Balancing Act: Saussure's Call for a Combined Linguistic Approach

Introduction

Language, as a complex and ever-evolving system of communication, has been a subject of fascination and study for centuries. Linguists have approached the study of language from various angles, and over time, two primary perspectives have emerged: the synchronic and diachronic views. These two viewpoints represent distinct methods of linguistic analysis, with each offering its own unique insights and challenges. In his seminal work, "Cours de linguistique générale," Ferdinand de Saussure critically examined the interplay between these perspectives and provided valuable insights into how they shape our understanding of language. This blog post explores Saussure's ideas on the synchronic and diachronic approaches in linguistics, shedding light on the significance of distinguishing between the two for a more comprehensive understanding of language.

The Synchronic View: Language as a State

Saussure emphasizes that language can be viewed as a "state" at any given moment. When we study a language from a synchronic perspective, we are primarily concerned with understanding it as it exists at a specific point in time. This viewpoint recognizes that language users are generally unaware of the historical evolution of their language; they engage with the language as it stands in the present.

To comprehend this state, linguists must exclude everything related to language history or diachrony. By focusing exclusively on the language's current state, linguists can gain deeper insights into the system's structure, rules, and functions without the distortion introduced by historical considerations. It's like observing a picturesque panorama from a single viewpoint rather than trying to capture it from multiple mountain peaks simultaneously.

Moreover, it's interesting to notice the subtle distinction Saussure makes between the speaker (le sujet parlant), on the one hand, and the linguist (le linguiste) on the other.

The Diachronic View: Language as Evolution

Historically, the field of linguistics had primarily focused on the diachronic study of language. Diachrony refers to the historical evolution of a language, including the reconstruction of earlier forms, comparisons between languages to identify common ancestors, and tracing the path of language change over time. For example, linguists have reconstructed Proto-Indo-European by comparing Indo-European languages.

While the diachronic approach has its merits, Saussure highlights that it can result in an uncertain understanding of language. It involves examining language as a sequence of historical developments, which may not provide a complete picture of the language's current state.

We could bring here Saussure's observation that the observer of a game of chess doesn't need to know all the previous moves to understand the present state of the game

Traditional Grammar: A Synchronic Approach

Saussure notes that traditional grammarians took a synchronic approach to language study. They focused on describing linguistic states as they existed during specific historical periods. For instance, the grammar of Port Royal described the French language during the time of Louis XIV. This approach allowed for a detailed understanding of the language in a particular period without delving into its historical development.

However, traditional grammar had its limitations. It was often normative, seeking to establish language rules rather than observing language as a living and evolving system. This brings us full circle to the distinction Saussure makes between the speaker (le sujet parlant), on the one hand, and the linguist (le linguiste) on the other.

Additionally, it sometimes failed to distinguish between the written and spoken forms of language (le mot écrit et le mot parlé), missing some crucial aspects of linguistic structure.

It's important to mention or remember that Saussure's thoughts on writing were part of a larger conversation about exploring a different approach to the study of language. His new approach looked beyond the current focus on written documents at that time and gave center stage to spoken languages.

A New Perspective: Combining the Best of Both Worlds

Saussure's insights suggest that the field of linguistics can benefit from a more balanced approach that combines the strengths of both synchronic and diachronic perspectives. The historical approach contributes to a better understanding of linguistic states, while the synchronic approach allows for a more accurate description of a language as it exists at a specific time.

Linguists should be cautious not to mix the two perspectives. They must distinguish clearly between the static view of a language at a specific point in time and the historical view that traces language evolution over time. This distinction helps researchers draw out the consequences and implications of each approach, ultimately leading to a more comprehensive understanding of language.

Conclusion

Ferdinand de Saussure's insights on the synchronic and diachronic perspectives in linguistics have profound implications for our understanding of language. By recognizing the value of studying language as a state and understanding its evolution as separate endeavors, linguists can attain a more accurate and comprehensive grasp of the linguistic landscape.

The synchronic perspective allows us to delve deep into the structures and systems of language, capturing its essence at a particular moment. Meanwhile, the diachronic perspective unveils the historical journey of languages, shedding light on their evolution.

As linguistics continues to evolve, it becomes increasingly important to strike a balance between these two perspectives, avoiding the pitfalls of hybrid approaches that blur the lines between the static and the historical. In doing so, we are better equipped to understand the complexity of language.

 Related post:

Exploring Internal Duality: Synchrony and Diachrony in the History of Linguistics

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2024/01/blog-post_31.html

Bibliography

De Saussure, Ferdinand. "Curso de Lingüística General." Traducido por Amado Alonso. 24ª edición. Editorial Losada, 1945.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, with Albert Riedlinger. Libraire Payot.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. "Course in General Linguistics." Translated and annotated by Roy Harris. With a new introduction by Roy Harris. Bloomsbury, 2013.

De Saussure, Ferdinand. "Curso de Lingüística General." Traducido por Amado Alonso. 24ª edición. Editorial Losada, 1945.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. Cours de linguistique générale. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, with the collaboration of Albert Riedlinger. Arbre d’Or, Genève, 2005.

Bouquet, Simon, Rudolf Engler, and Antoinette Weil, eds. ESCRITOS SOBRE LINGÜÍSTICA GENERAL. Translated by Clara Ubaldina Lorda Mur. Original title: Écrits de linguistique générale, de Ferdinand de Saussure. © Éditions Gallimard, 2002.

Culler, Jonathan. 1976. SAUSSURE. Fontana/Collins.

Thibault, Paul J. Re-reading Saussure: The Dynamics of Signs in Social Life. London and New York: Routledge, 1997.