The Elusive Link Between Object and Name: Understanding the Relationship Between Language and Reality in Saussure's Theory
Exergue
1. This acoustic image must be kept entirely distinct from the non-mental (physical) fact of the sound. Constantine's Notebook VII 68a
2. …words do not answer exactly to our definition of linguistic units…[CGL] [158]
3. …the language (langue), must not be taken as an equivalent to language (langage).Constantine's Notebook VII 74a
The triple exergue of the article points to three interrelated concepts, which have been widely misunderstood: (1) the concept of signifiant; (2) the concept of signe; and (3) the concept of la langue.
This triple exergue aims to draw attention to the following facts:
1. The signifier (signifiant) is not the sound (son).
2. The linguistic sign (signe) is not the word (mot).
3. Linguistic structure (la langue) is not language (le langage).
The Debate on Language's Relation with the External World
"Course in General Linguistics”, Part One, Chapter 1: Nature of the Linguistic Sign [CGL] [97], begins:
For some people a language (la langue), reduced to its essentials, is a nomenclature: a list of terms corresponding to a list of things… This conception is open to a number of objections. [CGL] [97]
Some scholars perceive Saussure's rejection of the idea that language merely functions as a direct list of terms corresponding to things in this quote as limiting linguists and philosophers in their discussions about the relationship between language and objects. They contend that Saussure's approach tends to isolate the linguistic system from the external world of objects and human action, as he provides scant discussion on how concepts relate to objects. They claim that Saussure's framework fails to offer a comprehensive understanding of how language interacts with the external world or how it represents objects and human actions.
But was Saussure truly disconnected from reality? Who are "the people" for whom a language (la langue) is a nomenclature? Let's try to find out by examining the notebooks of one of the students who attended his lessons.
Solving the Enigma: A Quest for Answers in Constantine's Notebooks
In his May 2, 1911 lesson on the Nature of the Linguistic Sign, Saussure addresses a prevalent misconception regarding language. As depicted in CGL, he challenges the notion that language (la langue) is merely a list of terms corresponding to things.
He observes that from a nomenclaturist point of view, we have two terms: an object outside the subject (dehors du sujet), such as a real tree or a picture of a tree, and the corresponding name, exemplified by the word "tree". However, he argues against the idea of considering "la langue" as a mere nomenclature.
Within Saussure's conceptual framework (la conception rationnelle), which stands in stark contrast to earlier, perhaps more intuitive, understandings of language as a mere list of names for a list of things, we encounter once more two distinct terms. However, this time around, these two terms comprise a concept (signifié) and a sound pattern (signifiant).
Unlike the preceding two terms, which involve the tree in the world and the word "tree," both the concept (signifié) and the sound pattern (signifiant) reside inside the subject (dans le sujet), both being mental (psychiques). Saussure adds emphatically at the end of his elucidation: "Any other connection than this I reject as misleading in the search for the two terms a sign comprises."
Partial conclusions
In light of the arguments presented by Saussure in the lesson of May 2, 1911, it becomes apparent that he is not denying the existence of objects in the world outside the subject and their names, although he finds the link between them problematic. Instead, he discusses in his lectures the internal workings of the language mechanism:
There is indeed an object which is outside the subject, and the name, but one does not know whether it is vocal or mental: <(arbos can be taken in these two different senses)>. The link between the two is not at all clear. Constantine's Notebook VII 75a
Many misconceptions surrounding [CGL] [97] arise from conflating 'la langue' with 'le langage'. Understanding the nuanced difference between these two concepts will dispel potential doubts. You can explore these concepts further by following the links below.
With regard to "the people" for whom a language (la langue) is a nomenclature, robust evidence is lacking, leaving only speculation. I infer that the reference isn't to specific schools of thought or particular philosophers, but rather to his students or colleagues who, upon encountering his groundbreaking ideas, continue to interchange "la langue" and "le langage." This, at least, is my interpretation.
A Tale of Enlightenment.
In a peaceful village beneath a sacred mountain, a young Buddhist monk eagerly sought to share the teachings of the Diamond Sutra. Approaching an elderly man whose white beard mirrored the snowy peaks above, he began reciting the sacred text:
"Thus I have heard. At one time, the Buddha was staying in the Jeta Grove of the Garden of the Benefactor of Orphans and the Solitary together with a gathering of great bhikùus ..."
After some time, the elderly man interrupted with a simple request: "Could you repeat again the first four words you said, please?"
"Thus I have heard," he softly repeated. In that exchange, enlightenment dawned upon him.
Conclusion
Next time someone reads to you the quote: "For some people, a language (la langue), reduced to its essentials, is a nomenclature: a list of terms corresponding to a list of things… This conception is open to a number of objections," you can ask: "Could you please repeat the first words you said again?" Maybe something happens in that exchange.
Related Posts from this Blog:
The Art of Negative Dialectic: What La Langue is not
https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2023/10/blog-post_11.html
The Significance of Terminology in Saussure's Work: Decoding the Nuances of Langue, Parole, and Langage
https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-significance-of-terminology-in.html
The Dynamic Interplay of Sign, Signifier, and Signified in Linguistics
https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2023/09/sign-signifier-and-signified-in.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.
Saussure, F. (1910-1911). Troisième cours de linguistique générale: d'après les cahiers d'Emile Constantin [Saussure's Third Course of Lectures on General Linguistics: From the Notebooks of Emile Constantin]. (R. Harris, Trans.) University of Oxford.1993
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.
Bush, Stephen S. "Nothing Outside the Text: Derrida and Brandom on Language and World." Contemporary Pragmatism, vol. 6, no. 2, December 2009, pp. 45–69. Published by Editions Rodopi.
Comments
Post a Comment