Specimen Klim Type Foundry

Klim Type Foundry Specimen
Klim Type Foundry Specimen
Signifier.
Klim Type Foundry Signifier Specimen 3
Thin Thin Italic Extralight

100 100 200
Extralight Italic Light Light Italic

200 300 300
Regular Regular Italic Medium

400 400 500
Medium Italic Bold Bold Italic

500 700 700
Black Black Italic

800 800
84pt Thin -10
Structuralism
84pt Extralight -10
Psychological
84pt Light -10
Classification
84pt Regular -10
Highlighting
84pt Medium -10
Scientifiques
Copyright © 2005 – 2020. All Rights Reserved. ⭍ Generated 16 Dec. 2020 klim.co.nz
84pt Bold -10
Nonuniform
84pt Black -10
Comparison
84pt Thin Italic -10
Misclassification
84pt Extralight Italic -10
Shadowgraphist
84pt Light Italic -10
Crystallization
84pt Regular Italic -10
Accompanying
84pt Medium Italic -10
Homogeneous
84pt Bold Italic -10
Quantitative
84pt Black Italic -10
Frameworks
36pt Thin 0
The concept of signs has been

around for a long time, having been
studied by many philosophers who
include Plato, Aristotle, Augustine,
and others from the medieval period
such as William of Ockham.
36pt Extralight 0
The term “semiotics” “comes

from the Greek root, seme, as in
semeiotikos, an interpreter of signs”.
36pt Light Old-style numerals, Ordinals 0
It wasn’t until the 20th century,

however, that Saussure and
American philosopher Charles
Sanders Peirce brought the term
into awareness.
36pt Regular 0
It was Saussure who created the

terms signifier and signified in
order to break down what a sign
was.
36pt Medium Fancy ligatures 0
Succeeding these founders

were numerous philosophers &
linguists who defined themselves
as semioticians.
36pt Bold 0
These semioticians have each

brought their own concerns to
the study of signs.
36pt Black Old-style numerals 0
Umberto Eco (1976),

a distinguished Italian
semiotician, came to the
conclusion that “if signs can be
used to tell the truth, they can
also be used to lie”.
36pt Thin Italic 0
Postmodernist social theorist Jean

Baudrillard spoke of hyperreality, which
referred to a copy becoming more real than
reality.
36pt Extralight Italic 0
In other words, how the signified becomes

more important than the signifier .
36pt Light Italic Fancy ligatures 0
Then French semiotician Roland

Barthes used signs to explain the concept
of connotation—cultural meanings
attached to words—and denotation—
literal or explicit meanings of words.
36pt Regular Italic 0
Without Saussure’s breakdown of signs

into signified and signifier, however,
these semioticians would not have had
anything to base their concepts on.
36pt Medium Italic 0
The relationship between the

signifier and signified is an arbitrary
relationship.
36pt Bold Italic 0
In other words, “there is no logical

connection” between them.
36pt Black 0
The idea that both the signifier

& the signified are inseparable is
explained by Saussure’s diagram,
which shows how both components
coincide to create the sign.
16pt Thin 0
The terms signified and signifier are most commonly related to semiot-
ics, which is defined by Oxford Dictionaries Online as “the study of signs and sym-
bols and their use or interpretation”. Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist, was
one of the two founders of semiotics. His book, Course in General Linguistics, pub-
lished in 1916, “is considered to be one of the most influential books published in
the twentieth century”. Saussure explained that a sign was not only a sound-im-
age but also a concept. Thus he divided the sign into two components: the signi-
fier (or “sound-image”) and the signified (or “concept”). For Saussure, the signi-
fied and signifier were purely psychological; they were form rather than substance.
Today, following Hjelmslev, the signifier is interpreted as the material form (some-
thing which can be seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted) and the signified as
the mental concept. The concept of signs has been around for a long time, having
been studied by many philosophers who include Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and
others from the medieval period such as William of Ockham. The term “semiot-
ics” “comes from the Greek root, seme, as in semeiotikos, an interpreter of signs”. It
wasn’t until the 20th century, however, that Saussure and American philosopher
16pt Extralight 0
Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and linguists who

defined themselves as semioticians. These semioticians have each brought their
own concerns to the study of signs. Umberto Eco (1976), a distinguished Italian
semiotician, came to the conclusion that “if signs can be used to tell the truth,
they can also be used to lie”. Postmodernist social theorist Jean Baudrillard spoke
of hyperreality, which referred to a copy becoming more real than reality. In oth-
er words, how the signified becomes more important than the signifier . Then
French semiotician Roland Barthes used signs to explain the concept of connota-
tion—cultural meanings attached to words—and denotation—literal or explic-
it meanings of words. Without Saussure’s breakdown of signs into signified and
signifier, however, these semioticians would not have had anything to base their
concepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators tend to describe the signifier
as the form that the sign takes and the signified as the concept to which it refers”.
The relationship between the signifier and signified is an arbitrary relationship.
In other words, “there is no logical connection” between them. This differs from
a symbol, which is “never wholly arbitrary”. The idea that both the signifier and
16pt Light 0
The terms signified and signifier are most commonly related to semi-
otics, which is defined by Oxford Dictionaries Online as “the study of signs and
symbols and their use or interpretation”. Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss lin-
guist, was one of the two founders of semiotics. His book, Course in General
Linguistics, published in 1916, “is considered to be one of the most influen-
tial books published in the twentieth century”. Saussure explained that a sign
was not only a sound-image but also a concept. Thus he divided the sign into
two components: the signifier (or “sound-image”) and the signified (or “con-
cept”). For Saussure, the signified and signifier were purely psychological; they
were form rather than substance. Today, following Hjelmslev, the signifier is in-
terpreted as the material form (something which can be seen, heard, touched,
smelled or tasted) and the signified as the mental concept. The concept of signs
has been around for a long time, having been studied by many philosophers who
include Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and others from the medieval period such as
William of Ockham. The term “semiotics” “comes from the Greek root, seme, as
in semeiotikos, an interpreter of signs”. It wasn’t until the 20th century, howev-
16pt Regular 0
Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and lin-

guists who defined themselves as semioticians. These semioticians have each
brought their own concerns to the study of signs. Umberto Eco (1976), a dis-
tinguished Italian semiotician, came to the conclusion that “if signs can be used
to tell the truth, they can also be used to lie”. Postmodernist social theorist Jean
Baudrillard spoke of hyperreality, which referred to a copy becoming more real
than reality. In other words, how the signified becomes more important than
the signifier . Then French semiotician Roland Barthes used signs to explain
the concept of connotation—cultural meanings attached to words—and deno-
tation—literal or explicit meanings of words. Without Saussure’s breakdown
of signs into signified and signifier, however, these semioticians would not have
had anything to base their concepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators
tend to describe the signifier as the form that the sign takes and the signified as
the concept to which it refers”. The relationship between the signifier and signi-
fied is an arbitrary relationship. In other words, “there is no logical connection”
between them. This differs from a symbol, which is “never wholly arbitrary”.
16pt Medium 0
The terms signified and signifier are most commonly related to se-
miotics, which is defined by Oxford Dictionaries Online as “the study of
signs and symbols and their use or interpretation”. Ferdinand de Saussure, a
Swiss linguist, was one of the two founders of semiotics. His book, Course in
General Linguistics, published in 1916, “is considered to be one of the most
influential books published in the twentieth century”. Saussure explained
that a sign was not only a sound-image but also a concept. Thus he divided
the sign into two components: the signifier (or “sound-image”) and the signi-
fied (or “concept”). For Saussure, the signified and signifier were purely psy-
chological; they were form rather than substance. Today, following Hjelmslev,
the signifier is interpreted as the material form (something which can be
seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted) and the signified as the mental con-
cept. The concept of signs has been around for a long time, having been stud-
ied by many philosophers who include Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and oth-
ers from the medieval period such as William of Ockham. The term “semi-
otics” “comes from the Greek root, seme, as in semeiotikos, an interpreter of
16pt Bold 0

guists who defined themselves as semioticians. These semioticians have
each brought their own concerns to the study of signs. Umberto Eco (1976),
a distinguished Italian semiotician, came to the conclusion that “if signs
can be used to tell the truth, they can also be used to lie”. Postmodernist
social theorist Jean Baudrillard spoke of hyperreality, which referred to a
copy becoming more real than reality. In other words, how the signified be-
comes more important than the signifier . Then French semiotician Roland
Barthes used signs to explain the concept of connotation—cultural mean-
ings attached to words—and denotation—literal or explicit meanings of
words. Without Saussure’s breakdown of signs into signified and signifier,
however, these semioticians would not have had anything to base their con-
cepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators tend to describe the signi-
fier as the form that the sign takes and the signified as the concept to which
it refers”. The relationship between the signifier and signified is an arbi-
trary relationship. In other words, “there is no logical connection” between
16pt Thin Italic 0
The terms signified and signifier are most commonly related to semiotics, which is de-
fined by Oxford Dictionaries Online as “the study of signs and symbols and their use or interpretation”.
Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist, was one of the two founders of semiotics. His book, Course in
General Linguistics, published in 1916, “is considered to be one of the most influential books published
in the twentieth century”. Saussure explained that a sign was not only a sound-image but also a con-
cept. Thus he divided the sign into two components: the signifier (or “sound-image”) and the signified
(or “concept”). For Saussure, the signified and signifier were purely psychological; they were form rath-
er than substance. Today, following Hjelmslev, the signifier is interpreted as the material form (some-
thing which can be seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted) and the signified as the mental concept. The
concept of signs has been around for a long time, having been studied by many philosophers who include
Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and others from the medieval period such as William of Ockham. The
term “semiotics” “comes from the Greek root, seme, as in semeiotikos, an interpreter of signs”. It wasn’t
until the 20th century, however, that Saussure and American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce
brought the term into awareness. While both Saussure and Peirce contributed greatly to the concept of
signs, it is important to note that each differed in their approach to the study, and it was Saussure who
created the terms signifier and signified in order to break down what a sign was. The Course became
16pt Extralight Italic 0
Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and linguists who defined
themselves as semioticians. These semioticians have each brought their own concerns to the study
of signs. Umberto Eco (1976), a distinguished Italian semiotician, came to the conclusion that
“if signs can be used to tell the truth, they can also be used to lie”. Postmodernist social theorist
Jean Baudrillard spoke of hyperreality, which referred to a copy becoming more real than reali-
ty. In other words, how the signified becomes more important than the signifier . Then French se-
miotician Roland Barthes used signs to explain the concept of connotation—cultural meanings
attached to words—and denotation—literal or explicit meanings of words. Without Saussure’s
breakdown of signs into signified and signifier, however, these semioticians would not have had an-
ything to base their concepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators tend to describe the signifier
as the form that the sign takes and the signified as the concept to which it refers”. The relationship
between the signifier and signified is an arbitrary relationship. In other words, “there is no logical
connection” between them. This differs from a symbol, which is “never wholly arbitrary”. The idea
that both the signifier and the signified are inseparable is explained by Saussure’s diagram, which
shows how both components coincide to create the sign. As a consequence, Saussure’s ideas are now
often presented by professional linguists as outdated and as superseded by developments such as cog-
16pt Light Italic 0
The terms signified and signifier are most commonly related to semiotics, which
is defined by Oxford Dictionaries Online as “the study of signs and symbols and their use or
interpretation”. Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist, was one of the two founders of semi-
otics. His book, Course in General Linguistics, published in 1916, “is considered to be one of
the most influential books published in the twentieth century”. Saussure explained that a sign
was not only a sound-image but also a concept. Thus he divided the sign into two components:
the signifier (or “sound-image”) and the signified (or “concept”). For Saussure, the signified
and signifier were purely psychological; they were form rather than substance. Today, follow-
ing Hjelmslev, the signifier is interpreted as the material form (something which can be seen,
heard, touched, smelled or tasted) and the signified as the mental concept. The concept of signs
has been around for a long time, having been studied by many philosophers who include Plato,
Aristotle, Augustine, and others from the medieval period such as William of Ockham. The
term “semiotics” “comes from the Greek root, seme, as in semeiotikos, an interpreter of signs”.
It wasn’t until the 20th century, however, that Saussure and American philosopher Charles
Sanders Peirce brought the term into awareness. While both Saussure and Peirce contribut-
ed greatly to the concept of signs, it is important to note that each differed in their approach to
16pt Regular Italic 0
Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and linguists who de-
fined themselves as semioticians. These semioticians have each brought their own con-
cerns to the study of signs. Umberto Eco (1976), a distinguished Italian semiotician, came
to the conclusion that “if signs can be used to tell the truth, they can also be used to lie”.
Postmodernist social theorist Jean Baudrillard spoke of hyperreality, which referred to a
copy becoming more real than reality. In other words, how the signified becomes more im-
portant than the signifier . Then French semiotician Roland Barthes used signs to explain
the concept of connotation—cultural meanings attached to words—and denotation—lit-
eral or explicit meanings of words. Without Saussure’s breakdown of signs into signified
and signifier, however, these semioticians would not have had anything to base their con-
cepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators tend to describe the signifier as the form
that the sign takes and the signified as the concept to which it refers”. The relationship be-
tween the signifier and signified is an arbitrary relationship. In other words, “there is no
logical connection” between them. This differs from a symbol, which is “never wholly ar-
bitrary”. The idea that both the signifier and the signified are inseparable is explained by
Saussure’s diagram, which shows how both components coincide to create the sign.
16pt Medium Italic 0
The terms signified and signifier are most commonly related to semiot-
ics, which is defined by Oxford Dictionaries Online as “the study of signs and symbols
and their use or interpretation”. Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist, was one of
the two founders of semiotics. His book, Course in General Linguistics, published in
1916, “is considered to be one of the most influential books published in the twenti-
eth century”. Saussure explained that a sign was not only a sound-image but also a
concept. Thus he divided the sign into two components: the signifier (or “sound-im-
age”) and the signified (or “concept”). For Saussure, the signified and signifier
were purely psychological; they were form rather than substance. Today, following
Hjelmslev, the signifier is interpreted as the material form (something which can be
seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted) and the signified as the mental concept. The
concept of signs has been around for a long time, having been studied by many philos-
ophers who include Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and others from the medieval period
such as William of Ockham. The term “semiotics” “comes from the Greek root, seme,
as in semeiotikos, an interpreter of signs”. It wasn’t until the 20th century, however,
that Saussure and American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce brought the term
16pt Bold Italic 0

