Tracing Change and Permanence in Language: A Question of Origin

 

Introduction

In Part One, Chapter 2 of "Course in General Linguistics" [104], Saussure explores the concepts of the immutability and mutability of signs, shedding light on their seemingly paradoxical nature. Saussure begins by exploring the concept of the invariability of signs, noting the apparent freedom in selecting signifiers corresponding to ideas. However, he swiftly uncovers the nuances of this choice, revealing its imposition from the perspective of the linguistic community. This exploration not only underscores the enigmatic essence of language but also emphasizes the critical role of the viewpoint in understanding linguistic phenomena:

The object is not given in advance of the viewpoint: far from it. Rather, one might say that it is the viewpoint adopted which creates the object [CGL-23].

Immutability of the Sign

In "Course in General Linguistics" [104-108], Saussure explores the concept of the invariability of signs. He initially observes the perceived freedom in selecting signifiers corresponding to ideas. However, he swiftly clarifies that from the viewpoint of the linguistic community, this choice is not free but rather imposed. The concept of the arbitrary nature of the sign simply suggests that this could have been different, underscoring the elusive nature of language and the significance of perspective.

Saussure contends that speakers are not consulted about linguistic signals, and once a signifier is chosen by the community, it cannot be freely substituted. This imposition may seem contradictory, as options are predetermined by the language system. Saussure likens this situation to a linguistic Hobson's choice, where what can be chosen is already predetermined:

This fact, which seems to involve a contradiction, could be familiarly called "the forced card/ la carte forcée." We tell the language: "Choose!" but we add: "It will be this sign and not another." [CGL-104]

Furthermore, Saussure emphasizes that neither individuals nor the linguistic community can freely modify or change established linguistic choices. Both individuals and the community are bound to their language, and linguistic signals cannot be treated merely as a form of contract where terms are freely agreed upon, a language cannot be regarded simply as a contractual agreement.

A Question of Origins

That is why the question of the origins of language does not have the importance generally attributed to it. It is not even a relevant question as far as linguistics is concerned. [CGL-105]

Saussure aptly observes that language, at any given point in time, is invariably inherited from preceding generations, an idea that resonates with Lacan's theories and is further elaborated upon in his work. This inheritance encompasses the initial assignment of names to things, forging a connection between ideas and sound patterns. However, this initial assignment is not directly observable; it's a concept we can imagine but not witness firsthand:

The initial assignment of names to things, establishing a contract between concepts and sound patterns, is an act we can conceive in the imagination, but no one has ever observed it taking place. [CGL-105]

Saussure notes that the arbitrary nature of linguistic signs suggests the concept of assigning names to things. Linguistic signs carry meanings that are not inherently tied to their sound patterns. This arbitrariness underscores the fact that no society has actively chosen its language; rather, languages are inherited and embraced by each generation.

These two points complement each other: the arbitrariness of linguistic signs underscores individuals' limited control over language, while the inheritance and acceptance of language illustrate how linguistic norms endure and evolve across societies.

Mutability of the Sign

To claim that the sign is immutable is only half of the truth. Having established the immutability of the sign, Saussure takes another perspective and delves into the concept of mutability in linguistics [CGL]- [108-113]. Time, he says, brings about changes while preserving their continuity; linguistic signs undergo alterations as they persist over time:

The passage of time, which ensures the continuity of a language, also has another effect, which appears to work in the opposite direction. It allows linguistic signs to be changed with some rapidity. Hence variability and invariability are both, in a certain sense, characteristic of the linguistic sign. In the final analysis, these two characteristics are intimately connected. The sign is subject to change because it continues through time. [CGL-108]

The main catalyst for changes in linguistic signs is the enduring presence of old material. Even amidst changes, their relationship to the past remains, rendering alterations relative. This is why the principle of alteration is rooted in the principle of continuity.

In conclusion, Saussure's exploration of the immutability and mutability of signs, alongside the question of origin, offers profound insights into the intricate nature of language. His examination of linguistic signs highlights the interplay between permanence and change, the relationship between present and past, and the dynamic interaction between the individual and the community, unveiling the dynamic essence of language evolution.

Related Post from this Blog:

The Supplementarity of Immutability and Mutability in Linguistic Signs

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2023/10/blog-post_05.html

Bibliography

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.