scholarly journals Znak językowy i dychotomia significans : significatum a morfosemantem i funkcja morfosemantyczna

2020 ◽  
Vol LXXVI (76) ◽  
pp. 307-320
Author(s):  
Kazimierz Sroka
Keyword(s):  
Present Author ◽  
Physical Phenomenon ◽  
Acoustic Image ◽  
Ferdinand De Saussure ◽  
Relational Categories ◽  
Linguistic Sign ◽  
Homogeneous Set ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Text Language

Artykuł dotyczy teorii znaku językowego, w tym rozróżnienia elementów: znaczący (significans) i znaczony (significatum). Rozważania skupione są na dwóch przeciwstawnych teoriach: jednej ‒ bilateralnej i psychologistycznej (mentalistycznej), pochodzącej od Ferdinanda de Saussure’a (CLG) i drugiej ‒ unilateralnej i obiektywistycznej autorstwa Leona Zawadowskiego (LTJ). Autor artykułu teorie te porównuje i ocenia, zestawiając je z przedstawianą już w swoich wcześniejszych pracach (m.in. Sroka 2016a i 2016b) własną koncepcją morfosemantemu i funkcji morfosemantycznej. Znak (fr. signe) w ujęciu de Saussure’a składa się z wyobrażenia akustycznego (fr. image acoustique) jako elementu znaczącego (fr. signifiant) i pojęcia (fr. concept) jako elementu znaczonego (fr. signifié), podczas gdy w ujęciu Zawadowskiego obejmuje on tylko będący na płaszczyźnie elementu znaczącego element tekstu (jako zjawisko fizyczne) w jego cechach inherentnych, a poza znakiem pozostaje element rzeczywistości pozatekstowej jako element znaczony. Pojęcie morfosemantemu jest uogólnieniem, modyfikacją i rozwinięciem pojęć znaku językowego wypracowanych przez de Saussure’a i Zawadowskiego. Morfosemantem jest elementem tekstu, definiowanym według trzech kategorii, do których należą: forma (F) (segment tekstu w jego cechach inherentnych), sygnifikacja czynna (S) (fakt, że segment tekstu reprezentuje wybrany element rzeczywistości pozasegmentalnej) i lokacja (L) (występowanie segmentu tekstu w danym otoczeniu). Funkcja morfosemantyczna (o kierunkach: sygnifikacja/lokacja => forma; forma/lokacja => sygnifikacja; forma/sygnifikacja => lokacja) jest rozpięta nad strukturalnie homogenicznym zbiorem morfosemantemów. Zaproponowane pojęcie morfosemantemu jako odpowiednika znaku językowego nie jest ani w pełni bilateralne, gdyż element znaczony (reprezentowany element rzeczywistości pozasegmentalnej (RR)) nie jest częścią morfosemantemu, ani też w pełni unilateralne, ponieważ obok formy (F), tj. kategorii, której wartościami są zespoły cech inherentnych segmentu tekstu, do istoty morfosemantemu należą również kategorie relacyjne: sygnifikacja czynna (S) oraz lokacja (L). Przedstawiona koncepcja morfosemantemu i funkcji morfosemantycznej jest obiektywistyczna, lecz obok niej można też stworzyć interpretację psychologistyczną (mentalistyczną), zakładając, że przedmiot poznania ma swoje odbicie (reprezentację) w umyśle poznającego podmiotu. Language sign and the dichotomy significans : significatum in relation to morphosemanteme and the morphosemantic function. Summary: The paper deals with the theory of language sign and with the distinction between the elements: signifying/signifier (significans) and signified (significatum). The discussion focuses on two opposite theories: one – bilateral and psychologistic (mentalistic) ‒ coming from Ferdinand de Saussure (CLG) and the other ‒ unilateral and objectivistic ‒ authored by Leon Zawadowski (LTJ). The present author compares and evaluates these theories, juxtaposing them with his own conception of morphosemanteme and the morphosemantic function, proposed in his earlier studies (e.g. Sroka 2016a and 2016b). According to de Saussure, a linguistic sign (Fr. signe) consists of the acoustic image (Fr. image acoustique) as the signifying element (Fr. signifiant) and of the concept (Fr. concept) as the signified element (Fr. signifié). According to Zawadowski, the sign includes only the textual element (as a physical phenomenon) in its inherent features, which belongs to the plane of the signifying element, and outside of the sign there is the element of the extratextual reality as the signified element. The concept of the morphosemanteme is a generalization, modification and development of de Saussure’s and Zawadowski’s concepts of the language sign. The morphosemanteme is an element of text defined according to three categories, namely: form (F) (textual segment in its inherent features), active signification (S) (the fact that a textual segment represents a given element of the extrasegmental reality), and location (L) (occurrence of a textual segment in a given environment). The morphosemantic function (of the directions: signification/location => form; form/location => signification; and form/signification => location) expands over a structurally homogeneous set of morphosemantemes. The proposed concept of the morphosemanteme as a counterpart of the language sign is neither fully bilateral, since the signified element (represented element of the extrasegmental reality (RR)) is not part of the morphosemanteme, nor fully unilateral, since in its essence the morphosemanteme includes not only form (F), i.e. the category whose values are sets of the inherent features of the textual segment, but also relational categories: active signification (S) and location (L). The conception of the morphosemanteme and morphosemantic function described here is objectivistic but it is also possible to create its psychologistic (mentalistic) interpretation, assuming that the object of cognition has its reflection (representation) in the mind of the conceiving subject. Keywords: F. de Saussure, Leon Zawadowski, element of text, language sign, signifying element (significans), signified element (significatum), morphosemanteme, form, signification, location, morphosemantic function

