Return to Saussure

The Tower of Babel, Pieter Bruegel the Elder. Source: Wikipedia Translation is a mode. To comprehend it as mode one must go back to the original, for that contains the law governing the translation: its translatability. Translatability is an essential quality of certain works, which is not to say that it is essential that they be translated; it means rather that a specific significance inherent in the original manifests itself in its translatability. It is plausible that no translation, however good it may be, can have any significance as regards the original. Yet, by virtue of its translatability the original is closely connected with the translation; in fact, this connection is all the closer since it is no longer of importance to the original. — Walter Benjamin, The task of the translator Thesis Walter Benjamin's The Task of the Translator argues that translatability (Übersetzbarkeit) is not an external property added to literary works but an essential characteristic of...

Introduction In recent years, a wave of popular books, podcasts, and wellness platforms has turned to Greek philosophy for answers to modern challenges. Stoicism is repackaged as a kind of self-help minimalism; Aristotle is reinterpreted to address crises of meaning; Plato becomes a mentor in the art of mindful living. Central to this revival is a promise: that ancient wisdom can make us “happy.” But what if this promise is based on a misunderstanding? What if the happiness Greek thinkers pursued is not the same as the one we seek today? While eudaimonia is often translated as “happiness,” the resemblance is deceptive. The ancients did not view happiness as an emotional state, nor did they locate it in wealth, popularity, power, or personal fulfillment. On the contrary, Aristotle dismissed the life of pleasure as “fit for cattle.”¹ This article offers a cautionary note. It explores how the meanings of happiness have changed over time, and why interpreting ancient ethics through ...

  Introduction Jacques Derrida’s Of Grammatology opens chapter 2 not with a thesis, but with a gesture—a typographical disruption, a pun, a fracture within the word “vêtement.” In doing so, Derrida stages from the outset a critique of Western metaphysics and its privileging of speech over writing. The metaphor of clothing, long used to mark writing as an external covering of the more authentic spoken word, becomes itself the site of philosophical unraveling. But this critique depends not only on what Derrida says, but how he writes. Through a play on the French word for clothing— vêtement , rendered provocatively as vête ment —Derrida exposes the rhetorical structures that sustain philosophical hierarchies, calling into question assumptions about presence, immediacy, and truth. This article explores the rhetorical and philosophical weight of this moment, examining how Derrida’s strategic wordplay deconstructs Saussure’s metaphor of writing as a “disguise,” and how the nuances ...