The Origins of Language: Rousseau and Saussure on Langue, Parole, and Langage

"Rousseau believed language is born from the heart's passions; Saussure argued it is the product of our minds' structures— a distinction that makes all the difference in understanding the essence of their respective theories."

Introduction

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his "Essay on the Origin of Languages," argues that speech (la parole) distinguishes humans from animals, while language (le langage) differentiates nations. He posits that one can identify a person's origin by their speech (parle) and that people learn the language (la langue) of their country through necessity and use. He concludes that speech (la parole) is shaped by natural causes, reflecting its foundational role in human society:

"Speech (la parole) distinguishes man among the animals; language (le langage) distinguishes nations from each other; one does not know where a man comes from until he has spoken (parle). Out of usage and necessity, each learns the language (la langue) of his own country. But what determines that this language (langue) is that of his country and not of another? In order to tell, it is necessary to go back to some principle that belongs to the locality itself and antedates its customs, for speech (la parole), being the first social institution, owes its form to natural causes alone." Jean-Jacques Rousseau, "Essay on the Origin of Languages"

While Rousseau used the terms "la parole," "la langue," and "le langage" in their popular sense, Ferdinand de Saussure, born later, assigned these terms precise technical meanings within his linguistic theories. Some philosophers have tried to align Rousseau and Saussure's perspectives, citing superficial similarities, such as the use of certain terms. However, this approach overlooks the significant influence of time and space on conceptual evolution and meaning, presenting challenges in interpreting and translating linguistic theories across different eras and contexts.

Let's elaborate on these ideas by focusing on two aspects: the difference in terminology and the role they assigned to the question of origins.

A Question of Terminology

Separated by a century, Rousseau and Saussure used "parole," "langage," and "langue" very differently. Rousseau, in the 18th century, approached these terms with everyday meaning. "Parole" was simply speaking, what separates us from animals. "Langage" represented language in general, distinguishing cultures. "Langue" was the specific language of a nation, learned through use.

Ferdinand de Saussure, writing in the early 20th century, redefined these terms within his conceptual framework. "Parole" became individual speech acts, the ever-changing utterances in conversation. "Langage" encompasses the overall human capacity for language. "Langue" was the most crucial shift. It became the abstract system of rules governing a language, the underlying structure that allows us to speak ("parole"). This difference in approach is key. Rousseau explored language's origins and development. Saussure focused on its underlying structure:

'the language' (la langue) is the heading one can provide for whatever <generalizations> the linguist may be able to extract from all his observations across time and space. Constantin’s Notebook I 11a

Misinterpretations arise when we force their terms together (Procrustean bed). Understanding their context and goals is crucial for accurate analysis.

A Question of Origins

In "Essay on the Origin of Languages," Chapter Two, Rousseau argues that the primary motivation for the creation of speech was not practical necessity but rather emotional expression:

“It seems then that need dictated the first gestures, while the passions stimulated the first words.”

He suggests that early humans used gestures for practical communication driven by survival needs, such as indicating directions or warning of danger. However, spoken language arose from the need to express complex emotions, or "passions." Rousseau believes that the depth and nuance of feelings like love, anger, and joy could not be effectively conveyed through gestures alone, leading to the development of vocal sounds and structured speech. This perspective emphasizes that language evolved as a crucial means of expressing emotional and social bonds, highlighting its fundamental role in human identity and community.

Ferdinand de Saussure's perspective on the origins of language, as presented in "Course in General Linguistics," contrasts with Rousseau's view. He believes that linguistics should focus on language as it exists rather than speculating about its origins:

“In fact, no society has ever known its language to be anything other than something inherited from previous generations, which it has no choice but to accept. 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. The sole object of study in linguistics is the normal, regular existence of a language already established”. [CGL] [105]

“It is quite illusory to believe that where language is concerned the problem of origins is any different from the problem of permanent conditions. There is no way out of the circle”. [CGL] [24]

Saussure argues that the origins of language are not particularly relevant to linguistics, which should instead focus on how language functions in its established form. By emphasizing the study of language as it exists (synchronic analysis), Saussure avoids the speculative nature of origins (diachronic analysis), which often lack empirical evidence and are highly conjectural. This pragmatic and scientific approach prioritizes observable and analyzable aspects of language over theoretical inquiries into its beginnings.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, Rousseau and Saussure see language differently. Rousseau used terms like "la parole," "la langue," and "le langage" in their popular, everyday sense, associating "parole" with the act of speaking that sets humans apart from animals, "langue" with the specific language of a nation learned through necessity, and "langage" with language in general, which differentiates cultures. In contrast, Saussure, writing over a century later, redefined these terms within his linguistic framework. He conceptualized "parole" as individual speech acts, "langue" as the abstract system of rules underlying a language, and "langage" as the overall human capacity for language.

They also clash on origins. Rousseau emphasized the role of "passions" in the development of language , suggesting that it evolved to convey complex emotions that gestures could not. On the other hand, Saussure dismissed the importance of language origins for linguistic study. He argued that linguistics should focus on language as it exists (synchronic analysis) rather than on its speculative beginnings (diachronic analysis). This approach is pragmatic and scientific, prioritizing observable and analyzable aspects of language over theoretical inquiries into its origins. Understanding these differences is crucial for accurate analysis and interpretation of their respective linguistic theories.

Cite this page: Return to Saussure. http://www.derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com

Related Post:

'Farmers' in the Field of Language: Concrete Analogies in Saussure’s Abstract Theory

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2024/05/farmers-in-field-of-language-concrete.html

 The Nature vs. Nurture Dilemma: Speech, Writing, and Sin

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2023/10/blog-post_14.html

Bibliography

Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Essai sur l'origine des langues. In Collection complète des oeuvres. Genève, 1780-1789, vol. 8, in-4°. Online edition, www.rousseauonline.ch. Version of October 7, 2012. http://www.rousseauonline.ch/Text/essai-sur-l-origine-des-langues.php.

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Essay on the Origin of Languages, Which Treats of Melody and Musical Imitation. Translated by John H. Moran.

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.