guists who defined themselves as semioticians. These semioticians have each
brought their own concerns to the study of signs. Umberto Eco (1976), a distin-
guished Italian semiotician, came to the conclusion that “if signs can be used to
tell the truth, they can also be used to lie”. Postmodernist social theorist Jean
Baudrillard spoke of hyperreality, which referred to a copy becoming more real
than reality. In other words, how the signified becomes more important than
the signifier . Then French semiotician Roland Barthes used signs to explain
the concept of connotation—cultural meanings attached to words—and deno-
tation—literal or explicit meanings of words. Without Saussure’s breakdown
of signs into signified and signifier, however, these semioticians would not have
had anything to base their concepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators
tend to describe the signifier as the form that the sign takes and the signified as
the concept to which it refers”. The relationship between the signifier and signi-
fied is an arbitrary relationship. In other words, “there is no logical connection”
between them. This differs from a symbol, which is “never wholly arbitrary”.
9pt Extralight Old-style numerals, Smallcaps 0
Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and ing depends on its relation to other words within the system” (for ex-
linguists who defined themselves as semioticians. These semioticians ample, to understand an individual word such as “tree”, one must also
have each brought their own concerns to the study of signs. Umberto understand the word “bush” and how the two relate to each other). It
Eco (1976), a distinguished Italian semiotician, came to the conclu- is this difference from other signs that allows the possibility of a speech
sion that “if signs can be used to tell the truth, they can also be used to community. However we need to remember that signifiers and their sig-
lie”. Postmodernist social theorist Jean Baudrillard spoke of hyperre- nificance change all the time, becoming “dated”. It is in this way that
ality, which referred to a copy becoming more real than reality. In oth- we are all “practicing semioticians who pay a great deal of attention to
er words, how the signified becomes more important than the signifier . signs… even though we may never have heard them before.” And while
Then French semiotician Roland Barthes used signs to explain the con- words are the most familiar form signs take, they stand for many things
cept of connotation—cultural meanings attached to words—and deno- within life, such as advertisement, objects, body language, music, and so
tation—literal or explicit meanings of words. Without Saussure’s break- on. Therefore, the use of signs, and the two components that make up a
down of signs into signified and signifier, however, these semioticians sign, can be and are—whether consciously or not—applied to everyday
would not have had anything to base their concepts on. Today, “contem- life. One of his translators, Roy Harris, summarized Saussure’s contribu-
porary commentators tend to describe the signifier as the form that the tion to linguistics and the study of “the whole range of human sciences.
sign takes and the signified as the concept to which it refers”. The rela- It is particularly marked in linguistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology
tionship between the signifier and signified is an arbitrary relationship. and anthropology.” Although they have undergone extension and cri-
In other words, “there is no logical connection” between them. This dif- tique over time, the dimensions of organization introduced by Saussure
fers from a symbol, which is “never wholly arbitrary”. The idea that both continue to inform contemporary approaches to the phenomenon of
the signifier and the signified are inseparable is explained by Saussure’s language. Prague school linguist Jan Mukařovský writes that Saussure’s
diagram, which shows how both components coincide to create the “discovery of the internal structure of the linguistic sign differentiat-
sign. So the question is, how do signifiers create meaning and how do ed the sign both from mere acoustic ’things’... and from mental process-
we know what that meaning is? In order to understand how the signifi- es”, and that in this development “new roads were thereby opened not
er and signified relate to each other, one must be able to interpret signs. only for linguistics, but also, in the future, for the theory of literature”.
“The only reason that the signifier does entail the signified is because Ruqaiya Hasan argued that “the impact of Saussure’s theory of the lin-
there is a conventional relationship at play”. That is, a sign can only be guistic sign has been such that modern linguists and their theories have
understood when the relationship between the two components that since been positioned by reference to him: they are known as pre-Sau-
make up the sign are agreed upon. Saussure argued that a sign’s “mean- ssurean, Saussurean, anti-Saussurean, post-Saussurean, or non-Saus-
9pt Light Old-style numerals, Smallcaps 0
Saussure was born in Geneva in 1857. His father was Henri Louis not unproblematic. Thus, for example, his publication on Lithuanian
Frédéric de Saussure, a mineralogist, entomologist, and taxonomist. phonetics is grosso modo taken from studies by the Lithuanian re-
Saussure showed signs of considerable talent and intellectual abili- searcher Friedrich Kurschat, with whom Saussure traveled through
ty as early as the age of fourteen. In the autumn of 1870, he began at- Lithuania in August 1880 for two weeks, and whose (German) books
tending the Institution Martine (previously the Institution Lecoultre Saussure had read. Saussure, who had studied some basic grammar of
until 1969), in Geneva. There he lived with the family of a classmate, Lithuanian in Leipzig for one semester but was unable to speak the
Elie David. Graduating at the top of class, Saussure expected to con- language, was thus dependent on Kurschat. It is also questionable to
tinue his studies at the Gymnase de Genève, but his father decid- what extent the Cours itself can be traced back to Saussure (alone).
ed he was not mature enough at fourteen and a half, and sent him to Studies have shown that at least the current version and its content
the Collège de Genève instead. Saussure was not pleased, as he com- are more likely to have the so-called editors Charles Bally and Albert
plained: “I entered the Collège de Genève, to waste a year there as com- Sèchehaye as their source than Saussure himself. Saussure taught at
pletely as a year can be wasted.” After a year of studying Latin, Ancient the École pratique des hautes études for eleven years during which he
Greek and Sanskrit and taking a variety of courses at the University was named Chevalier de la Légion d’Honneur (Knight of the Legion of
of Geneva, he commenced graduate work at the University of Leipzig Honor). When offered a professorship in Geneva in 1892, he returned
in 1876. Two years later, at 21, Saussure published a book entitled to Switzerland. Saussure lectured on Sanskrit and Indo-European at
Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes the University of Geneva for the remainder of his life. It was not until
(Dissertation on the Primitive Vowel System in Indo-European 1907 that Saussure began teaching the Course of General Linguistics,
Languages). After this he studied for a year at the University of Berlin which he would offer three times, ending in the summer of 1911. He
under the Privatdozenten Heinrich Zimmer, with whom he studied died in 1913 in Vufflens-le-Château, Vaud, Switzerland. His brothers
Celtic, and Hermann Oldenberg with whom he continued his studies were the linguist and Esperantist René de Saussure, and scholar of an-
of Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig to defend his doctoral dissertation cient Chinese astronomy, Léopold de Saussure. In turn, his son was
De l’emploi du génitif absolu en Sanscrit, and was awarded his doc- the psychoanalyst Raymond de Saussure. Saussure attempted, at vari-
torate in February 1880. Soon, he relocated to the University of Paris, ous times in the 1880s and 1890s, to write a book on general linguistic
where he lectured on Sanskrit, Gothic and Old High German and oc- matters. His lectures about important principles of language descrip-
casionally other subjects. Ferdinand de Saussure is one of the world’s tion in Geneva between 1907 and 1911 were collected and published by
most quoted linguists, which is remarkable as he himself hardly pub- his pupils posthumously in the famous Cours de linguistique générale
lished anything during his lifetime. Even his few scientific articles are in 1916. Some of his manuscripts, including an unfinished essay discov-
9pt Regular Old-style numerals, Smallcaps, Ordinals 0
Saussure’s theoretical reconstructions of the Proto-Indo- in that period of influence was done by the Prague school. Most no-
European language vocalic system and particularly his theory of lary- tably, Nikolay Trubetzkoy and Roman Jakobson headed the efforts
ngeals, otherwise unattested at the time, bore fruit and found confir- of the Prague School in setting the course of phonological theory in
mation after the decipherment of Hittite in the work of later genera- the decades from 1940. Jakobson’s universalizing structural-func-
tions of linguists such as Émile Benveniste and Walter Couvreur, who tional theory of phonology, based on a markedness hierarchy of dis-
both drew direct inspiration from their reading of the 1878 Mémoire. tinctive features, was the first successful solution of a plane of lin-
Saussure had a major impact on the development of linguistic theory guistic analysis according to the Saussurean hypotheses. Elsewhere,
in the first half of the 20th century. His two currents of thought emer- Louis Hjelmslev and the Copenhagen School proposed new inter-
ged independently of each other, one in Europe, the other in America. pretations of linguistics from structuralist theoretical frameworks. In
The results of each incorporated the basic notions of Saussure’s thou- America, Saussure’s ideas informed the distributionalism of Leonard
ght in forming the central tenets of structural linguistics. According Bloomfield and the post-Bloomfieldian structuralism of such scho-
to him, linguistic entities are parts of a system and are defined by their lars as Eugene Nida, Bernard Bloch, George L. Trager, Rulon S. Wells
relations to one another within said system. The thinker used the III, Charles Hockett and, through Zellig Harris, the young Noam
game of chess for his analogy, citing that the game is not defined by Chomsky. In addition to Chomsky’s theory of transformational gram-
the physical attributes of the chess pieces but the relation of each piece mar, other contemporary developments of structuralism included
to the other pieces. Saussure’s status in contemporary theoretical lin- Kenneth Pike’s theory of tagmemics, Sidney Lamb’s theory of stratifi-
guistics, however, is much diminished, with many key positions now cational grammar, and Michael Silverstein’s work. Systemic functional
dated or subject to challenge, but post-structuralist 21st-century re- linguistics is a theory considered to be based firmly on the Saussurean
ception remains more open to Saussure’s influence. His main contri- principles of the sign, albeit with some modifications. Ruqaiya Hasan
bution to structuralism was his theory of a two-tiered reality about describes systemic functional linguistics as a ’post-Saussurean’ lin-
language. The first is the langue, the abstract and invisible layer, while guistic theory. Michael Halliday argues: Saussure took the sign as the
the second, the parole, refers to the actual speech that we hear in real organizing concept for linguistic structure, using it to express the con-
life. This framework was later adopted by Claude Levi-Strauss, who ventional nature of language in the phrase “l’arbitraire du signe”. This
used the two-tiered model to determine the reality of myths. His idea has the effect of highlighting what is, in fact, the one point of arbi-
was that all myths have an underlying pattern, which form the struc- trariness in the system, namely the phonological shape of words, and
ture that makes them myths. These established the structuralist fra- hence allows the non-arbitrariness of the rest to emerge with greater
mework to literary criticism. In Europe, the most important work clarity. An example of something that is distinctly non-arbitrary is the
9pt Medium Smallcaps, Ordinals 0
Saussure’s most influential work, Course in General Lingu- sure encountered, trying to explain how he was able to make sys-
istics (Cours de linguistique générale), was published posthumous- tematic and predictive hypotheses from known linguistic data to un-
ly in 1916 by former students Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, known linguistic data, stimulated his development of structuralism.
on the basis of notes taken from Saussure’s lectures in Geneva. The His predictions about the existence of primate coefficients/larynge-
Course became one of the seminal linguistics works of the 20th cen- als and their evolution proved a success when Hittite texts were di-
tury not primarily for the content (many of the ideas had been anti- scovered and deciphered, some 50 years later. The neutrality of this
cipated in the works of other 20th century linguists) but for the in- subsection is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk
novative approach that Saussure applied in discussing linguistic page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are
phenomena. Its central notion is that language may be analyzed as a met. (January 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template
formal system of differential elements, apart from the messy dialec- message) The closing sentence of Saussure’s Course in General Lin-
tics of real-time production and comprehension. Examples of the- guistics has been challenged in many[weasel words] academic disci-
se elements include his notion of the linguistic sign, which is compo- plines and subdisciplines with its contention that “linguistics has as
sed of the signifier and the signified. Though the sign may also have its unique and true object the language envisioned in itself and for it-
a referent, Saussure took that to lie beyond the linguist’s purview. self ”. By the latter half of the 20th century, many of Saussure’s ideas
Throughout the book, he stated that a linguist can develop a dia- were under heavy criticism. Saussure’s linguistic ideas are still con-
chronic analysis of a text or theory of language but must learn just as sidered important for their time but have since suffered considera-
much or more about the language/text as it exists at any moment in bly under rhetorical developments aimed at showing how linguis-
time (i.e. “synchronically”): “Language is a system of signs that ex- tics had changed or was changing with the times. As a consequence,
presses ideas”. A science that studies the life of signs within society Saussure’s ideas are now often presented by professional linguists as
and is a part of social and general psychology. Saussure believed that outdated and as superseded by developments such as cognitive lin-
semiotics is concerned with everything that can be taken as a sign, he guistics and generative grammar or have been so modified in their
called it semiology. While a student, Saussure published an import- basic tenets as to make their use in their original formulations diffi-
ant work in Indo-European philology that proposed the existen- cult without risking distortion, as in systemic linguistics. That de-
ce of ghosts in Proto-Indo-European called sonant coefficients. The velopment is occasionally overstated, however; Jan Koster states,
Scandinavian scholar Hermann Möller suggested that they might “Saussure, considered the most important linguist of the century
actually be laryngeal consonants, leading to what is now known as in Europe until the 1950s, hardly plays a role in current theoretical
the laryngeal theory. It has been argued that the problem that Saus- thinking about language,” Over-reactions can also be seen in com-
9pt Extralight Italic Old-style numerals, Smallcaps 0
Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and linguists who is in this way that we are all “practicing semioticians who pay a great deal of attention
defined themselves as semioticians. These semioticians have each brought their own to signs… even though we may never have heard them before.” And while words are the
concerns to the study of signs. Umberto Eco (1976), a distinguished Italian semio- most familiar form signs take, they stand for many things within life, such as adver-
tician, came to the conclusion that “if signs can be used to tell the truth, they can also tisement, objects, body language, music, and so on. Therefore, the use of signs, and the
be used to lie”. Postmodernist social theorist Jean Baudrillard spoke of hyperreality, two components that make up a sign, can be and are—whether consciously or not—
which referred to a copy becoming more real than reality. In other words, how the sig- applied to everyday life. One of his translators, Roy Harris, summarized Saussure’s
nified becomes more important than the signifier . Then French semiotician Roland contribution to linguistics and the study of “the whole range of human sciences. It is
Barthes used signs to explain the concept of connotation—cultural meanings attached particularly marked in linguistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology and anthropolo-