scholarly journals PHONOSEMANTISM AS PART OF THE SIGN SYSTEM OF LANGUAGE

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andriiva S. S.
Keyword(s):  
One Dimension ◽  
Emotional States ◽  
Acoustic Image ◽  
Sign System ◽  
Linguistic Sign ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Powerful Means ◽  
Sound Unit ◽  
Linguistic Units ◽  
To Receive

Phonosemantics is a science with a thousand-year history, the attitude to which is ambiguous. Despite the fact that the main principle of this linguistic discipline about the motivation of the sound unit and the legitimacy of the phenomenon has been repeatedly questioned, although discussions on the universality and specificity of the phenomenon under study continue to this day. Language is the most powerful means of forming thought; social phenomenon that attest to such its main functions as informational, communicative, emotional, cognitive, epistemological, accumulative. All functions are usually implemented not in isolation, but in various combinations, because each statement in most cases is multifunctional. All functions ultimately work for communication, and that's in the sense that the communicative function is leading. Simultaneously with the acquisition of human language, it acquires knowledge about the world around, which significantly shortens and simplifies the path of cognition, protects a person from unnecessary mistakes. F. de Saussure explained the problem of the value of a linguistic sign, arguing that a linguistic sign combines a concept and an acoustic image and has two essential features: arbitrariness (unmotivated) and linearity (unfolding in time and one dimension). The sign is used to indicate an object outside it, to receive, store and transmit information. A sign acquires its meaning only in a certain system, because outside it is not a sign and means nothing. The palette of phonosemantic searches is inexhaustible, as each linguistic and literary-artistic direction in various manifestations considers the symbolism of images of phonemes, phonemes, morphemes, tokens, syntagms, texts. The scope of using linguistic units with existing phonosemantic features is different types of movement, sound, light phenomena, physiological and emotional states of both humans and animals.

Johann Joachim Becher (1635–1682), a little known opponent of Comenius’ Theory of Language and Language Learning

1996 ◽  
Vol 23 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 73-88
Author(s):  
Werner Hüllen
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
Learning Abilities ◽  
Word Classes ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
Situational Learning ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Mind

Summary Concerning the methods of language teaching, Johann Joachim Becher (1635–1682), one of the encyclopedic philosophers of the 17th century, stood in opposition to Jan Amos Comenius (1592–1670), the pedagogue of Europewide influence. He published Methodus didactica (1668) and Novum organon (1672), the latter being a universal nomenclator as they were popular in the 17th century. This nomenclator is organised according to Aristotelian categories which Becher saw expressed in word-classes. It assembles groups of synonyms in Latin and German under headwords which were taken as the simple notions, i.e., the building-blocks, of the human mind. Becher demanded didactic principles to be developed out of these linguistic assumptions. Whereas Comenius shaped his teaching methods according to the situational learning abilities of the individual, Becher regarded them as being dominated by the structures of language seen as structures of the mind, thus foreshadowing Cartesian thinking.

scholarly journals CONVEX AND CONCAVE: CONCEPTUAL BOUNDARIES IN PSYCHOLOGY, NOW AND THEN (BUT MAINLY THEN)

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 449-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rick Rylance
Keyword(s):  
Nervous System ◽  
Mental Phenomenon ◽  
Linguistic Sign ◽  
Magnum Opus ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Victorian Psychology ◽  
Modern Thinking

