The Primacy of Symbols: Saussure, Semiology, and the Language of the Other

Introduction

Ferdinand de Saussure’s revolutionary insights into the nature of language fundamentally challenged the deeply ingrained assumption that spoken language is the natural, primary mode of human communication. By distinguishing between "la langue"—the structured, rule-governed system of language—and "le langage," the broader capacity for communication, Saussure argued that the true essence of language lies not in the act of speaking but in the cognitive ability to create and manipulate signs. This view subverts the phonocentric bias that privileges speech over other forms of communication, suggesting that what is fundamentally natural is not speech itself, but the faculty for generating distinct signs corresponding to distinct ideas. Saussure’s approach anticipates later critiques of phonocentrism, notably those of Jacques Derrida, who argued that Western thought has long privileged speech as the most authentic form of language, marginalizing other sign systems as secondary or derivative.

Saussure’s semiology—a proposed science of signs—rejects this hierarchical view by positioning language as part of a broader spectrum of symbolic systems, including writing, sign language, symbolic rites, and other forms of communication. In doing so, his theory offers a radical rethinking of language as an adaptable, sign-based system rather than a rigid, speech-bound function, thereby inviting us to see speech as just one of many possible manifestations of our deeper cognitive abilities. This perspective not only challenges the primacy of spoken language but also aligns Saussure with contemporary debates about the nature of communication, where the boundaries between human and non-human, spoken and non-spoken, are continually reexamined. Empirical evidence from studies of non-human primates, such as Washoe and Sarah—chimpanzees who learned symbolic forms of communication without speech—provides compelling support for Saussure’s vision. These cases illustrate that the cognitive foundations of language are not inherently tied to any specific modality, reinforcing Saussure’s challenge to phonocentrism and affirming the validity of diverse forms of symbolic expression.

In the following sections, we will delve deeper into Saussure's challenge to phonocentrism, examining how his viewpoint on language reshape our understanding of communication and exploring empirical evidence that underscores the adaptability of human linguistic capacities beyond spoken speech.

Ferdinand de Saussure: Challenging Phonocentric Views of Language

Ferdinand de Saussure challenges the notion that spoken language is a natural function of the human vocal apparatus. In his Course in General Linguistics, Saussure distinguishes between "la langue"—the structured system of language—and "le langage," the broader capacity for communication, arguing that the use of vocal organs for speech is not an inherent natural function but a social convention. He contends that, unlike legs evolved specifically for walking, there is no definitive evidence that our vocal apparatus is biologically specialized for speech. “It has not been established that the function of language, as manifested in speech, is entirely natural: that is to say, it is not clear that our vocal apparatus is made for speaking as our legs for walking,” he writes.

Saussure’s critique is further supported by the American linguist William Dwight Whitney, whom he references to highlight the arbitrary nature of using the vocal organs for communication. Whitney views languages as social constructs, equating them with other social institutions, and argues that the use of vocal organs for language is more about convenience than necessity: “It is a matter of chance or mere convenience that it is our vocal apparatus we use for linguistic purposes.” Saussure acknowledges that while Whitney’s perspective might be somewhat extreme, it aligns with the broader argument that language is fundamentally a social convention, not a biologically predetermined act tied specifically to speech.

Ultimately, Saussure’s arguments reposition the debate around language, suggesting that while speech is a powerful and pervasive form of communication, it is just one of many possible manifestations of our deeper cognitive abilities. This perspective opens the door to viewing language as an adaptable, sign-based system rather than a rigid, speech-bound function, challenging the primacy of spoken language and inviting us to rethink the supposed naturalness of our vocal expressions.

Languages and Their Place in Human Affairs: Semiology

In the broader framework of his linguistic theory, Saussure situates language within the field of semiology, the study of signs as part of social life. In Course in General Linguistics, Chapter 3, §3 La sémiologie, he famously posits that language is not an isolated phenomenon but a system of signs comparable to writing, symbolic rites, forms of politeness, military signals, and more. Saussure proposes that a new science—semiology—should emerge to investigate the nature of signs and the laws governing them. This science would extend beyond linguistics, revealing the social and psychological dimensions that underlie all systems of communication: “It is therefore possible to conceive of a science which studies the role of signs as part of social life. We shall call it semiology (from the Greek sēmeîon, ‘sign’). It would investigate the nature of signs and the laws governing them. Linguistics is only one branch of this general science. The laws which semiology will discover will be laws applicable in linguistics, and linguistics will thus be assigned to a clearly defined place in the field of human knowledge”.

He argues that the linguistic problem is fundamentally semiological, and understanding language requires examining it alongside other sign systems, challenging the conventional view that languages are mere nomenclatures and pointing out that such a superficial perspective overlooks the deeper, structural similarities between linguistic and non-linguistic signs. To uncover the true nature of language, he argues, one must explore what languages share with other semiological systems rather than focusing solely on the vocal apparatus that differentiates spoken language from other forms.

