Saussure, Chomsky, and Jakobson on Aphasia: Symbolic Representation Revisited

Introduction

In our previous article, The Cognitive Architecture of Signs: Al-Mutairi, Chomsky, and Saussure in Dialogue, we examined two influential theories regarding the cognitive mechanisms underlying language. Ferdinand de Saussure proposed that spoken language, along with other symbolic systems, is governed by a unified cognitive faculty capable of processing diverse sign systems. Noam Chomsky, by contrast, advocated for a modular approach, emphasizing specialized faculties, particularly the syntactic operation known as Merge, which distinguishes spoken language from other symbolic systems.

In this follow-up, we introduce Roman Jakobson’s groundbreaking work on aphasia, which offers key insights into how cognitive impairments affect symbolic processes. By revisiting symbol processing through the lens of aphasia, Jakobson’s findings serve as a bridge between Saussure’s unified cognitive model and Chomsky’s modular framework, allowing us to reassess how language disorders impact these systems and recovery.

Jakobson’s Contribution to Understanding Aphasia

Roman Jakobson’s research on aphasia identified two primary types of linguistic disorders: similarity (metaphoric) disorders and contiguity (metonymic) disorders. Metaphoric disorders hinder the use of figurative and symbolic language, restricting patients’ ability to employ poetic or metaphorical expressions. Metonymic disorders, on the other hand, impair sequential and contextual language use, leading to difficulties in forming coherent, syntactically structured sentences.

Jakobson’s classification illustrates how cognitive deficiencies affect linguistic expression, providing a "real-world" test case for theories of symbolic thought. His work reveals a deeper connection between language and broader symbolic systems, demonstrating how aphasia disrupts not only verbal communication, but also cognitive operations related to other symbolic domains, such as art and literature. These findings lend empirical support to the ongoing debate between Saussure’s view of a unified cognitive faculty and Chomsky’s modular theory of language.

The Metaphoric and Metonymic Poles in Cognitive and Symbolic Systems

Jakobson’s metaphoric and metonymic poles extend Saussure’s syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations. In Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics, syntagmatic relations govern the combination of linguistic units in a sequence (paralleling Jakobson’s metonymic processes), while paradigmatic relations manage substitution and selection (aligning with Jakobson’s metaphoric processes).

From a Saussurean perspective, Jakobson’s findings suggest that a general cognitive faculty governs not only spoken language but a wide range of symbolic systems. Patients with metaphorical disorders often struggle with figurative and poetic language, which indicates a disruption in symbolic processes across language and other media, such as visual art or literature. This supports Saussure’s view of a unified cognitive capacity responsible for managing symbolic behavior across various domains.

Conversely, Jakobson’s findings also align with Chomsky’s modular approach. The selective breakdown in aphasic patients indicates that distinct cognitive modules may underlie specific linguistic processes. Patients with metonymic dysfunctions, for instance, often retain the ability to produce individual words while losing the capacity to form grammatically correct sentences, reinforcing Chomsky’s claim that syntax operates through a specialized cognitive module separate from other language faculties.

In this way, Jakobson’s research shows that both general cognitive mechanisms (Saussure) and modular structures (Chomsky) contribute to the production and disruption of symbolic representation, offering a unique convergence of these two theoretical perspectives.

Comparative Analysis and Broader Implications

Jakobson’s work mediates between Saussure’s and Chomsky’s views, presenting both points of contact and tension. Saussure’s emphasis on a general faculty for symbolic systems aligns with Jakobson’s findings that aphasic disturbances affect broad symbolic processes, not only in language but in other forms of symbolic behavior. Jakobson’s exploration of these processes in diverse cultural contexts—Cubism in art, Surrealism in cinema, and Symbolism in literature—supports Saussure’s view that symbolic systems share underlying cognitive mechanisms.

