Bridging Perspectives: Saussure and Derrida on Speech and Writing

 Saussure's Analysis of Linguistic Errors and the Evolution of Spelling Systems

Saussure initiated an exploration into the nature of errors in a section of his first course titled "Analysis of Linguistic Errors," with a focus on critically examining the negative aspects of the science. Drawing parallels to Bacon's notion of linguistic caverns or idols of linguistics, Saussure divides linguistic errors into two primary categories:

1.      Misconceptions of Language Changes: Errors arising from a false conception of changes in the language wrongly called: corruptions.

2.      Errors in Writing: The second category of linguistic errors arises from the act of writing itself.

Within the context of errors originating from writing, Saussure investigates those resulting from inconsistencies within the spelling system. Notably, he asserts, "We learned to speak before learning to write," emphasizing the phonetic alphabet's purpose in fixing, through conventional signs, the spoken word. In this context, Saussure explicitly excluded purely ideological systems like Chinese.

He notes that there are periods when there is a correspondence between phoneme and grapheme in alphabetic writing. In the primitive spelling system of the Greeks, consistency is evident, especially in the sequence of sounds, with as many spoken elements as there are written elements.

However, over time, as pronunciation evolves, inconsistencies in the spelling system become apparent. Saussure contends, "The most serious errors stem from the inconsistencies in the spelling system." He questions why a spelling system is forced to become inconsistent, suggesting that while the system might have been established on a justifiable basis, it may no longer be so as time passes, and the written word no longer aligns with the spoken word.

Derrida's Challenge to Linguistic Hierarchy: Language as Primary Writing

Saussure clarified in his lecture that he was specifically addressing phonetic writing systems, such as the Greek spelling system, and explicitly excluded ideological systems like Chinese. This distinction justifies the assertion that "We learned to speak before learning to write (in a phonetic system!) ."

However, confusion arises when Jacques Derrida, in his work "Of Grammatology," redefined "writing" and stated that everything encompassed by the term "language" for the past twenty centuries is now shifting towards being categorized as "writing." He suggests that the Western concept of language may be revealed as a façade for a primary form of writing:

…everything that for at least some twenty centuries tended toward and finally succeeded in being gathered under the name of language is beginning to let itself be transferred to, or at least summarized under, the name of writing.

It is as if the Western concept of language were revealed today as the guise or disguise of a primary writing (1).

Scholars subsequently challenged the conventional hierarchy that prioritized language, opting to invert it by placing writing at the forefront. Interestingly, they overlooked Derrida's footnote placed at the bottom of the page, where he clarifies that speaking of a primary writing doesn't imply a chronological priority in fact:

(1) Parler ici d'une écriture première ne revient pas à affirmer une priorité chronologique de fait. (Derrida)

To speak of a primary writing here does not amount to affirming a chronological priority of fact. (Spivak´s translation)

In this note, Derrida seems to acknowledge the distinction between quid facti and quid juris, a concept Kant borrowed from legal terminology. In legal terms, something being a condition of possibility for another doesn't necessitate temporal precedence.

It's indisputable that speaking precedes writing de facti, just as it is true that "writing" precedes speaking de juris. "Writing," when redefined, signifies arche-écriture, the condition of possibility for any sign in general.

This echoes Saussure's explanation of the langue-parole relationship, asserting that speech (parole) is essential for the existence of the underlying language system (langue). However, for effective communication among speakers, the language system must already be in place—a stance articulated by John Joseph in his book Saussure (Joseph 2012):

In introducing what would become one of his most famous dyads, Saussure is not trying to separate langue from parole, but to insist on their mutual interdependence.

“If it is true that the treasury of the language is always required for speaking, reciprocally, all that enters the language has first been tried out in speech enough times for a lasting impression to result: the language is only the consecration of what had been evoked <through> speech”.

Bridging Saussure and Derrida's Perspectives

Saussure's analysis of linguistic errors and the evolution of spelling systems sets the stage for understanding the interplay between spoken and written language. Derrida's challenge to the linguistic hierarchy, revealing language as "a form of writing", builds upon Saussure's groundwork. The distinction between quid facti and quid juris, drawn from legal terminology, reinforces the idea that the condition of possibility of language in general doesn't always require temporal precedence. Together, these perspectives emphasize the intricate relationship between spoken and written language, urging a reevaluation of their roles in linguistic analysis.

Related posts from this blog:

·         Derrida's Profound Redefinition of Writing: Arche-écriture (14.09.2023).

·         Kant, Saussure, and Derrida: Exploring the Interplay of Language (14.09.2023).

·         Two Roads Diverged in Linguistics: He Took the Less Traveled By (29.10.2023).

Bibliography

De Saussure, Ferdinand. Premier Cours de Linguistique Générale (1907): D'après les Cahiers d'Albert Riedlinger. Saussure's First Course of Lectures on General Linguistics (1907): From the Notebooks of Albert Riedlinger. Edited by Eisuke Komatsu. Translated by George Wolf. Tokyo: Gakushuin University, 1996. Pergamon.

Derrida, Jacques. Of Grammatology. Corrected Edition. Translated by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997. Copyright © 1974, 1976, 1997 by The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Derrida, Jacques. De la Grammatologie. Collection "Critique." Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit, 1967.

John E. Joseph. SAUSSURE. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.