to words—and denotation—literal or explicit meanings of words. Without Saussure’s gy.” Although they have undergone extension and critique over time, the dimensions
breakdown of signs into signified and signifier, however, these semioticians would not of organization introduced by Saussure continue to inform contemporary approach-
have had anything to base their concepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators es to the phenomenon of language. Prague school linguist Jan Mukařovský writes
tend to describe the signifier as the form that the sign takes and the signified as the con- that Saussure’s “discovery of the internal structure of the linguistic sign differentiat-
cept to which it refers”. The relationship between the signifier and signified is an arbi- ed the sign both from mere acoustic ’things’... and from mental processes”, and that in
trary relationship. In other words, “there is no logical connection” between them. This this development “new roads were thereby opened not only for linguistics, but also, in
differs from a symbol, which is “never wholly arbitrary”. The idea that both the signi- the future, for the theory of literature”. Ruqaiya Hasan argued that “the impact of
fier and the signified are inseparable is explained by Saussure’s diagram, which shows Saussure’s theory of the linguistic sign has been such that modern linguists and their
how both components coincide to create the sign. So the question is, how do signifiers theories have since been positioned by reference to him: they are known as pre-Sau-
create meaning and how do we know what that meaning is? In order to understand ssurean, Saussurean, anti-Saussurean, post-Saussurean, or non-Saussure”. The
how the signifier and signified relate to each other, one must be able to interpret signs. Course became one of the seminal linguistics works of the 20th century not primarily
“The only reason that the signifier does entail the signified is because there is a conven- for the content (many of the ideas had been anticipated in the works of other 20th cen-
tional relationship at play”. That is, a sign can only be understood when the relation- tury linguists) but for the innovative approach that Saussure applied in discussing lin-
ship between the two components that make up the sign are agreed upon. Saussure ar- guistic phenomena. Its central notion is that language may be analyzed as a formal
gued that a sign’s “meaning depends on its relation to other words within the system” system of differential elements, apart from the messy dialectics of real-time produc-
(for example, to understand an individual word such as “tree”, one must also under- tion and comprehension. Examples of these elements include his notion of the linguis-
stand the word “bush” and how the two relate to each other). It is this difference from tic sign, which is composed of the signifier and the signified. Though the sign may also
other signs that allows the possibility of a speech community. However we need to re- have a referent, Saussure took that to lie beyond the linguist’s purview. Throughout
member that signifiers and their significance change all the time, becoming “dated”. It the book, he stated that a linguist can develop a diachronic analysis of a text or theo-
9pt Light Italic Old-style numerals, Smallcaps 0
Saussure was born in Geneva in 1857. His father was Henri Louis had read. Saussure, who had studied some basic grammar of Lithuanian in
Frédéric de Saussure, a mineralogist, entomologist, and taxonomist. Saussure Leipzig for one semester but was unable to speak the language, was thus dependent
showed signs of considerable talent and intellectual ability as early as the age of on Kurschat. It is also questionable to what extent the Cours itself can be traced
fourteen. In the autumn of 1870, he began attending the Institution Martine back to Saussure (alone). Studies have shown that at least the current version and
(previously the Institution Lecoultre until 1969), in Geneva. There he lived with its content are more likely to have the so-called editors Charles Bally and Albert
the family of a classmate, Elie David. Graduating at the top of class, Saussure Sèchehaye as their source than Saussure himself. Saussure taught at the École pra-
expected to continue his studies at the Gymnase de Genève, but his father decid- tique des hautes études for eleven years during which he was named Chevalier
ed he was not mature enough at fourteen and a half, and sent him to the Collège de la Légion d’Honneur (Knight of the Legion of Honor). When offered a pro-
de Genève instead. Saussure was not pleased, as he complained: “I entered the fessorship in Geneva in 1892, he returned to Switzerland. Saussure lectured on
Collège de Genève, to waste a year there as completely as a year can be wasted.” Sanskrit and Indo-European at the University of Geneva for the remainder of
After a year of studying Latin, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit and taking a va- his life. It was not until 1907 that Saussure began teaching the Course of General
riety of courses at the University of Geneva, he commenced graduate work at Linguistics, which he would offer three times, ending in the summer of 1911. He
the University of Leipzig in 1876. Two years later, at 21, Saussure published a died in 1913 in Vufflens-le-Château, Vaud, Switzerland. His brothers were the
book entitled Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues in- linguist and Esperantist René de Saussure, and scholar of ancient Chinese astron-
do-européennes (Dissertation on the Primitive Vowel System in Indo-European omy, Léopold de Saussure. In turn, his son was the psychoanalyst Raymond de
Languages). After this he studied for a year at the University of Berlin under the Saussure. Saussure attempted, at various times in the 1880s and 1890s, to write
Privatdozenten Heinrich Zimmer, with whom he studied Celtic, and Hermann a book on general linguistic matters. His lectures about important principles of
Oldenberg with whom he continued his studies of Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig language description in Geneva between 1907 and 1911 were collected and pub-
to defend his doctoral dissertation De l’emploi du génitif absolu en Sanscrit, and lished by his pupils posthumously in the famous Cours de linguistique générale in
was awarded his doctorate in February 1880. Soon, he relocated to the University 1916. Some of his manuscripts, including an unfinished essay discovered in 1996,
of Paris, where he lectured on Sanskrit, Gothic and Old High German and oc- were published in Writings in General Linguistics, but most of the material in it
casionally other subjects. Ferdinand de Saussure is one of the world’s most quoted had already been published in Engler’s critical edition of the Course, in 1967 and
linguists, which is remarkable as he himself hardly published anything during his 1974. The Course became one of the seminal linguistics works of the 20th century
lifetime. Even his few scientific articles are not unproblematic. Thus, for example, not primarily for the content (many of the ideas had been anticipated in the works
his publication on Lithuanian phonetics is grosso modo taken from studies by the of other 20th century linguists) but for the innovative approach that Saussure ap-
Lithuanian researcher Friedrich Kurschat, with whom Saussure traveled through plied in discussing linguistic phenomena. Its central notion is that language may
Lithuania in August 1880 for two weeks, and whose (German) books Saussure be analyzed as a formal system of differential elements, apart from the messy dia-
9pt Regular Italic Old-style numerals, Smallcaps, Ordinals 0
Saussure’s theoretical reconstructions of the Proto-Indo- universalizing structural-functional theory of phonology, based on a marked-
European language vocalic system and particularly his theory of laryngeals, ness hierarchy of distinctive features, was the first successful solution of a plane
otherwise unattested at the time, bore fruit and found confirmation after the of linguistic analysis according to the Saussurean hypotheses. Elsewhere, Louis
decipherment of Hittite in the work of later generations of linguists such as Hjelmslev and the Copenhagen School proposed new interpretations of linguis-
Émile Benveniste and Walter Couvreur, who both drew direct inspiration from tics from structuralist theoretical frameworks. In America, Saussure’s ideas in-
their reading of the 1878 Mémoire. Saussure had a major impact on the deve- formed the distributionalism of Leonard Bloomfield and the post-Bloomfiel-
lopment of linguistic theory in the first half of the 20th century. His two currents dian structuralism of such scholars as Eugene Nida, Bernard Bloch, George L.
of thought emerged independently of each other, one in Europe, the other in Trager, Rulon S. Wells III, Charles Hockett and, through Zellig Harris, the
America. The results of each incorporated the basic notions of Saussure’s thou- young Noam Chomsky. In addition to Chomsky’s theory of transformational
ght in forming the central tenets of structural linguistics. According to him, lin- grammar, other contemporary developments of structuralism included Kenneth
guistic entities are parts of a system and are defined by their relations to one Pike’s theory of tagmemics, Sidney Lamb’s theory of stratificational grammar,
another within said system. The thinker used the game of chess for his analo- and Michael Silverstein’s work. Systemic functional linguistics is a theory con-
gy, citing that the game is not defined by the physical attributes of the chess pie- sidered to be based firmly on the Saussurean principles of the sign, albeit with
ces but the relation of each piece to the other pieces. Saussure’s status in contem- some modifications. Ruqaiya Hasan describes systemic functional linguistics
porary theoretical linguistics, however, is much diminished, with many key po- as a ’post-Saussurean’ linguistic theory. Michael Halliday argues: Saussure
sitions now dated or subject to challenge, but post-structuralist 21st-century re- took the sign as the organizing concept for linguistic structure, using it to ex-
ception remains more open to Saussure’s influence. His main contribution to press the conventional nature of language in the phrase “l’arbitraire du signe”.
structuralism was his theory of a two-tiered reality about language. The first This has the effect of highlighting what is, in fact, the one point of arbitrari-
is the langue, the abstract and invisible layer, while the second, the parole, re- ness in the system, namely the phonological shape of words, and hence allows the
fers to the actual speech that we hear in real life. This framework was later non-arbitrariness of the rest to emerge with greater clarity. The Course beca-
adopted by Claude Levi-Strauss, who used the two-tiered model to determi- me one of the seminal linguistics works of the 20th century not primarily for the
ne the reality of myths. His idea was that all myths have an underlying pattern, content (many of the ideas had been anticipated in the works of other 20th cen-
which form the structure that makes them myths. These established the structu- tury linguists) but for the innovative approach that Saussure applied in discus-
ralist framework to literary criticism. In Europe, the most important work in sing linguistic phenomena. Its central notion is that language may be analyzed
that period of influence was done by the Prague school. Most notably, Nikolay as a formal system of differential elements, apart from the messy dialectics of
Trubetzkoy and Roman Jakobson headed the efforts of the Prague School in real-time production and comprehension. Examples of these elements include
setting the course of phonological theory in the decades from 1940. Jakobson’s his notion of the linguistic sign, which is composed of the signifier and the signi-
9pt Medium Italic Smallcaps, Ordinals 0
Saussure’s most influential work, Course in General Linguis- velopment of structuralism. His predictions about the existence of prima-
tics (Cours de linguistique générale), was published posthumously in 1916 te coefficients/laryngeals and their evolution proved a success when Hitti-
by former students Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, on the basis of te texts were discovered and deciphered, some 50 years later. The neutrality
notes taken from Saussure’s lectures in Geneva. The Course became one of of this subsection is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk
the seminal linguistics works of the 20th century not primarily for the con- page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met.
tent (many of the ideas had been anticipated in the works of other 20th cen- (January 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
tury linguists) but for the innovative approach that Saussure applied in The closing sentence of Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics has been
discussing linguistic phenomena. Its central notion is that language may be challenged in many[weasel words] academic disciplines and subdisciplines
analyzed as a formal system of differential elements, apart from the mes- with its contention that “linguistics has as its unique and true object the
sy dialectics of real-time production and comprehension. Examples of the- language envisioned in itself and for itself”. By the latter half of the 20th
se elements include his notion of the linguistic sign, which is composed of the century, many of Saussure’s ideas were under heavy criticism. Saussure’s
signifier and the signified. Though the sign may also have a referent, Saus- linguistic ideas are still considered important for their time but have since
sure took that to lie beyond the linguist’s purview. Throughout the book, suffered considerably under rhetorical developments aimed at showing how
he stated that a linguist can develop a diachronic analysis of a text or theo- linguistics had changed or was changing with the times. As a consequence,
ry of language but must learn just as much or more about the language/ Saussure’s ideas are now often presented by professional linguists as outda-
text as it exists at any moment in time (i.e. “synchronically”): “Langua- ted and as superseded by developments such as cognitive linguistics and ge-
ge is a system of signs that expresses ideas”. A science that studies the life of nerative grammar or have been so modified in their basic tenets as to make
signs within society and is a part of social and general psychology. Saus- their use in their original formulations difficult without risking distorti-
sure believed that semiotics is concerned with everything that can be ta- on, as in systemic linguistics. That development is occasionally overstated,
ken as a sign, he called it semiology. While a student, Saussure published however; Jan Koster states, “Saussure, considered the most important lin-
an important work in Indo-European philology that proposed the existen- guist of the century in Europe until the 1950s, hardly plays a role in cur-
ce of ghosts in Proto-Indo-European called sonant coefficients. The Scan- rent theoretical thinking about language,” Over-reactions can also be seen
dinavian scholar Hermann Möller suggested that they might actually be in comments of the cognitive linguist Mark Turner who reports that many
laryngeal consonants, leading to what is now known as the laryngeal theo- of Saussure’s concepts were “wrong on a grand scale”. It is necessary to be
ry. It has been argued that the problem that Saussure encountered, trying rather more finely nuanced in the positions attributed to Saussure and in
to explain how he was able to make systematic and predictive hypotheses their longterm influence on the development of linguistic theorizing in all
from known linguistic data to unknown linguistic data, stimulated his de- schools; for a more recent rereading of Saussure with respect to such issues,
7pt Extralight +6
Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers speech community. However we need to remember that sig- de Genève, but his father decided he was not mature enough
and linguists who defined themselves as semioticians. These nifiers and their significance change all the time, becoming at fourteen and a half, and sent him to the Collège de
semioticians have each brought their own concerns to the “dated”. It is in this way that we are all “practicing semioti- Genève instead. Saussure was not pleased, as he complained:
study of signs. Umberto Eco (1976), a distinguished Italian cians who pay a great deal of attention to signs… even “I entered the Collège de Genève, to waste a year there as
semiotician, came to the conclusion that “if signs can be though we may never have heard them before.” And while completely as a year can be wasted.” After a year of studying
used to tell the truth, they can also be used to lie”. words are the most familiar form signs take, they stand for Latin, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit and taking a variety of
Postmodernist social theorist Jean Baudrillard spoke of hy- many things within life, such as advertisement, objects, body courses at the University of Geneva, he commenced gradu-
perreality, which referred to a copy becoming more real than language, music, and so on. Therefore, the use of signs, and ate work at the University of Leipzig in 1876. Two years lat-
reality. In other words, how the signified becomes more im- the two components that make up a sign, can be and are— er, at 21, Saussure published a book entitled Mémoire sur le
portant than the signifier . Then French semiotician Roland whether consciously or not—applied to everyday life. One système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-eu-
