Return to Saussure

Introduction Language does not merely label reality; it actively constructs it. Jonathan Culler, drawing on Saussure, argues that no single way of dividing or interpreting experience is inherently superior to another, as long as it enables individuals to navigate and flourish within their environment. Similarly, Uexküll’s Umwelt theory suggests that meaning is not exclusive to humans but is shaped by the perceptual and semiotic structures of different species. In the digital sphere, AI systems process data in ways that could be seen as a form of meaning-making, though fundamentally distinct from human and animal cognition. This article explores how these perspectives challenge traditional assumptions about interpretation and considers whether AI systems, in their structured responses to input, participate in semiosis. Language as an Active Shaper of Meaning Culler’s discussion of linguistic systems highlights that they do not simply reflect reality but impose their own structu...

Introduction The study of signs and meaning-making has long been associated with human language and culture, but biosemiotics and ecosemiotics challenge this anthropocentric view. By extending semiotic analysis beyond human communication, these fields argue that signification is a fundamental feature of life itself. The idea that nature is structured through sign relations—observable in animal behavior, plant communication, and environmental patterns—suggests that meaning is not exclusive to human cognition. This perspective finds an intriguing parallel in Jacques Derrida’s concept of arche-writing, which redefines writing as an inscription that precedes and transcends the human subject. Similarly, artificial intelligence (AI) operates by detecting patterns and making inferences from traces of prior states, mirroring both natural and conceptual systems of inscription. This article explores the interrelation of biosemiotics, Derrida’s deconstruction, and AI to reveal a broader cont...

Introduction: Retroactivity and the Instability of Meaning Meaning is never fully immediate; it is constituted after the fact. This principle, central to Derrida’s Of Grammatology , aligns with Freud’s Nachträglichkeit (deferred action) and Lacan’s point de capiton (quilting point). Each concept reveals how interpretation reshapes prior experiences, creating the illusion of coherence where, in fact, meaning is always in flux. Derrida’s notion of après-coup expands Freud’s deferred action by arguing that meaning is never ultimately stabilized. Writing, rather than serving as a derivative form of speech, is the very structure within which signification endlessly defers itself. As Derrida observes, “There is not a single signified that escapes, even if recaptured, the play of signifying references that constitute language.” Freud’s insights into trauma and Lacan’s mechanisms of signification illustrate temporary anchors of meaning, but Derrida deconstructs even these, arguing ...

Conceptual diagram illustrating how AI recursively modifies meaning, inspired by Derrida’s notion of arche-writing. Introduction: AI and the Chain of Signifiers Jacques Derrida’s concept of arche-writing challenges the assumption that meaning is anchored in human cognition, arguing instead that writing exists as an endless chain of signifiers, always in motion and never fixed to a transcendental origin. Signification, in this view, is not a function of human intent but an emergent property of relational networks that reshape sense continuously. With the rise of artificial intelligence and its capacity for language generation, we find a striking parallel to Derrida’s theory. AI systems operate independently of human cognition, generating linguistic structures through recursive processes, statistical modeling, and the continuous reorganization of textual elements. This article explores how algorithmic cognition embodies arche-writing , demonstrating the convergence between ...