Course of general linguistics
Ferdinand de Saussure’s "Course of General Linguistics" (1916) book is an academic recompilation of his conclusions about linguistics, realized by his University students. In the book, Saussure show us the creation and explanation of linguistic concepts as sign, signifier and signified, and the differences among them.
He affirmed that the sign is the integration of a concept (signified) and a sound-image (signifier). In this sense, when we listen, see or perceive something (signifier) our brain internalizes it with the concept (signified) of the object. In other words, for Saussure a sign it is a compound of two elements, which are not connected between them naturally: the sensory representation of something is the signifier and the concept or the idea about the thing is the signified.
Consequently, the linguistic sign acquire consistency to connect between itself two aspects in a same time: The phonic element and the concept associate.
He affirmed that the sign is the integration of a concept (signified) and a sound-image (signifier). In this sense, when we listen, see or perceive something (signifier) our brain internalizes it with the concept (signified) of the object. In other words, for Saussure a sign it is a compound of two elements, which are not connected between them naturally: the sensory representation of something is the signifier and the concept or the idea about the thing is the signified.
Consequently, the linguistic sign acquire consistency to connect between itself two aspects in a same time: The phonic element and the concept associate.
The Arbitrary Nature of the sign means that it has been made in convention for a speaking community. It does not has a natural relationship between the signifier and signified, it is conventional according to Saussure. In that sense, when the signifier changes the signified does not. For example, the word "Casa" in Spanish, "house" in English, in every country or speaking community, the sound of the words are different (signifier) but the concept still the same (signified).
A linguistic sign is not a link between a thing and a name, but between a concept and a sound pattern.
For Saussure the linguistic sign is wholly immaterial although he disliked referring to it as 'abstract'
For Saussure the linguistic sign is wholly immaterial although he disliked referring to it as 'abstract'
In the other hand, the Onomatop (miau, glup, gulp, ...) might be used to prove that the choice of the signifier is not always arbitrary. They are conventional imitations of certain sounds. Also the Interjections (ouch,Ayyy,¡¿Qué?!) whose are spontaneous expressions of reality dictated, by natural forces. But for most interjections we can show that there is no fixed bond between their signified and their signifier. We need only compare two languages.
Saussure supported that the symbol, it is never wholly arbitrary sign such as the words themselves because they have signified by a conventional law arbitrarily established. For example the balance it is an tool for measure units of food or whatever, but it become conventionally in a symbol of justice. The balance could not be replaced by any other symbol because we given it a whole meaning outside of his real function and real meaning.
In that order, the signifier is fixed, manipulated by the speaking community that uses it. This linguistic phenomenon has the name of mutability, when the sign has the capacity to change, to adapt itself to the social and cultural environment, this phenomenon ensure the language evolution through the speech. Inside it, there is other linguistic event, the diachronic, means that the sign changes through the time; this phenomenon allows the historical evolution of languages, the successions. The diachronic, study the terms successions of the language through the time, the language changes, evolution, whose replaces among them without form a determinate system. It does not consider two things at the same time.
On the other hand, the immutable (non-arbitrary) sing, or the sign that does not change through the time and does not accept a linguistic change, it is within of synchrony, its means that the society is tied to the language, the simultaneous study. It doesn’t accept the linguistic innovation because the synchrony analyze a particular moment of language in a determinate time with the aim of analyze its evolution.
Simultaneously study of terms that forms a system.
At the same time, Saussure referred to the Syntagm as a determinate sign presence, a specific group of signs associated in speech chain of signs, is lineal, synchrony and immutable. For example, the sentence "I love you", it is a syntagm, a word successions which if we separate each one, it will not have sense or meaningful. He also defined the paradigm as something that is compound by common elements of a sign series or the mental associations that we do when we recibe the signifier and subsequently we analyze and processing its possible signified, also called "associative relationships", it is universal and it is nonlinear, diachronic and mutable.
Saussure undoubtedly contributed to think the language as a more complex system but in a easy explanation. He treated to bring language to another level where the humans can to get to the bottom of this.
On the other hand, the immutable (non-arbitrary) sing, or the sign that does not change through the time and does not accept a linguistic change, it is within of synchrony, its means that the society is tied to the language, the simultaneous study. It doesn’t accept the linguistic innovation because the synchrony analyze a particular moment of language in a determinate time with the aim of analyze its evolution.
Simultaneously study of terms that forms a system.
At the same time, Saussure referred to the Syntagm as a determinate sign presence, a specific group of signs associated in speech chain of signs, is lineal, synchrony and immutable. For example, the sentence "I love you", it is a syntagm, a word successions which if we separate each one, it will not have sense or meaningful. He also defined the paradigm as something that is compound by common elements of a sign series or the mental associations that we do when we recibe the signifier and subsequently we analyze and processing its possible signified, also called "associative relationships", it is universal and it is nonlinear, diachronic and mutable.
Saussure undoubtedly contributed to think the language as a more complex system but in a easy explanation. He treated to bring language to another level where the humans can to get to the bottom of this.
Your browser does not support viewing this document. Click here to download the document.