Barthes used signs to explain the concept of connotation— of his translators, Roy Harris, summarized Saussure’s con- ropéennes (Dissertation on the Primitive Vowel System in
cultural meanings attached to words—and denotation—lit- tribution to linguistics and the study of “the whole range of Indo-European Languages). After this he studied for a year
eral or explicit meanings of words. Without Saussure’s human sciences. It is particularly marked in linguistics, phi- at the University of Berlin under the Privatdozenten
breakdown of signs into signified and signifier, however, losophy, psychology, sociology and anthropology.” Although Heinrich Zimmer, with whom he studied Celtic, and
these semioticians would not have had anything to base they have undergone extension and critique over time, the Hermann Oldenberg with whom he continued his studies of
their concepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators dimensions of organization introduced by Saussure contin- Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig to defend his doctoral dis-
tend to describe the signifier as the form that the sign takes ue to inform contemporary approaches to the phenomenon sertation De l’emploi du génitif absolu en Sanscrit, and was
and the signified as the concept to which it refers”. The rela- of language. Prague school linguist Jan Mukařovský writes awarded his doctorate in February 1880. Soon, he relocated
tionship between the signifier and signified is an arbitrary that Saussure’s “discovery of the internal structure of the to the University of Paris, where he lectured on Sanskrit,
relationship. In other words, “there is no logical connection” linguistic sign differentiated the sign both from mere acous- Gothic and Old High German and occasionally other sub-
between them. This differs from a symbol, which is “never tic ’things’... and from mental processes”, and that in this de- jects. Ferdinand de Saussure is one of the world’s most quot-
wholly arbitrary”. The idea that both the signifier and the velopment “new roads were thereby opened not only for ed linguists, which is remarkable as he himself hardly pub-
signified are inseparable is explained by Saussure’s diagram, linguistics, but also, in the future, for the theory of litera- lished anything during his lifetime. Even his few scientific
which shows how both components coincide to create the ture”. Ruqaiya Hasan argued that “the impact of Saussure’s articles are not unproblematic. Thus, for example, his publi-
sign. So the question is, how do signifiers create meaning theory of the linguistic sign has been such that modern lin- cation on Lithuanian phonetics is grosso modo taken from
and how do we know what that meaning is? In order to un- guists and their theories have since been positioned by ref- studies by the Lithuanian researcher Friedrich Kurschat,
derstand how the signifier and signified relate to each other, erence to him: they are known as pre-Saussurean, with whom Saussure traveled through Lithuania in August
one must be able to interpret signs. “The only reason that Saussurean, anti-Saussurean, post-Saussurean, or non-Sau- 1880 for two weeks, and whose (German) books Saussure
the signifier does entail the signified is because there is a ssure”. Saussure was born in Geneva in 1857. His father was had read. Saussure, who had studied some basic grammar of
conventional relationship at play”. That is, a sign can only be Henri Louis Frédéric de Saussure, a mineralogist, entomol- Lithuanian in Leipzig for one semester but was unable to
understood when the relationship between the two compo- ogist, and taxonomist. Saussure showed signs of considera- speak the language, was thus dependent on Kurschat. It is
nents that make up the sign are agreed upon. Saussure ar- ble talent and intellectual ability as early as the age of four- also questionable to what extent the Cours itself can be
gued that a sign’s “meaning depends on its relation to other teen. In the autumn of 1870, he began attending the traced back to Saussure (alone). Studies have shown that at
words within the system” (for example, to understand an in- Institution Martine (previously the Institution Lecoultre least the current version and its content are more likely to
dividual word such as “tree”, one must also understand the until 1969), in Geneva. There he lived with the family of a have the so-called editors Charles Bally and Albert
word “bush” and how the two relate to each other). It is this classmate, Elie David. Graduating at the top of class, Sèchehaye as their source than Saussure himself. Saussure
difference from other signs that allows the possibility of a Saussure expected to continue his studies at the Gymnase taught at the École pratique des hautes études for eleven
7pt Light +6
The idea that both the signifier and the signified are insep- cesses”, and that in this development “new roads were Saussure is one of the world’s most quoted linguists, which
arable is explained by Saussure’s diagram, which shows how thereby opened not only for linguistics, but also, in the fu- is remarkable as he himself hardly published anything dur-
both components coincide to create the sign. So the ques- ture, for the theory of literature”. Ruqaiya Hasan argued ing his lifetime. Even his few scientific articles are not un-
tion is, how do signifiers create meaning and how do we that “the impact of Saussure’s theory of the linguistic sign problematic. Thus, for example, his publication on
know what that meaning is? In order to understand how has been such that modern linguists and their theories have Lithuanian phonetics is grosso modo taken from studies by
the signifier and signified relate to each other, one must be since been positioned by reference to him: they are known the Lithuanian researcher Friedrich Kurschat, with whom
able to interpret signs. “The only reason that the signifier as pre-Saussurean, Saussurean, anti-Saussurean, post-Sau- Saussure traveled through Lithuania in August 1880 for
does entail the signified is because there is a conventional ssurean, or non-Saussure”. Saussure was born in Geneva in two weeks, and whose (German) books Saussure had read.
relationship at play”. That is, a sign can only be understood 1857. His father was Henri Louis Frédéric de Saussure, a Saussure, who had studied some basic grammar of
when the relationship between the two components that mineralogist, entomologist, and taxonomist. Saussure Lithuanian in Leipzig for one semester but was unable to
make up the sign are agreed upon. Saussure argued that a showed signs of considerable talent and intellectual ability speak the language, was thus dependent on Kurschat. It is
sign’s “meaning depends on its relation to other words as early as the age of fourteen. In the autumn of 1870, he also questionable to what extent the Cours itself can be
within the system” (for example, to understand an individ- began attending the Institution Martine (previously the traced back to Saussure (alone). Studies have shown that at
ual word such as “tree”, one must also understand the word Institution Lecoultre until 1969), in Geneva. There he least the current version and its content are more likely to
“bush” and how the two relate to each other). It is this dif- lived with the family of a classmate, Elie David. Graduating have the so-called editors Charles Bally and Albert
ference from other signs that allows the possibility of a at the top of class, Saussure expected to continue his stud- Sèchehaye as their source than Saussure himself. Saussure
speech community. However we need to remember that ies at the Gymnase de Genève, but his father decided he taught at the École pratique des hautes études for eleven
signifiers and their significance change all the time, becom- was not mature enough at fourteen and a half, and sent him years during which he was named Chevalier de la Légion
ing “dated”. It is in this way that we are all “practicing semi- to the Collège de Genève instead. Saussure was not pleased, d’Honneur (Knight of the Legion of Honor). When of-
oticians who pay a great deal of attention to signs… even as he complained: “I entered the Collège de Genève, to fered a professorship in Geneva in 1892, he returned to
though we may never have heard them before.” And while waste a year there as completely as a year can be wasted.” Switzerland. Saussure lectured on Sanskrit and Indo-
words are the most familiar form signs take, they stand for After a year of studying Latin, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit European at the University of Geneva for the remainder of
many things within life, such as advertisement, objects, and taking a variety of courses at the University of Geneva, his life. It was not until 1907 that Saussure began teaching
body language, music, and so on. Therefore, the use of he commenced graduate work at the University of Leipzig the Course of General Linguistics, which he would offer
signs, and the two components that make up a sign, can be in 1876. Two years later, at 21, Saussure published a book three times, ending in the summer of 1911. He died in 1913
and are—whether consciously or not—applied to everyday entitled Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans in Vufflens-le-Château, Vaud, Switzerland. His brothers
life. One of his translators, Roy Harris, summarized les langues indo-européennes (Dissertation on the were the linguist and Esperantist René de Saussure, and
Saussure’s contribution to linguistics and the study of “the Primitive Vowel System in Indo-European Languages). scholar of ancient Chinese astronomy, Léopold de
whole range of human sciences. It is particularly marked in After this he studied for a year at the University of Berlin Saussure. In turn, his son was the psychoanalyst Raymond
linguistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology and anthro- under the Privatdozenten Heinrich Zimmer, with whom he de Saussure. Saussure attempted, at various times in the
pology.” Although they have undergone extension and cri- studied Celtic, and Hermann Oldenberg with whom he 1880s and 1890s, to write a book on general linguistic mat-
tique over time, the dimensions of organization introduced continued his studies of Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig ters. His lectures about important principles of language
by Saussure continue to inform contemporary approaches to defend his doctoral dissertation De l’emploi du génitif description in Geneva between 1907 and 1911 were collect-
to the phenomenon of language. Prague school linguist Jan absolu en Sanscrit, and was awarded his doctorate in ed and published by his pupils posthumously in the famous
Mukařovský writes that Saussure’s “discovery of the inter- February 1880. Soon, he relocated to the University of Cours de linguistique générale in 1916. Some of his manu-
nal structure of the linguistic sign differentiated the sign Paris, where he lectured on Sanskrit, Gothic and Old High scripts, including an unfinished essay discovered in 1996,
both from mere acoustic ’things’... and from mental pro- German and occasionally other subjects. Ferdinand de were published in Writings in General Linguistics, but
7pt Regular +6
Prague school linguist Jan Mukařovský writes that Sanscrit, and was awarded his doctorate in February 1880. published by his pupils posthumously in the famous Cours
Saussure’s “discovery of the internal structure of the lin- Soon, he relocated to the University of Paris, where he lec- de linguistique générale in 1916. Some of his manuscripts,
guistic sign differentiated the sign both from mere acous- tured on Sanskrit, Gothic and Old High German and oc- including an unfinished essay discovered in 1996, were
tic ’things’... and from mental processes”, and that in this casionally other subjects. Ferdinand de Saussure is one of published in Writings in General Linguistics, but most of
development “new roads were thereby opened not only for the world’s most quoted linguists, which is remarkable as the material in it had already been published in Engler’s
linguistics, but also, in the future, for the theory of litera- he himself hardly published anything during his lifetime. critical edition of the Course, in 1967 and 1974. (TUFA)
ture”. Ruqaiya Hasan argued that “the impact of Even his few scientific articles are not unproblematic. Saussure’s theoretical reconstructions of the Proto-Indo-
Saussure’s theory of the linguistic sign has been such that Thus, for example, his publication on Lithuanian phonet- European language vocalic system and particularly his the-
modern linguists and their theories have since been posi- ics is grosso modo taken from studies by the Lithuanian ory of laryngeals, otherwise unattested at the time, bore
tioned by reference to him: they are known as pre-Saus- researcher Friedrich Kurschat, with whom Saussure trave- fruit and found confirmation after the decipherment of
surean, Saussurean, anti-Saussurean, post-Saussurean, or led through Lithuania in August 1880 for two weeks, and Hittite in the work of later generations of linguists such as
non-Saussure”. Saussure was born in Geneva in 1857. His whose (German) books Saussure had read. Saussure, who Émile Benveniste and Walter Couvreur, who both drew di-
father was Henri Louis Frédéric de Saussure, a mineralo- had studied some basic grammar of Lithuanian in Leipzig rect inspiration from their reading of the 1878 Mémoire.
gist, entomologist, and taxonomist. Saussure showed signs for one semester but was unable to speak the language, was Saussure had a major impact on the development of lin-
of considerable talent and intellectual ability as early as the thus dependent on Kurschat. It is also questionable to guistic theory in the first half of the 20th century. His two
age of fourteen. In the autumn of 1870, he began attending what extent the Cours itself can be traced back to Saussure currents of thought emerged independently of each other,
the Institution Martine (previously the Institution (alone). Studies have shown that at least the current ver- one in Europe, the other in America. The results of each
Lecoultre until 1969), in Geneva. There he lived with the sion and its content are more likely to have the so-called incorporated the basic notions of Saussure’s thought in
family of a classmate, Elie David. Graduating at the top of editors Charles Bally and Albert Sèchehaye as their source forming the central tenets of structural linguistics.
class, Saussure expected to continue his studies at the than Saussure himself. Saussure taught at the École pra- According to him, linguistic entities are parts of a system
Gymnase de Genève, but his father decided he was not ma- tique des hautes études for eleven years during which he and are defined by their relations to one another within
ture enough at fourteen and a half, and sent him to the was named Chevalier de la Légion d’Honneur (Knight of said system. The thinker used the game of chess for his
Collège de Genève instead. Saussure was not pleased, as he the Legion of Honor). When offered a professorship in analogy, citing that the game is not defined by the physical
complained: “I entered the Collège de Genève, to waste a Geneva in 1892, he returned to Switzerland. Saussure lec- attributes of the chess pieces but the relation of each piece
year there as completely as a year can be wasted.” After a tured on Sanskrit and Indo-European at the University of to the other pieces. Saussure’s status in contemporary the-
year of studying Latin, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit and Geneva for the remainder of his life. It was not until 1907 oretical linguistics, however, is much diminished, with
taking a variety of courses at the University of Geneva, he that Saussure began teaching the Course of General many key positions now dated or subject to challenge, but
commenced graduate work at the University of Leipzig in Linguistics, which he would offer three times, ending in post-structuralist 21st-century reception remains more
1876. Two years later, at 21, Saussure published a book en- the summer of 1911. He died in 1913 in Vufflens-le- open to Saussure’s influence. His main contribution to
titled Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les Château, Vaud, Switzerland. His brothers were the lin- structuralism was his theory of a two-tiered reality about
langues indo-européennes (Dissertation on the Primitive guist and Esperantist René de Saussure, and scholar of an- language. The first is the langue, the abstract and invisible
Vowel System in Indo-European Languages). After this he cient Chinese astronomy, Léopold de Saussure. In turn, layer, while the second, the parole, refers to the actual
studied for a year at the University of Berlin under the his son was the psychoanalyst Raymond de Saussure. speech that we hear in real life. This framework was later
Privatdozenten Heinrich Zimmer, with whom he studied Saussure attempted, at various times in the 1880s and adopted by Claude Levi-Strauss, who used the two-tiered
Celtic, and Hermann Oldenberg with whom he continued 1890s, to write a book on general linguistic matters. His model to determine the reality of myths. His idea was that
his studies of Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig to defend lectures about important principles of language descrip- all myths have an underlying pattern, which form the
his doctoral dissertation De l’emploi du génitif absolu en tion in Geneva between 1907 and 1911 were collected and structure that makes them myths. These established the
7pt Medium +6
Ferdinand de Saussure is one of the world’s most quoted uscripts, including an unfinished essay discovered in In Europe, the most important work in that period of in-
linguists, which is remarkable as he himself hardly pub- 1996, were published in Writings in General Linguistics, fluence was done by the Prague school. Most notably,
