected to a greater scientific view of linguistics - much like the development of geology, physics, biology into the analysis of systems and not isolated organisms or phenomenon Unified Theory of Everything analyzing a language as a system is a matter of analyzing its structure E.B. “Each system, being formed of units that mutually affect one another, is distinguished from other systems by the internal arrangements of these units, an arrangement which constitutes its structure.” the whole is greater than the sum of its parts (Remember Gestalt psych, Turner) network of dependences

French structuralism Benveniste: “The structuralist doctrine teaches the predomincance of the system over the elements, and aims to define the structure of the system through the relationships among the elements, in the spoken chain as well as in formal paradigms, and shows the organic character of the changes to which language is subject.” check out the French vs. American structuralism in AT, Kroeber, ed. EB: “The structuralist doctrine teaches the predomincance of the system over the elements, and aims to define the structure of the system through the relationships among the elements, in the spoken chain as well as in formal paradigms, and shows the organic character ofthe changes to which language is subject.” Benveniste points out the arbitrariness across systems and the necessity within systems (Whorf)

Arbitrariness Benveniste, ‘Nature of the Linguistic Sign’: Arbitrariness of the sign is when analyzed across systems The linguistic sign is non-arbitrary (necessary) within the system. Can’t say just anything and be speaking English. Natural logic of the system (Whorf) check out the French vs. American structuralism in AT, Kroeber, ed. EB: “The structuralist doctrine teaches the predomincance of the system over the elements, and aims to define the structure of the system through the relationships among the elements, in the spoken chain as well as in formal paradigms, and shows the organic character ofthe changes to which language is subject.” Benveniste points out the arbitrariness across systems and the necessity within systems (Whorf)

Metaphor of the chess game Understanding the game requires knowing the attributes of the pieces and their relationships with one another. The relationships - relative positions on the board, are the essential problem for the player.

Diachronic view: previous state More chess Diachronic view looks at previous states, knowing the changes between states.

Change in time This is red, 2)yello, 3)green Changes in position affect the subsequent possibilities

Structures of the system Understanding the game requires knowing the attributes of the pieces and their relationships with one another. The relationships - relative positions on the board, are the essential problem for the player. The qualities of individual pieces are meaningless without understanding their relationships to other pieces.

Changes in the structure This is Change in position thus alters the nature of the structure

Structuralism Claude Levi-Strauss Edmund Leach Rodney Needham Dual oppositions Structures need not be pairs. Can be triads (Turner) or encompassing hierarchies (Dumont) )

Speech and communication Speech is one-dimensional, sequence of signs Communication includes gestures and other signals Operates in parallel to speech Reinforcing ideas Contradicting (mixed signals)