Relation To Linguistics

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 4

RELATION TO LINGUISTICS

 It is difficult to disentangle European semiotics from structuralism in its


origins. Linguistic structuralism derived primarily from Saussure, Hjelmslev
and Jakobson. It was Jakobson who first coined the term ‘structuralism’ in
1929 (Jakobson 1990, 6). Structuralism is an analytical method which
involves the application of the linguistic model to a much wider range of
social phenomena. Jakobson wrote that ‘Language is . . . a purely semiotic
system . . . The study of signs, however, . . . must take into consideration
also applied semiotic structures, as for instance, architecture, dress, or
cuisine . . .
 Saussure argued that ‘nothing is more appropriate than the study of
languages to bring out the nature of the semiological problem’ (Saussure
1983, 16). Semiotics draws heavily on linguistic concepts, partly because of
his influence, and also because linguistics is a more established discipline
than the study of other sign-systems.
Saussure saw linguistics as a branch of ‘semiology’
 Linguistics is only one branch of this general science [of semiology]. The laws
which semiology will discover will be laws applicable in linguistics . . . As far
as we are concerned . . . the linguistic problem is first and foremost
semiological . . .
 If one wishes to discover the true nature of language systems, one must first
consider what they have in common with all other systems of the same
kind . . . In this way, light will be thrown not only upon the linguistic
problem. By considering rites, customs etc. as signs, it will be possible, we
believe, to see them in a new perspective. The need will be felt to consider
them as semiological phenomena and to explain them in terms of the laws of
semiology.
 While Roland Barthes (1967b, xi) declared that ‘perhaps we must invert
Saussure’s formulation and assert that semiology is a branch of linguistics’,
most of those who call themselves semioticians at least implicitly accept
Saussure’s location of linguistics within semiotics.
 The linguist and semiotician Roman Jakobson was in no doubt that ‘language is
a system of signs, and linguistics is part and parcel of the science of signs or
semiotics’ (Jakobson 1949a, 50; cf. 1970, 454).
 However, even if we theoretically locate linguistics within semiotics it is
difficult to avoid adopting the linguistic model in exploring other sign-systems.
 The American linguist Leonard Bloomfield asserted that ‘linguistics is the chief
contributor to semiotics’ (Bloomfield 1939, 55). Jakobson defined semiotics as
‘the general science of signs which has as its basic discipline linguistics, the
science of verbal signs’ (Jakobson 1963e, 289).
 Semioticians commonly refer to films, television and radio programmes,
advertising posters and so on as ‘texts’, and to ‘reading television’ (Fiske and
Hartley 1978). Media such as television and film are regarded by some
semioticians as being in some respects like languages.
WHY STUDY SEMIOTICS?
 While Saussure may be hailed as a founder of semiotics, semiotics has
become increasingly less Saussurean since the 1970s. While the current
account of semiotics focuses primarily on its structuralist forms.
 studying semiotics can assist us to become more aware of the mediating role
of signs and of the roles played by ourselves and others in constructing social
realities. It can make us less likely to take reality for granted as something
which is wholly independent of human interpretation.
 exploring semiotic perspectives, we may come to realize that information or
meaning is not ‘contained’ in the world or in books, computers or audio-
visual media. Meaning is not ‘transmitted’ to us – we actively create it
according to a complex interplay of codes or conventions of which we are
normally unaware.
 Such a study involves investigating the construction and maintenance of
reality by particular social groups. To decline the study of signs is to leave to
others the control of the world of meanings which we inhabit.

You might also like