lished anything during his lifetime. Even his few scientif- but most of the material in it had already been published Nikolay Trubetzkoy and Roman Jakobson headed the ef-
ic articles are not unproblematic. Thus, for example, his in Engler’s critical edition of the Course, in 1967 and forts of the Prague School in setting the course of phono-
publication on Lithuanian phonetics is grosso modo tak- 1974. (TUFA) Saussure’s theoretical reconstructions of logical theory in the decades from 1940. Jakobson’s uni-
en from studies by the Lithuanian researcher Friedrich the Proto-Indo-European language vocalic system and versalizing structural-functional theory of phonology,
Kurschat, with whom Saussure traveled through particularly his theory of laryngeals, otherwise unattest- based on a markedness hierarchy of distinctive features,
Lithuania in August 1880 for two weeks, and whose ed at the time, bore fruit and found confirmation after was the first successful solution of a plane of linguistic
(German) books Saussure had read. Saussure, who had the decipherment of Hittite in the work of later genera- analysis according to the Saussurean hypotheses.
studied some basic grammar of Lithuanian in Leipzig for tions of linguists such as Émile Benveniste and Walter Elsewhere, Louis Hjelmslev and the Copenhagen School
one semester but was unable to speak the language, was Couvreur, who both drew direct inspiration from their proposed new interpretations of linguistics from struc-
thus dependent on Kurschat. It is also questionable to reading of the 1878 Mémoire. Saussure had a major im- turalist theoretical frameworks. In America, Saussure’s
what extent the Cours itself can be traced back to pact on the development of linguistic theory in the first ideas informed the distributionalism of Leonard
Saussure (alone). Studies have shown that at least the half of the 20th century. His two currents of thought Bloomfield and the post-Bloomfieldian structuralism of
current version and its content are more likely to have emerged independently of each other, one in Europe, the such scholars as Eugene Nida, Bernard Bloch, George L.
the so-called editors Charles Bally and Albert Sèchehaye other in America. The results of each incorporated the Trager, Rulon S. Wells III, Charles Hockett and, through
as their source than Saussure himself. Saussure taught at basic notions of Saussure’s thought in forming the cen- Zellig Harris, the young Noam Chomsky. In addition to
the École pratique des hautes études for eleven years tral tenets of structural linguistics. According to him, Chomsky’s theory of transformational grammar, other
during which he was named Chevalier de la Légion linguistic entities are parts of a system and are defined by contemporary developments of structuralism included
d’Honneur (Knight of the Legion of Honor). When of- their relations to one another within said system. The Kenneth Pike’s theory of tagmemics, Sidney Lamb’s the-
fered a professorship in Geneva in 1892, he returned to thinker used the game of chess for his analogy, citing that ory of stratificational grammar, and Michael Silverstein’s
Switzerland. Saussure lectured on Sanskrit and Indo- the game is not defined by the physical attributes of the work. Systemic functional linguistics is a theory consid-
European at the University of Geneva for the remainder chess pieces but the relation of each piece to the other ered to be based firmly on the Saussurean principles of
of his life. It was not until 1907 that Saussure began pieces. Saussure’s status in contemporary theoretical lin- the sign, albeit with some modifications. Ruqaiya Hasan
teaching the Course of General Linguistics, which he guistics, however, is much diminished, with many key describes systemic functional linguistics as a ’post-Saus-
would offer three times, ending in the summer of 1911. positions now dated or subject to challenge, but surean’ linguistic theory. Michael Halliday argues:
He died in 1913 in Vufflens-le-Château, Vaud, post-structuralist 21st-century reception remains more Saussure took the sign as the organizing concept for lin-
Switzerland. His brothers were the linguist and open to Saussure’s influence. His main contribution to guistic structure, using it to express the conventional na-
Esperantist René de Saussure, and scholar of ancient structuralism was his theory of a two-tiered reality about ture of language in the phrase “l’arbitraire du signe”.
Chinese astronomy, Léopold de Saussure. In turn, his language. The first is the langue, the abstract and invisi- This has the effect of highlighting what is, in fact, the one
son was the psychoanalyst Raymond de Saussure. ble layer, while the second, the parole, refers to the actual point of arbitrariness in the system, namely the phono-
Saussure attempted, at various times in the 1880s and speech that we hear in real life. This framework was later logical shape of words, and hence allows the non-arbi-
1890s, to write a book on general linguistic matters. His adopted by Claude Levi-Strauss, who used the two- trariness of the rest to emerge with greater clarity. An
lectures about important principles of language descrip- tiered model to determine the reality of myths. His idea example of something that is distinctly non-arbitrary is
tion in Geneva between 1907 and 1911 were collected and was that all myths have an underlying pattern, which the way different kinds of meaning in language are ex-
published by his pupils posthumously in the famous form the structure that makes them myths. These estab- pressed by different kinds of grammatical structure, as
Cours de linguistique générale in 1916. Some of his man- lished the structuralist framework to literary criticism. appears when linguistic structure is interpreted in func-
7pt Extralight Italic +6
Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and linguists who the two components that make up a sign, can be and are—whether con- tation De l’emploi du génitif absolu en Sanscrit, and was awarded his
defined themselves as semioticians. These semioticians have each brought sciously or not—applied to everyday life. One of his translators, Roy doctorate in February 1880. Soon, he relocated to the University of
their own concerns to the study of signs. Umberto Eco (1976), a distin- Harris, summarized Saussure’s contribution to linguistics and the study Paris, where he lectured on Sanskrit, Gothic and Old High German
guished Italian semiotician, came to the conclusion that “if signs can be of “the whole range of human sciences. It is particularly marked in lin- and occasionally other subjects. Ferdinand de Saussure is one of the
used to tell the truth, they can also be used to lie”. Postmodernist social guistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology and anthropology.” Although world’s most quoted linguists, which is remarkable as he himself hardly
theorist Jean Baudrillard spoke of hyperreality, which referred to a copy they have undergone extension and critique over time, the dimensions of published anything during his lifetime. Even his few scientific articles
becoming more real than reality. In other words, how the signified be- organization introduced by Saussure continue to inform contemporary are not unproblematic. Thus, for example, his publication on
comes more important than the signifier . Then French semiotician approaches to the phenomenon of language. Prague school linguist Jan Lithuanian phonetics is grosso modo taken from studies by the
Roland Barthes used signs to explain the concept of connotation—cul- Mukařovský writes that Saussure’s “discovery of the internal structure Lithuanian researcher Friedrich Kurschat, with whom Saussure trave-
tural meanings attached to words—and denotation—literal or explicit of the linguistic sign differentiated the sign both from mere acoustic led through Lithuania in August 1880 for two weeks, and whose
meanings of words. Without Saussure’s breakdown of signs into signified ’things’... and from mental processes”, and that in this development “new (German) books Saussure had read. Saussure, who had studied some
and signifier, however, these semioticians would not have had anything roads were thereby opened not only for linguistics, but also, in the future, basic grammar of Lithuanian in Leipzig for one semester but was una-
to base their concepts on. Today, “contemporary commentators tend to for the theory of literature”. Ruqaiya Hasan argued that “the impact of ble to speak the language, was thus dependent on Kurschat. It is also
describe the signifier as the form that the sign takes and the signified as Saussure’s theory of the linguistic sign has been such that modern lin- questionable to what extent the Cours itself can be traced back to
the concept to which it refers”. The relationship between the signifier and guists and their theories have since been positioned by reference to him: Saussure (alone). Studies have shown that at least the current version
signified is an arbitrary relationship. In other words, “there is no logical they are known as pre-Saussurean, Saussurean, anti-Saussurean, and its content are more likely to have the so-called editors Charles
connection” between them. This differs from a symbol, which is “never post-Saussurean, or non-Saussure”. Saussure was born in Geneva in Bally and Albert Sèchehaye as their source than Saussure himself.
wholly arbitrary”. The idea that both the signifier and the signified are 1857. His father was Henri Louis Frédéric de Saussure, a mineralogist, Saussure taught at the École pratique des hautes études for eleven years
inseparable is explained by Saussure’s diagram, which shows how both entomologist, and taxonomist. Saussure showed signs of considerable during which he was named Chevalier de la Légion d’Honneur (Knight
components coincide to create the sign. So the question is, how do signifi- talent and intellectual ability as early as the age of fourteen. In the au- of the Legion of Honor). When offered a professorship in Geneva in
ers create meaning and how do we know what that meaning is? In order tumn of 1870, he began attending the Institution Martine (previously 1892, he returned to Switzerland. Saussure lectured on Sanskrit and
to understand how the signifier and signified relate to each other, one the Institution Lecoultre until 1969), in Geneva. There he lived with Indo-European at the University of Geneva for the remainder of his
must be able to interpret signs. “The only reason that the signifier does the family of a classmate, Elie David. Graduating at the top of class, life. It was not until 1907 that Saussure began teaching the Course of
entail the signified is because there is a conventional relationship at Saussure expected to continue his studies at the Gymnase de Genève, but General Linguistics, which he would offer three times, ending in the
play”. That is, a sign can only be understood when the relationship be- his father decided he was not mature enough at fourteen and a half, and summer of 1911. He died in 1913 in Vufflens-le-Château, Vaud,
tween the two components that make up the sign are agreed upon. sent him to the Collège de Genève instead. Saussure was not pleased, as Switzerland. His brothers were the linguist and Esperantist René de
Saussure argued that a sign’s “meaning depends on its relation to other he complained: “I entered the Collège de Genève, to waste a year there as Saussure, and scholar of ancient Chinese astronomy, Léopold de
words within the system” (for example, to understand an individual completely as a year can be wasted.” After a year of studying Latin, Saussure. In turn, his son was the psychoanalyst Raymond de Saussure.
word such as “tree”, one must also understand the word “bush” and how Ancient Greek and Sanskrit and taking a variety of courses at the Saussure attempted, at various times in the 1880s and 1890s, to write a
the two relate to each other). It is this difference from other signs that al- University of Geneva, he commenced graduate work at the University book on general linguistic matters. His lectures about important princi-
lows the possibility of a speech community. However we need to remem- of Leipzig in 1876. Two years later, at 21, Saussure published a book ples of language description in Geneva between 1907 and 1911 were col-
ber that signifiers and their significance change all the time, becoming entitled Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues in- lected and published by his pupils posthumously in the famous Cours de
“dated”. It is in this way that we are all “practicing semioticians who do-européennes (Dissertation on the Primitive Vowel System in Indo- linguistique générale in 1916. Some of his manuscripts, including an
pay a great deal of attention to signs… even though we may never have European Languages). After this he studied for a year at the University unfinished essay discovered in 1996, were published in Writings in
heard them before.” And while words are the most familiar form signs of Berlin under the Privatdozenten Heinrich Zimmer, with whom he General Linguistics, but most of the material in it had already been
take, they stand for many things within life, such as advertisement, ob- studied Celtic, and Hermann Oldenberg with whom he continued his published in Engler’s critical edition of the Course, in 1967 and 1974.
jects, body language, music, and so on. Therefore, the use of signs, and studies of Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig to defend his doctoral disser- (TUFA) Saussure’s theoretical reconstructions of the Proto-Indo-
7pt Light Italic +6
The idea that both the signifier and the signified are inseparable is known as pre-Saussurean, Saussurean, anti-Saussurean, post-Sau- self can be traced back to Saussure (alone). Studies have shown that
explained by Saussure’s diagram, which shows how both components ssurean, or non-Saussure”. Saussure was born in Geneva in 1857. at least the current version and its content are more likely to have the
coincide to create the sign. So the question is, how do signifiers create His father was Henri Louis Frédéric de Saussure, a mineralogist, so-called editors Charles Bally and Albert Sèchehaye as their source
meaning and how do we know what that meaning is? In order to un- entomologist, and taxonomist. Saussure showed signs of considerable than Saussure himself. Saussure taught at the École pratique des
derstand how the signifier and signified relate to each other, one must talent and intellectual ability as early as the age of fourteen. In the hautes études for eleven years during which he was named Chevalier
be able to interpret signs. “The only reason that the signifier does en- autumn of 1870, he began attending the Institution Martine (previ- de la Légion d’Honneur (Knight of the Legion of Honor). When of-
tail the signified is because there is a conventional relationship at ously the Institution Lecoultre until 1969), in Geneva. There he fered a professorship in Geneva in 1892, he returned to Switzerland.
play”. That is, a sign can only be understood when the relationship lived with the family of a classmate, Elie David. Graduating at the Saussure lectured on Sanskrit and Indo-European at the University
between the two components that make up the sign are agreed upon. top of class, Saussure expected to continue his studies at the Gymnase of Geneva for the remainder of his life. It was not until 1907 that
Saussure argued that a sign’s “meaning depends on its relation to de Genève, but his father decided he was not mature enough at four- Saussure began teaching the Course of General Linguistics, which he
other words within the system” (for example, to understand an indi- teen and a half, and sent him to the Collège de Genève instead. would offer three times, ending in the summer of 1911. He died in
vidual word such as “tree”, one must also understand the word Saussure was not pleased, as he complained: “I entered the Collège de 1913 in Vufflens-le-Château, Vaud, Switzerland. His brothers
“bush” and how the two relate to each other). It is this difference Genève, to waste a year there as completely as a year can be wasted.” were the linguist and Esperantist René de Saussure, and scholar of
from other signs that allows the possibility of a speech community. After a year of studying Latin, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit and ancient Chinese astronomy, Léopold de Saussure. In turn, his son
However we need to remember that signifiers and their significance taking a variety of courses at the University of Geneva, he com- was the psychoanalyst Raymond de Saussure. Saussure attempted,
change all the time, becoming “dated”. It is in this way that we are menced graduate work at the University of Leipzig in 1876. Two at various times in the 1880s and 1890s, to write a book on general
all “practicing semioticians who pay a great deal of attention to years later, at 21, Saussure published a book entitled Mémoire sur le linguistic matters. His lectures about important principles of lan-
signs… even though we may never have heard them before.” And système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes guage description in Geneva between 1907 and 1911 were collected
while words are the most familiar form signs take, they stand for (Dissertation on the Primitive Vowel System in Indo-European and published by his pupils posthumously in the famous Cours de lin-
many things within life, such as advertisement, objects, body lan- Languages). After this he studied for a year at the University of guistique générale in 1916. Some of his manuscripts, including an
guage, music, and so on. Therefore, the use of signs, and the two com- Berlin under the Privatdozenten Heinrich Zimmer, with whom he unfinished essay discovered in 1996, were published in Writings in