MY TITLEis derived from G. H. Lewes's psychological magnum opusProblems of Life and Mind(1874–79). Lewes's image is a metaphor for the relation of mind to brain, or more generally of the mind to the nervous system: “every mental phenomenon has its corresponding neural phenomenon (the two being as convex and concave surfaces of the same sphere, distinguishable yet identical)” (Problems: First Series1: 112). His point is that, though the two entities can be analytically distinguished, they are as necessarily linked as the two surfaces of a bending plane. Like the recto and verso of a sheet of paper, or signifier and signified in the linguistic sign, one can make an interpretative separation of the two, but not an ontological one. It is a characteristically deft metaphor by Lewes to express a notoriously vexed relationship, not only in Victorian psychology but also in modern thinking today.

scholarly journals Semiotic Interpretation of Bangla Ligatures: An Introduction

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-124
Author(s):  
Sanjida Afrin
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Charles Sanders Peirce ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Writing System ◽  
Social Phenomena ◽  
Ferdinand De Saussure ◽  
Linguistic Sign ◽  
Semiotic Perspective ◽  
Potential Sign ◽  
Separate Discipline

Semiotics is the study of sign processes emphasizing signification and communication, signs and symbols of different social phenomena. In the late 19th and early 20th century the works of Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce led to the emergence of semiotics as a separate discipline as well as method for examining phenomena in different fields, including aesthetics, anthropology, communications, psychology, and semantics. Saussure's interpretation of linguistic sign from a semiotic perspective has, better or worse, affected much of subsequent discussions about language. But according to Peirce, meaning is not directly attached to the sign; instead, it is mediated through the interaction between the representamen, interpretant, and object. This paper initiates a brief semiotic interpretation of Bengali ligature-an essential component of Bengali writing system, since semiotics considers ligature, like other linguistic components, a potential sign-unit. Key words: ligature, Saussure, Peirce, Object.DOI: 10.3329/dujl.v2i3.4147 The Dhaka University Journal of Linguistics: Vol.2 No.3 February, 2009 Page: 111-124

Pictet’s Du Beau (1856) and the crystallisation of saussurean linguistics

2003 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
John E. Joseph
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Life ◽  
Independent Evidence ◽  
Missing Link ◽  
Language System ◽  
Ferdinand De Saussure ◽  
The Enlightenment ◽  
Linguistic Sign ◽  
Hippolyte Taine

Summary The key formative figure in the intellectual life of the young Ferdinand de Saussure was Adolphe Pictet (1799–1875), a family friend best remembered for his Les origines indo-européennes, ou Les Aryas primitifs: Essai de paléontologie linguistique (1859–1863). A review of its second edition written by Saussure two years after Pictet’s death contains a wealth of information about his life and work, including a description of his book Du beau, dans la nature, l’art et la poésie: Etudes esthétiques (1856). In it, Pictet makes clear that aesthetics is principally centred on the problem of the meaning of the word beauty, and that within this problem are to be found all the tensions between the rational and sensible, the intellectual and emotional, the subjective and objective, and intention and reaction, that are at the heart of the whole Enlightenment discourse on the nature of language. A number of remarks on regularity of form in nature, for example in crystallisation, find echoes in Saussure’s later characterisation of the language system, as do Pictet’s assertions about the arbitrary nature of the linguistic sign and about the signified being not a thing but a concept. Indeed, a number of ‘influences’ on Saussure which Aarsleff (1982) credited to Hippolyte Taine (1828–1893) – for whom we have no independent evidence of such influence – can more convincingly be ascribed to his early mentor Pictet. Du beau moreover provides a ‘missing link’ between the Enlightenment philosophers whose aesthetic views it details, and the traces of their philosophical positions that have repeatedly been detected in the Cours de linguistique générale.

scholarly journals Theatre of the Mind: A Project to Animate the Language of Thought and Communication

2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 272-273
Author(s):  
Eric S. Wheeler
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Of Thought ◽  
Acting Out ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Second Language Teaching ◽  
Complex Part ◽  
Integrated Theory ◽  
Constructive Dialogue ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
The Mind

Human language is a rich and complex part of human behaviour that can be studied in many ways. The author and his colleagues are developing an application that accepts simple texts as input and presents an animated display of characters acting out the text. It mimics the human visualization of texts, the so-called Theatre of the Mind. In so doing, they need an integrated theory of language; they can test such a theory for consistency and completeness because it is implemented in computable form. In practice, they may have the basis for a useful tool for developing literacy or second-language teaching. By entering expressions, learners can see what the expressions mean and so learn, in a constructive dialogue, some of the language-specific features that they need to master.

