Return to Saussure

Introduction Why is it easier to translate a scientific article than a sonnet? Most people would answer that poems are simply more difficult. Roman Jakobson offers a more interesting explanation. The decisive difference, he argues, is not between information and poetry but between two ways language functions. Sometimes words primarily direct our attention toward the world they describe. At other times, language draws attention to itself—to its sounds, rhythms, repetitions, and patterns. When this happens, form is no longer a mere vehicle for meaning; it becomes part of meaning itself. This distinction lies at the heart of Jakobson's classic essay On Linguistic Aspects of Translation (1959). It also explains why he can make two apparently contradictory claims. On the one hand, "all cognitive experience and its classification is conveyable in any existing language" (Jakobson, 1959, p. 233). On the other, "poetry by definition is untranslatable" (p. 238). These ...

Aristotle’s Unexpected Challenge For more than two millennia, Aristotle’s account of the good life has shaped philosophical reflection on human flourishing. Yet many influential thinkers of the twentieth century rejected one of its central assumptions: that human beings possess a fixed nature with a determinate end. Existentialists famously declared that “existence precedes essence,” while poststructuralists questioned stable foundations of identity, meaning, and reason. From this perspective, Aristotle’s conception of the contemplative life appears to belong to a metaphysical world that modern philosophy has left behind. And yet an unexpected tension remains. Many philosophers who denied any predetermined human purpose nevertheless devoted their lives to precisely the activity Aristotle regarded as the highest expression of human fulfillment: sustained intellectual inquiry. They immersed themselves in reading, writing, teaching, and archival research, often at the expense of w...

Introduction Translation is commonly understood as the passage from one language into another. Roman Jakobson opens On Linguistic Aspects of Translation from a very different starting point. Before discussing bilingual dictionaries or lexical equivalence, he offers a striking definition of linguistic meaning itself: "the meaning of any linguistic sign is its translation into some further, alternative sign" (Jakobson, 1959, p. 232). Borrowed directly from Charles Sanders Peirce's theory of signs, this claim transforms the scope of the essay. Translation is no longer a specialized linguistic practice but the very process through which signs become intelligible. Read from this perspective, Jakobson's discussion of lexical equivalence, Benjamin Lee Whorf's linguistic relativity, and even the familiar expressions sunrise and sunset all serve a single philosophical purpose. They illustrate that understanding is inseparable from interpretation, and interpretation ...

Introduction Translation is often imagined as a process of finding the right equivalent. Dictionaries reinforce this expectation by pairing words across languages as though each term corresponded neatly to another. Roman Jakobson challenged this assumption in his classic essay On Linguistic Aspects of Translation . Using the seemingly straightforward English word cheese , he demonstrates that lexical equivalence is rarely complete. The difficulty has little to do with dairy products. Instead, it reveals something fundamental about language itself. Jakobson's discussion gains additional depth when read alongside Ferdinand de Saussure's theory of linguistic value and Jonathan Culler's exposition of that theory. Together, these three thinkers suggest that languages do not merely assign different labels to the same world. They organize the conceptual plane differently. Translation therefore exposes the structure of linguistic meaning rather than simply transferring words fr...

Introduction Roman Jakobson opens his essay On Linguistic Aspects of Translation by quoting Bertrand Russell: "No one can understand the word 'cheese' unless he has a nonlinguistic acquaintance with cheese." The remark is taken from Russell's essay "Logical Positivism" (1950), but Jakobson adopts it as the starting point for a discussion of meaning and translation. At first sight, Russell's claim seems almost impossible to dispute. How could anyone genuinely understand the word cheese without ever having encountered cheese? Surely language must ultimately rest upon experience. Yet several decades before Jakobson quoted Russell, Ferdinand de Saussure had already developed a conception of language that invites us to reconsider this intuition. His famous rejection of the idea that language is merely a nomenclature suggests that the issue is more complex than it first appears. Is Language a List of Names? In Course in General Linguistic...