ponents that make up a sign, can be and are—whether consciously or studied Celtic, and Hermann Oldenberg with whom he continued General Linguistics, but most of the material in it had already been
not—applied to everyday life. One of his translators, Roy Harris, his studies of Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig to defend his doctoral published in Engler’s critical edition of the Course, in 1967 and
summarized Saussure’s contribution to linguistics and the study of dissertation De l’emploi du génitif absolu en Sanscrit, and was 1974. (TUFA) Saussure’s theoretical reconstructions of the Proto-
“the whole range of human sciences. It is particularly marked in lin- awarded his doctorate in February 1880. Soon, he relocated to the Indo-European language vocalic system and particularly his theory
guistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology and anthropology.” University of Paris, where he lectured on Sanskrit, Gothic and Old of laryngeals, otherwise unattested at the time, bore fruit and found
Although they have undergone extension and critique over time, the High German and occasionally other subjects. Ferdinand de confirmation after the decipherment of Hittite in the work of later
dimensions of organization introduced by Saussure continue to in- Saussure is one of the world’s most quoted linguists, which is remark- generations of linguists such as Émile Benveniste and Walter
form contemporary approaches to the phenomenon of language. able as he himself hardly published anything during his lifetime. Couvreur, who both drew direct inspiration from their reading of the
Prague school linguist Jan Mukařovský writes that Saussure’s “dis- Even his few scientific articles are not unproblematic. Thus, for ex- 1878 Mémoire. Saussure had a major impact on the development of
covery of the internal structure of the linguistic sign differentiated ample, his publication on Lithuanian phonetics is grosso modo taken linguistic theory in the first half of the 20th century. His two currents
the sign both from mere acoustic ’things’... and from mental process- from studies by the Lithuanian researcher Friedrich Kurschat, with of thought emerged independently of each other, one in Europe, the
es”, and that in this development “new roads were thereby opened not whom Saussure traveled through Lithuania in August 1880 for two other in America. The results of each incorporated the basic notions
only for linguistics, but also, in the future, for the theory of litera- weeks, and whose (German) books Saussure had read. Saussure, of Saussure’s thought in forming the central tenets of structural lin-
ture”. Ruqaiya Hasan argued that “the impact of Saussure’s theory who had studied some basic grammar of Lithuanian in Leipzig for guistics. According to him, linguistic entities are parts of a system
of the linguistic sign has been such that modern linguists and their one semester but was unable to speak the language, was thus depend- and are defined by their relations to one another within said system.
theories have since been positioned by reference to him: they are ent on Kurschat. It is also questionable to what extent the Cours it- The thinker used the game of chess for his analogy, citing that the
7pt Regular Italic +6
Prague school linguist Jan Mukařovský writes that Saussure’s which is remarkable as he himself hardly published anything dur- fruit and found confirmation after the decipherment of Hittite in
“discovery of the internal structure of the linguistic sign differenti- ing his lifetime. Even his few scientific articles are not unproblem- the work of later generations of linguists such as Émile Benveniste
ated the sign both from mere acoustic ’things’... and from mental atic. Thus, for example, his publication on Lithuanian phonetics and Walter Couvreur, who both drew direct inspiration from their
processes”, and that in this development “new roads were thereby is grosso modo taken from studies by the Lithuanian researcher reading of the 1878 Mémoire. Saussure had a major impact on the
opened not only for linguistics, but also, in the future, for the theo- Friedrich Kurschat, with whom Saussure traveled through development of linguistic theory in the first half of the 20th centu-
ry of literature”. Ruqaiya Hasan argued that “the impact of Lithuania in August 1880 for two weeks, and whose (German) ry. His two currents of thought emerged independently of each
Saussure’s theory of the linguistic sign has been such that modern books Saussure had read. Saussure, who had studied some basic other, one in Europe, the other in America. The results of each in-
linguists and their theories have since been positioned by reference grammar of Lithuanian in Leipzig for one semester but was una- corporated the basic notions of Saussure’s thought in forming the
to him: they are known as pre-Saussurean, Saussurean, an- ble to speak the language, was thus dependent on Kurschat. It is central tenets of structural linguistics. According to him, linguis-
ti-Saussurean, post-Saussurean, or non-Saussure”. Saussure was also questionable to what extent the Cours itself can be traced tic entities are parts of a system and are defined by their relations
born in Geneva in 1857. His father was Henri Louis Frédéric de back to Saussure (alone). Studies have shown that at least the to one another within said system. The thinker used the game of
Saussure, a mineralogist, entomologist, and taxonomist. Saussure current version and its content are more likely to have the so- chess for his analogy, citing that the game is not defined by the
showed signs of considerable talent and intellectual ability as ear- called editors Charles Bally and Albert Sèchehaye as their source physical attributes of the chess pieces but the relation of each piece
ly as the age of fourteen. In the autumn of 1870, he began attend- than Saussure himself. Saussure taught at the École pratique des to the other pieces. Saussure’s status in contemporary theoretical
ing the Institution Martine (previously the Institution Lecoultre hautes études for eleven years during which he was named linguistics, however, is much diminished, with many key positions
until 1969), in Geneva. There he lived with the family of a class- Chevalier de la Légion d’Honneur (Knight of the Legion of now dated or subject to challenge, but post-structuralist 21st-cen-
mate, Elie David. Graduating at the top of class, Saussure ex- Honor). When offered a professorship in Geneva in 1892, he re- tury reception remains more open to Saussure’s influence. His
pected to continue his studies at the Gymnase de Genève, but his turned to Switzerland. Saussure lectured on Sanskrit and Indo- main contribution to structuralism was his theory of a two-tiered
father decided he was not mature enough at fourteen and a half, European at the University of Geneva for the remainder of his reality about language. The first is the langue, the abstract and
and sent him to the Collège de Genève instead. Saussure was not life. It was not until 1907 that Saussure began teaching the invisible layer, while the second, the parole, refers to the actual
pleased, as he complained: “I entered the Collège de Genève, to Course of General Linguistics, which he would offer three times, speech that we hear in real life. This framework was later adopted
waste a year there as completely as a year can be wasted.” After a ending in the summer of 1911. He died in 1913 in Vufflens-le- by Claude Levi-Strauss, who used the two-tiered model to deter-
year of studying Latin, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit and taking a Château, Vaud, Switzerland. His brothers were the linguist and mine the reality of myths. His idea was that all myths have an un-
variety of courses at the University of Geneva, he commenced Esperantist René de Saussure, and scholar of ancient Chinese as- derlying pattern, which form the structure that makes them
graduate work at the University of Leipzig in 1876. Two years tronomy, Léopold de Saussure. In turn, his son was the psychoan- myths. These established the structuralist framework to literary
later, at 21, Saussure published a book entitled Mémoire sur le alyst Raymond de Saussure. Saussure attempted, at various times criticism. In Europe, the most important work in that period of
système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes in the 1880s and 1890s, to write a book on general linguistic mat- influence was done by the Prague school. Most notably, Nikolay
(Dissertation on the Primitive Vowel System in Indo-European ters. His lectures about important principles of language descrip- Trubetzkoy and Roman Jakobson headed the efforts of the
Languages). After this he studied for a year at the University of tion in Geneva between 1907 and 1911 were collected and pub- Prague School in setting the course of phonological theory in the
Berlin under the Privatdozenten Heinrich Zimmer, with whom lished by his pupils posthumously in the famous Cours de linguis- decades from 1940. Jakobson’s universalizing structural-func-
he studied Celtic, and Hermann Oldenberg with whom he contin- tique générale in 1916. Some of his manuscripts, including an un- tional theory of phonology, based on a markedness hierarchy of
ued his studies of Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig to defend his finished essay discovered in 1996, were published in Writings in distinctive features, was the first successful solution of a plane of
doctoral dissertation De l’emploi du génitif absolu en Sanscrit, General Linguistics, but most of the material in it had already linguistic analysis according to the Saussurean hypotheses.
and was awarded his doctorate in February 1880. Soon, he relo- been published in Engler’s critical edition of the Course, in 1967 Elsewhere, Louis Hjelmslev and the Copenhagen School proposed
cated to the University of Paris, where he lectured on Sanskrit, and 1974. (TUFA) Saussure’s theoretical reconstructions of the new interpretations of linguistics from structuralist theoretical
Gothic and Old High German and occasionally other subjects. Proto-Indo-European language vocalic system and particularly frameworks. In America, Saussure’s ideas informed the distribu-
Ferdinand de Saussure is one of the world’s most quoted linguists, his theory of laryngeals, otherwise unattested at the time, bore tionalism of Leonard Bloomfield and the post-Bloomfieldian
7pt Medium Italic +6
Ferdinand de Saussure is one of the world’s most quoted lin- and 1974. (TUFA) Saussure’s theoretical reconstructions of of a plane of linguistic analysis according to the Saussurean
guists, which is remarkable as he himself hardly published an- the Proto-Indo-European language vocalic system and par- hypotheses. Elsewhere, Louis Hjelmslev and the Copenhagen
ything during his lifetime. Even his few scientific articles are ticularly his theory of laryngeals, otherwise unattested at the School proposed new interpretations of linguistics from struc-
not unproblematic. Thus, for example, his publication on time, bore fruit and found confirmation after the decipher- turalist theoretical frameworks. In America, Saussure’s ideas
Lithuanian phonetics is grosso modo taken from studies by the ment of Hittite in the work of later generations of linguists informed the distributionalism of Leonard Bloomfield and the
Lithuanian researcher Friedrich Kurschat, with whom such as Émile Benveniste and Walter Couvreur, who both post-Bloomfieldian structuralism of such scholars as Eugene
Saussure traveled through Lithuania in August 1880 for two drew direct inspiration from their reading of the 1878 Nida, Bernard Bloch, George L. Trager, Rulon S. Wells III,
weeks, and whose (German) books Saussure had read. Mémoire. Saussure had a major impact on the development of Charles Hockett and, through Zellig Harris, the young Noam
Saussure, who had studied some basic grammar of Lithuanian linguistic theory in the first half of the 20th century. His two Chomsky. In addition to Chomsky’s theory of transformation-
in Leipzig for one semester but was unable to speak the lan- currents of thought emerged independently of each other, one al grammar, other contemporary developments of structural-
guage, was thus dependent on Kurschat. It is also questionable in Europe, the other in America. The results of each incorpo- ism included Kenneth Pike’s theory of tagmemics, Sidney
to what extent the Cours itself can be traced back to Saussure rated the basic notions of Saussure’s thought in forming the Lamb’s theory of stratificational grammar, and Michael
(alone). Studies have shown that at least the current version central tenets of structural linguistics. According to him, lin- Silverstein’s work. Systemic functional linguistics is a theory
and its content are more likely to have the so-called editors guistic entities are parts of a system and are defined by their considered to be based firmly on the Saussurean principles of
Charles Bally and Albert Sèchehaye as their source than relations to one another within said system. The thinker used the sign, albeit with some modifications. Ruqaiya Hasan de-
Saussure himself. Saussure taught at the École pratique des the game of chess for his analogy, citing that the game is not scribes systemic functional linguistics as a ’post-Saussurean’
hautes études for eleven years during which he was named defined by the physical attributes of the chess pieces but the re- linguistic theory. Michael Halliday argues: Saussure took the
Chevalier de la Légion d’Honneur (Knight of the Legion of lation of each piece to the other pieces. Saussure’s status in con- sign as the organizing concept for linguistic structure, using it
Honor). When offered a professorship in Geneva in 1892, he temporary theoretical linguistics, however, is much dimin- to express the conventional nature of language in the phrase
returned to Switzerland. Saussure lectured on Sanskrit and ished, with many key positions now dated or subject to chal- “l’arbitraire du signe”. This has the effect of highlighting what
Indo-European at the University of Geneva for the remainder lenge, but post-structuralist 21st-century reception remains is, in fact, the one point of arbitrariness in the system, namely
of his life. It was not until 1907 that Saussure began teaching more open to Saussure’s influence. His main contribution to the phonological shape of words, and hence allows the non-ar-
the Course of General Linguistics, which he would offer three structuralism was his theory of a two-tiered reality about lan- bitrariness of the rest to emerge with greater clarity. An exam-
times, ending in the summer of 1911. He died in 1913 in guage. The first is the langue, the abstract and invisible layer, ple of something that is distinctly non-arbitrary is the way dif-
Vufflens-le-Château, Vaud, Switzerland. His brothers were while the second, the parole, refers to the actual speech that we ferent kinds of meaning in language are expressed by different
the linguist and Esperantist René de Saussure, and scholar of hear in real life. This framework was later adopted by Claude kinds of grammatical structure, as appears when linguistic
ancient Chinese astronomy, Léopold de Saussure. In turn, his Levi-Strauss, who used the two-tiered model to determine the structure is interpreted in functional terms. Saussure’s most
son was the psychoanalyst Raymond de Saussure. Saussure at- reality of myths. His idea was that all myths have an underly- influential work, Course in General Linguistics (Cours de lin-
tempted, at various times in the 1880s and 1890s, to write a ing pattern, which form the structure that makes them myths. guistique générale), was published posthumously in 1916 by
book on general linguistic matters. His lectures about impor- These established the structuralist framework to literary criti- former students Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, on the
tant principles of language description in Geneva between cism. In Europe, the most important work in that period of in- basis of notes taken from Saussure’s lectures in Geneva. The
1907 and 1911 were collected and published by his pupils post- fluence was done by the Prague school. Most notably, Nikolay Course became one of the seminal linguistics works of the 20th
humously in the famous Cours de linguistique générale in Trubetzkoy and Roman Jakobson headed the efforts of the century not primarily for the content (many of the ideas had
1916. Some of his manuscripts, including an unfinished essay Prague School in setting the course of phonological theory in been anticipated in the works of other 20th century linguists)
discovered in 1996, were published in Writings in General the decades from 1940. Jakobson’s universalizing structur- but for the innovative approach that Saussure applied in dis-
Linguistics, but most of the material in it had already been al-functional theory of phonology, based on a markedness hi- cussing linguistic phenomena. Its central notion is that lan-
published in Engler’s critical edition of the Course, in 1967 erarchy of distinctive features, was the first successful solution guage may be analyzed as a formal system of differential ele-
OpenType features
Affiche flags
Ligatures These feature a functional join between a
pair of letters, like f and i. They’re typically
liga drawn to avoid ugly collisions between let-
ters. Ligatures are usually on by default.
Rich asterisk
Discretionary ligatures Also know as “fancy” or “rare” ligatures.
These feature a decorative join between
dlig
a pair of letters, usually inspired by clas-
sic 16th century typography. You can use
them for a touch of class or pure visual in-
terest in your typography.
2nd 3rd Mme