Meaning Redefined

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Göran Sonesson ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Present Author ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Medieval Philosophy ◽  
Fundamental Part ◽  
Essential Contribution ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Scholastic Realism ◽  
Recurrent Theme ◽  
Do So

From the point of view of semiotics, the essential contribution of John Deely consists in having made us all aware of the richness of the Scholastic heritage, and to have explained it to us latter-day semioticians. Even for those, who, like the present author, think that semiotics was alive and well between the dawn of the Latin Age, and the rediscovery of Scholastic realism by Peirce, the notions coined by the Scholastic philosophers are intriguing. To make sense of scholastic notions such as ens reale and ens rationis is not a straightforward matter, but it is worthwhile trying to do so, in particular by adapting these notions to ideas more familiar in the present age. Starting out from the notions of Scholastic Realism, we try in the following to make sense of the different meanings of meaning, only one of which is the sign. It will be suggested that there are counterparts to ens rationis, not only in the thinking of some contemporary philosophers, but also, in a more convoluted way, in the discussion within cognitive science about different extensions to the mind. The recurrent theme of the paper will be Deely’s musing, according to which signs, unlike any other kind of being, form relations which may connect things which are mind-dependent (ens rationis) and mind-independent (ens reale). The import of this proposition is quite different if is applied to what we will call the Augustinian notion of the sign, or to the Fonseca notion, which is better termed intentionality. In both cases, however, mind-dependence will be shown to have a fundamental part to play. Following upon the redefinition of Medieval philosophy suggested by Deely, we will broach a redefinition of something even wider: meaning even beyond signs.

From Maine de Biran to the ‘Motor Theory’ of speech

1996 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-364
Author(s):  
Federico Albano Leoni ◽  
Francesca M. Dovetto
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
General Theory ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Motor Theory ◽  
Ferdinand De Saussure ◽  
Articulatory Movements ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
The 19Th Century

Summary The basic idea of the modern Motor Theory of Speech Perception (Liberman et al. 1963) is that “the perception of speech is tightly linked to the feedback from the speaker’s own articulatory movements”. In this paper we try to show how the same idea was already formulated by the French philosopher Maine de Biran (1805) and taken up in the second half of the 19th century by psychologists (like Steinthal) and linguists (like Kruszewski and Paul). However, whereas in the 19th century the articulatory point of view was not only dominant, but also the only one incorporated in a general theory of language, in the 20th century the articulatory perspective is supplemented by the acoustic one (cf. Malmberg 1967). This was only hinted at by Ferdinand de Saussure in the Cours, but fully expressed in Jakobson & Halle (1956). In this respect, Liberman’s Motor Theory is to be considered much less original than it has been claimed.

Language as a complex algebra: Post-structuralism and inflectional morphology in Saussure’s Cours

Semiotica ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 (208) ◽  
pp. 133-154
Author(s):  
Raúl Aranovich
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Inflectional Morphology ◽  
Word Form ◽  
Acoustic Image ◽  
Complex Algebra ◽  
Linguistic Sign ◽  
Word Forms ◽  
Human Actors ◽  
Static Nature

AbstractIn Item-and-Arrangement models of inflection, morphemes are associations of form and meaning stored in a mental lexicon. Saussure’s notion of the linguistic sign as a unit of an acoustic image (signifier) and a concept (signified) immediately suggests such a model. But close examination of the examples of inflectional morphology throughout the Cours brings Saussure’s ideas more in line with Process morphology, a model in which recurrent elements in word forms are exponents of content features, and realizational rules license a word form inferentially from the word’s content. The Saussurean sign allowed French structuralists to revolutionize the methods of modern social science, eschewing the motives and intentions of human actors to focus on the system of oppositions that make signification possible in each domain. Eventually, post-structuralism rejected the static nature of the linguistic sign, forcing linguistics into relative isolation (since it held on to sign-based models of language). The criticism of structuralist treatments of morphology in Process models of inflection, however, stands as an exception to this tendency. In retrospect, I argue, similar ideas can be found in Saussure’s view of the langue as a complex algebra.

scholarly journals Iconicity in Saussure’s Linguistic Work

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
John E. Joseph
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Ferdinand De Saussure ◽  
Linguistic Sign ◽  
The Relationship

Summary Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913) is routinely criticized for denying the possibility of iconicity in language through his principle of the arbitrariness of linguistic signs. Yet two of his articles, one from the beginning (1877) and the other from the end (1912) of his career, propose analyses of the development of certain Latin verbs and adjectives in which iconicity plays a key role. Saussure did not dismiss iconicity, but limited its sphere of application to the relationship between signs and their referents, which falls outside linguistics as he defined it. Hence iconicity does not contradict arbitrariness, which applies to the relationship between signifier and signified within the linguistic sign.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document