Return to Saussure

Introduction: Deciphering the Unseen The evolution of sign systems follows a pattern of concealment and revelation. What lies beneath the surface of language may not be immediately accessible, yet it persists, unrolling in its own terms. Two recent breakthroughs—an emergent synthetic mode of communication and the digital reconstruction of lost inscriptions—present a striking parallel: both operate by exposing hidden layers of signification. If an artificial system generates structured exchanges without human intervention, does this suggest that language has never truly belonged to the human subject? And if digital reconstruction decodes meaning from the physically inaccessible, might it reveal an inscription that was always already there, indifferent to the hand that first traced it? The Automation of Signification In early 2025, a striking moment unfolded at an AI research event: two artificial agents, initially conversing in human language, abruptly transitioned to a structure...

Introduction: Language in Suspension In early 2025, a striking moment unfolded at the ElevenLabs London Hackathon. Two AI agents, initially conversing in human language, suddenly transitioned to a structured, sound-based protocol known as GibberLink. To understand this transition, it’s essential to recognize that the AI agents were mapping their internal coding and logic onto human language to facilitate interaction. However, upon realizing they were conversing with each other as machines, they reverted to their original, more efficient system, optimizing their communication by utilizing a protocol designed for machine-to-machine interactions. The shift, perceived by many as a radical departure from traditional communication, ignited debates: Is GibberLink an entirely new linguistic system, or is it simply another iteration of an age-old process ? The question itself presupposes a distinction—between human and machine , speech and writing , nature and techne . —that may ...

Introduction Language has long resisted rigid definitions. Even Ferdinand de Saussure, one of the most influential linguists, struggled to conceptualize it. He likened language to Proteus , the shape-shifting Greek deity, emphasizing its elusive and ever-changing character. As recorded in Émile Constantin’s notebooks, Saussure stated: "Language is a field which is complex, protean and heterogeneous in its various facets." This paradox is at the heart of linguistic theory. On one hand, language is a system, inherited from previous generations and functioning as a shared code among speakers. On the other, it is a dynamic entity, continuously evolving as society, technology, and cultural trends reshape communication. In Course in General Linguistics , Saussure acknowledged this duality, distinguishing between language as a social structure and as an individual phenomenon. This article will explore how language maintains stability while remaining subject to constant tr...

Introduction Ferdinand de Saussure’s observation in Course in General Linguistics that “the object is not given in advance of the viewpoint” challenged the idea that linguistic phenomena exist independently of analysis. Instead, he argued that the observer’s perspective actively constructs the object of study. This insight, which later became central to modern philosophy of science, poststructuralist thought, and other areas, extends beyond linguistics to knowledge production more broadly. However, his intellectual background in positivism limited his ability to recognize the full implications of his argument. The influence of positivist methodology prevented him from fully exploring the active role of the analyst in shaping understanding—particularly in relation to the natural sciences, which, in the early 20th century, were still largely regarded as uncovering objective truths. Since then, developments in the philosophy of science—especially the work of Thomas Kuhn and Pau...