Return to Saussure

Introduction Artificial intelligence has rapidly become surrounded by a remarkably stable vocabulary. We are told that AI is inevitable, that algorithms know what we want, that data never lies, that machines will replace human workers, and that the future belongs to those who adapt. These expressions recur in newspaper headlines, corporate presentations, political speeches, and everyday conversation with such regularity that they have acquired the character of common sense. Public debate usually concerns whether they are true. Are algorithms genuinely objective? Can AI understand us? Will automation inevitably transform every profession? Roland Barthes approached questions of this kind differently. Rather than asking whether such statements were true or false, he asked why they appeared so self-evident in the first place. The shift may seem subtle, but it changes the object of inquiry. Instead of evaluating the factual accuracy of particular claims, Barthes directs our attention to...

Introduction Translation is often imagined as a process of finding the right equivalent. Dictionaries reinforce this expectation by pairing words across languages as though each term corresponded neatly to another. Roman Jakobson challenged this assumption in his classic essay On Linguistic Aspects of Translation . Using the seemingly straightforward English word cheese , he demonstrates that lexical equivalence is rarely complete. The difficulty has little to do with dairy products. Instead, it reveals something fundamental about language itself. Jakobson's discussion gains additional depth when read alongside Ferdinand de Saussure's theory of linguistic value and Jonathan Culler's exposition of that theory. Together, these three thinkers suggest that languages do not merely assign different labels to the same world. They organize the conceptual plane differently. Translation therefore exposes the structure of linguistic meaning rather than simply transferring words fr...

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...