Simultaneously, Jakobson’s detailed analysis of the effects of aphasia at phonological, morphological, lexical and syntactic levels supports Chomsky’s modular approach. Disorders like agrammatism, where patients retain words but lose grammatical structure, offer real-world examples of the selective impairment of cognitive faculties, providing tangible evidence for Chomsky’s argument that language is governed by specialized, interacting cognitive modules rather than by a unified faculty

Jakobson thus highlights both the broad cognitive processes that support Saussure’s vision and the modular faculties emphasized by Chomsky. This synthesis offers a richer understanding of how symbolic systems function, particularly in cases of limitation, where cognitive breakdowns expose the underlying architecture of these systems.

Contemporary Relevance and Future Directions

Jakobson’s distinction between metaphoric and metonymic poles continues to inform contemporary research on language and symbolic systems. Recent studies in neurolinguistics and aphasia research have built upon his work, investigating how cognitive faculties responsible for metaphor and metonymy operate not only in language but also in other symbolic domains like cinema and visual arts.

Both Saussure’s and Chomsky’s theories remain highly relevant to these discussions. Saussure’s model of a unified cognitive capacity continues to shape debates on how symbolic representation functions across different domains, while Chomsky’s modular approach guides neurolinguistic research into the brain’s specialized language faculties. These theoretical frameworks have direct applications in language rehabilitation. For instance, aphasia therapies that target specific cognitive modules, such as those responsible for syntax or figurative language, can be tailored based on Jakobson’s classification of metaphor and metonymy.

Interdisciplinary research, particularly in semiotics and cognitive neuroscience, can deepen our understanding of how symbolic impairments extend beyond language, potentially influencing future therapeutic approaches for aphasic patients.

Conclusion

Jakobson’s analysis of aphasia bridges Saussure’s unified cognitive faculty with Chomsky’s modular approach to language processing, offering a nuanced understanding of symbolic representation. By examining how aphasia disrupts metaphor and metonymy, Jakobson provides real-world evidence for both general and specialized cognitive processes, enhancing our theoretical models of language and symbolic systems.

These insights hold practical implications for language rehabilitation, particularly in aphasia recovery, where therapies targeting specific cognitive faculties can benefit from Jakobson’s classifications. As research in neurolinguistics and cognitive science progresses, future studies can continue to explore how general cognitive capacities interact with modular faculties in linguistic systems and broader symbolic processes, advancing both theory and clinical practice

Related Posts

Roman Jakobson's Exploration of Aphasia: Implications for Linguistics and Semiotics

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2024/09/blog-post_16.html

The Cognitive Architecture of Signs: Al-Mutairi, Chomsky and Saussure in Dialogue

https://leonardoerasmo.blogspot.com/2024/09/blog-post_14.html

Bibliography

Jakobson, Roman. On Language. Edited by Linda R. Waugh and Monique Monville-Burston. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990.

Al-Mutairi, Fahad Rashed. The Minimalist Program: The Nature and Plausibility of Chomsky’s Biolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

Chomsky, Noam. Science, Mind, and Limits of Understanding. Lecture presented at The Science and Faith Foundation (STOQ), The Vatican, January 2014. https://chomsky.info/201401__/.

Chomsky, Noam. Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures. Third printing. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1989.

Chomsky, Noam. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist Thought. Second Edition. Edited by James McGilvray. Christchurch, New Zealand: Cybereditions Corporation, 2002.

Chomsky, Noam. Language and Mind. Third Edition. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, 2006.

Chomsky, Noam. On Nature and Language. Edited by Adriana Belletti and Luigi Rizzi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

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, Ferdinand de. Cours de linguistique générale. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, with the collaboration of Albert Riedlinger. Arbre d’Or, Genève, 2005.

Bouquet, Simon, Rudolf Engler, and Antoinette Weil, eds. ESCRITOS SOBRE LINGÜÍSTICA GENERAL. Translated by Clara Ubaldina Lorda Mur. Original title: Écrits de linguistique générale, de Ferdinand de Saussure. © Éditions Gallimard, 2002.