His call for semiology to be recognized as a distinct field challenges the primacy of phonocentric approaches that place undue emphasis on the vocal components of language. He argues that linguistic factors like the workings of the vocal apparatus should be relegated to secondary importance, as they merely differentiate languages from other systems rather than defining their core nature. By examining language as a semiological phenomenon, Saussure encourages a reevaluation of cultural practices, symbolic rites, and social customs as sign systems governed by similar principles.

Saussure’s semiology, therefore, lays the groundwork for understanding language as one manifestation within a vast network of signs, repositioning linguistics as a branch of a broader, interdisciplinary science dedicated to decoding the symbols that shape human social life. This shift in perspective repositions linguistics within a broader scientific framework.

The Cases of Washoe and Sarah: Symbolic Forms of Communication

Attempts to teach spoken language to chimpanzees have consistently failed, likely because their speech organs have not developed in the same way as those of humans. However, these efforts have succeeded when communication systems involving gestures and visual images—rather than vocal sounds—have been employed. This shift highlights an important aspect of language: it is not strictly tied to speech but can manifest through various symbolic forms.

The cases of Washoe and Sarah, two chimpanzees that learned non-vocal forms of communication, provide compelling empirical support for Ferdinand de Saussure’s theoretical framework. Saussure argued that language is fundamentally about the cognitive ability to create and use signs, not the specific vocal means of communication. These examples demonstrate that the essence of language lies in the symbolic representation of ideas, aligning with Saussure’s claim that language systems are adaptable and not confined to spoken words.

Washoe, a chimpanzee trained in American Sign Language (ASL), learned to use approximately 350 signs to communicate, mirroring the way a human child might learn language. Washoe's use of signs—such as combining “WATER” and “BIRD” to describe a swan—illustrates her capacity for symbolic thought and challenges the notion that language is inherently phonocentric. Her success with ASL underscores that the vocal apparatus is not a prerequisite for language, as her communication relied on the same cognitive faculty Saussure identified as central to human language: the ability to create and manipulate signs, independent of the medium.

Similarly, Sarah, another chimpanzee trained to use plastic tokens, further exemplifies Saussure’s principles. Each token functioned as a distinct sign, allowing Sarah to form syntactic expressions governed by consistent grammatical rules. Her use of tokens to represent abstract concepts, such as negation and conditional statements, demonstrates a sophisticated level of symbolic thinking that transcends basic communication. This highlights a core element of Saussure’s theory: the arbitrariness of the sign, where the relationship between the signifier and the signified is not bound by physical resemblance but by social convention.

Together, the cases of Washoe and Sarah illustrate Saussure’s argument that the essence of language lies in the cognitive ability to generate systems of signs, not in the physical act of speaking. Their successes challenge the phonocentric view of language, supporting the broader claim that symbolic representation is the true foundation of communication. These examples validate Saussure’s theory that language is a social phenomenon governed by conventions and the inherent cognitive capacity for symbolization, regardless of whether the medium is vocal, visual, or tactile.

Ultimately, Washoe and Sarah’s achievements provide empirical weight to Saussure’s challenge to traditional views of language, expanding our understanding of communication as a fundamental aspect of both human and non-human cognition.

Conclusion

Ferdinand de Saussure’s original theories compel us to reconsider the long-standing belief that spoken language is the primary mode of communication. By centering the cognitive faculty to create and use signs as the underlying principle that govern language, Saussure shifts our focus away from the vocal apparatus and toward the deeper symbolic capabilities that underpin all forms of communication, which he called la langue. Speech (la parole), in this view, emerges as just one manifestation among many—no more fundamental than sign language, writing, or other visual and tactile systems. The cases of Washoe and Sarah, chimpanzees who successfully used symbolic systems to convey complex ideas, provide compelling empirical support for this perspective, demonstrating that the capacity for language is not exclusive confined to speech. Instead, it is a broader cognitive ability that transcends specific communication modes.

This perspective aligns with Jacques Derrida’s later critique of phonocentrism—the privileging of speech over other forms of communication in Western thought. Derrida argues that the emphasis on speech as the most authentic or primary form of language reflects a deeper bias that overlooks the validity of other symbolic systems. Saussure’s semiology, which views language as part of a broader study of signs, prefigures this critique, suggesting that non-oral systems of communication are equally legitimate expressions of the human capacity for meaning-making. Unlike many of his contemporaries, Saussure’s theories resist the phonocentric bias that dominated linguistic thought, positioning him as a forward-thinking figure whose ideas resonate with contemporary debates in linguistics, philosophy, and cognitive science.

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

Related Posts

The Burden of the Word: Examining the Limits of Speech in Science and Fiction

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2024/08/blog-post_312.html

Bibliography

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

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.

Lyons, John. Noam Chomsky. New York: The Viking Press, 1970.

Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washoe_(chimpanzee)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_(chimpanzee)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_language