Ordinals Ordinals are optically adjusted, small,
raised lowercase letters. You can use
ordn them for numerical abbreviations like 1st,
2nd, 3rd and in languages like French for
1e or Mme.
1/4 Cup 53/82 In

Fractions Dynamic fractions will automatically sub-
stitute for pre-built and arbitrary fractions.
frac
H₂O C₂H₆O
Subscript Subscripts & Inferiors are optically adjust-
ed, small lowered numerals. They usual-
subs ly sit below the baseline. You can use them
for chemical formulae, like H₂0.
Footnotes.⁵
Superscript Superscripts are optically adjusted, small
raised numerals. You can use them for
sups footnote references in running text,¹
chemistry notation (²H) and mathematical
exponents (x³).
1-5 (R/G) «Q»

Case-sensitive forms Punctuation designed specifically to align
with capital letters.
case
OpenType features
König 1875
Small capitals Literally “small capital letters” drawn spe-
cially to harmonise with lowercase letter-
smcp forms in running text. You can use them
for acronyms (USA), all-caps words and
subtitles. They’re also used instead of
Italics for emphasis.
4:20 1x5 föl

Contextual alternates Alternates that intelligently substitute de-
pending on context. The raised colon will
calt
only appear between numerals to indicate
time. The multiplication sign will only sub-
stitue x or X for × between numerals.
0123456789
Default numerals These are the default numerals.
0123456789
Tabular lining numerals Tabular lining numerals all share the same
width. You can use them to align columns
tnum of data or a price list, for example. The as-
sociated currency and math symbols also
have the same width.
0123456789
Old-style numerals Old-style numerals are designed to har-
monise with lowercase letterforms in run-
onum ning text. They typically have ascenders
and descenders. You could think of them
as “lowercase numerals”.
0123456789
Tabular old-style numerals Tabular old-style numerals all share the
same width. You can use them to align col-
onum tnum umns of data or a price list, for example.
The associated currency and math sym-
bols also have the same width.
OpenType features
1526–1580
Alternate old-style 1
ss01
1526–1580
Alternate old-style 0
ss02
Character set
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Uppercase
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
Lowercase
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Small capitals
ÁĂÂÄÀĀĄÅÃÆǼĆČÇĈĊĎĐÉĔĚÊËĖÈĒĘ
Uppercase accents
ÐĞĜĢĠĦĤÍĬÎÏİÌĪĮĨĴĶĹĽĻĿŁŃŇŅÑŊÓŎÔ
ÖÒŐŌØǾÕŒŔŘŖŚŠŞŜȘẞŦŤŢȚÞÚŬÛÜÙ
ŰŪŲŮŨẂŴẀẄÝŶŸỲŹŽŻ
áăâäàāąåãæǽćčçĉċďđéĕěêëėèēęðğĝģġßħĥıíĭîïi
Lowercase accents
ìīįĩĵķĸĺľļŀłńňņñŋóŏôöòőōøǿõœŕřŗśšşŝșŧťţțþú
ŭûüùűūųůũẃŵẁẅýŷÿỳźžż
ÁĂÂÄÀĀĄÅÃÆǼĆČÇĈĊĎĐÉĔĚÊËĖÈĒĘÐĞĜĢ
Small capital accents
ĠĦĤÍĬÎÏİÌĪĮĨĴĶĹĽĻĿŁŃŇŅÑŊÓŎÔÖÒŐŌØǾÕ
ŒŔŘŖŚŠŞŜȘẞŦŤŢȚÞÚŬÛÜÙŰŪŲŮŨẂŴẀẄÝ
ŶŸỲŹŽŻ
Character set
0123456789
Numerals
0123456789
Tabular numerals
001123456789
Old-style numerals
0�1�23456789
Tabular old-style
numerals
0123456789
Small capital numerals
0123456789
Tabular small capital
numerals
$¢£€¥฿₫₣₦₧₱₽₹₺₩ƒ +−=÷×<> #%
Currency & math
$¢£€¥฿₫₣₦₧₱₽₹₺₩ƒ +−=÷×<>
Tabular currency
& math
$¢£€¥฿₫₣₦₧₱₽₹₺₩ƒ
Small capital currency
& math
$¢£€¥฿₫₣₦₧₱₽₹₺₩ƒ
Tabular small capital
currency & math
Character set
0123456789 0123456789 0123456789

Superscript, denominator
& subscript
ªº abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
Ordinals
fb ffb ff fh ffh fi fï ffi ffï fj ffj fk ffk fl ffl

Ligatures
ch ck çk cl çl cł ct cţ cť
Discretionary ligatures
sh sk şk sl şl sĺ sľ sł sp şp șp st șt sţ şt sť
fï ffï
Ligature accents
&@ ()[]{} /|\ ¿?¡! •·-–—~_ .,:;…

Punctuation & symbols
'"“”‘’„‚ «»‹› °^*†‡§¶©®™
@ ()[]{} /|\ •·-–— «»‹›

Punctuation & symbol
capital forms
&¿?¡!
Punctuation & symbol
small capital forms
½¼¾⅓⅔⅛⅜⅝⅞
Prebuilt fractions
↑↓←→↕↔↖↗↘↙
Arrows

Specimen Klim Type Foundry

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Specimen Klim Type Foundry

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Klim Type Foundry Specimen

Klim Type Foundry Specimen

Thin Thin Italic Extralight

Extralight Italic Light Light Italic

Regular Regular Italic Medium

Medium Italic Bold Bold Italic

Black Black Italic

84pt Thin -10

84pt Bold -10

84pt Regular Italic -10

The concept of signs has been

The term “semiotics” “comes

It wasn’t until the 20th century,

It was Saussure who created the

Succeeding these founders

These semioticians have each

36pt Black Old-style numerals 0

Umberto Eco (1976),

Postmodernist social theorist Jean

In other words, how the signified becomes

36pt Light Italic Fancy ligatures 0

Then French semiotician Roland

Without Saussure’s breakdown of signs

The relationship between the

36pt Bold Italic 0

In other words, “there is no logical

The idea that both the signifier

Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and linguists who

Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and lin-

Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and lin-

16pt Thin Italic 0

16pt Extralight Italic 0

16pt Light Italic 0

16pt Regular Italic 0

16pt Medium Italic 0

16pt Bold Italic 0

Succeeding these founders were numerous philosophers and lin-

9pt Extralight Old-style numerals, Smallcaps 0

9pt Light Old-style numerals, Smallcaps 0

9pt Regular Old-style numerals, Smallcaps, Ordinals 0

9pt Medium Smallcaps, Ordinals 0

9pt Extralight Italic Old-style numerals, Smallcaps 0

9pt Light Italic Old-style numerals, Smallcaps 0

9pt Regular Italic Old-style numerals, Smallcaps, Ordinals 0

9pt Medium Italic Smallcaps, Ordinals 0

7pt Extralight Italic +6

7pt Light Italic +6

7pt Regular Italic +6

7pt Medium Italic +6

2nd 3rd Mme

1/4 Cup 53/82 In

1-5 (R/G) «Q»

4:20 1x5 föl

0123456789 0123456789 0123456789

fb ffb ff fh ffh fi fï ffi ffï fj ffj fk ffk fl ffl

&@ ()[]{} /|\ ¿?¡! •·-–—~_ .,:;…

'"“”‘’„‚ «»‹› °^*†‡§¶©®™

@ ()[]{} /|\ •·-–— «»‹›

You might also like