University of Algiers 2 Module: Linguistic theories

Faculty of foreign languages and Literature 2nd Year

Department of English Dr L. Merzougui

Modern Linguistics: European Structuralism

Structuralism is a term used in linguistics referring to a theoretical approach to the analysis
of language that describes linguistic items in different terms of structures. The basic claim of
structuralism is that language is a structured system: this means that each element in a
language is defined by how it is related to other elements.
Linguistics is descriptive, not prescriptive: It means that linguists describe the rules and
facts of language exactly as they find them without making judgements. They do not try to
impose norms of correctness and do not try to change the actual usage of the language of
the native speakers. This contrasts with the previous view of traditional grammar which was
very strongly prescriptive. The principle of descriptiveness also reflects the present-day view
about language change. Before de Saussure, it was held that linguistic change involves
corruption and should be stopped. Modern linguistics states that change is a natural
process. The task of a linguist is to describe the way people speak and write, not to tell them
how they ought to use language.
Priority of the spoken language: It is one of the main principles of modern linguistics that
spoken language is more basic than written language. For a long time only written language
was studied, and judgements about language on the whole were based on the results of
these studies. However, spoken language is very different from written texts. There are
great variations both in grammar and vocabulary choices which the written language does
not reflect. Therefore, for a full understanding of language use, both spoken and written
language should be studied.
All languages are equal: For a linguist, all languages serve as the data for objective study.
Though it was common earlier to call certain languages “primitive” (in relation to the
cultural and economic development of certain societies), it was determined that every
existing natural language is a highly developed system and its structure does not directly
correlate with the stage of social development of that speech community.
Ferdinand de Saussure
Ferdinand de Saussure (26 November 1857 – 22 February 1913) was a Swiss linguist whose
ideas laid a foundation for many significant developments in linguistics in the 20th century.
Saussure is widely considered to be one of the fathers of 20th-century linguistics and
semiotics (the study of sign processes) and his ideas have had a monumental impact
throughout the humanities and social sciences.

1|Page
 His Book Course in General Linguistics that was published in 1916 has detailed all that he
claimed to be his views. In his book Saussure shows us a clear reaction against many of
the ideas raised and he emphasizes the importance of seeing language as a living
phenomenon as against the historical view, of studying speech (as opposed to written
texts), of analysing the underlying system of language in order to demonstrate an integrated
structure and placing the language firmly in its social milieu.
Saussure introduced new concepts and procedures in analysing language. The following are
some of the major terms and concepts introduced by him:
1- Langue/Parole:
Early last century, the famous linguist F. de Saussure made an important distinction
between langue and parole. Langue refers to the abstract linguistic system shared by all the
members of a speech community.
Langue= grammar + vocabulary + pronunciation
Parole refers to particular realizations of langue. Langue is the social, conventional side of
language, while parole is individualized speech. Parole is the language behaviour (concrete)
through the use of language.
Langue is the code, and parole is the message. Parole is the concrete manifestation of
language either through speech or writing. Langue is the abstract knowledge necessary for
speaking, listening, writing and reading. It is relatively stable and systematic, whereas parole
is more variable and may change according to contextual factors. Parole and langue
together constitute language.
2- Signified/ signifier (Arbitrariness of signs)
F. de Saussure saw the language as a system of sign. Signs have specific forms and they are
different from other signs. The ‘signs’ are words that we use. According to Saussure the
origin of the form of words (Linguistic sign) lies in the principle of differentiation. For him
language is system of systems and the whole system is based on minimal differences e.g.
pat, bat, cat rat. This principle of differentiation distinguishes words from each other and
simultaneously meanings from each other. To him Linguistic sign i.e. word is both form and
meaning. He uses the term ‘Signifier’ to form i.e. the word as it is spoken or written e.g.
/dog/ and dog, both pronunciation /d  g/ or written word dog are signifier. The meaning
which comes out of form, he calls signified (an animal having four legs, barking sound etc.)

2|Page
 Signifier (Sound image)

Sign

Signified (Meaning)
Both terms signifier and signified are important elements of semantics. Saussure sees
language as a system of signs - these signs are at first arbitrary - then they become
conventions. In all languages signs are arbitrary as there are different words (signs) for the
(same) objects they refer to. The relation between the sign ‘cat’ and what it refers to is
fundamentally arbitrary, because in Hindi the sign ‘Billi’ are in use. It means there is no
inherent logical relationship between signifier and signified. The arbitrariness of course only
applies to the fundamental relationship between words and what they refer to. In actual
practice those relationships turn into social convention.
3- Synchronic/diachronic:
Synchronic and diachronic linguistics Language can be studied at a given point in time or
over time. When we study language at one particular time, it is called synchronic linguistics.
When we study language developments through time, it is called diachronic or historical
linguistics. E.g. we study how French, Italian language have grown from Latin language.
Synchronic means contemporary. If a linguist studies present day Marathi used by villagers
in the West Maharashtra, it will be synchronic study of Marathi at present time. Synchronic
linguistics focuses on the state of language at any point in history while diachronic linguistics
focuses on the differences in two or more than two states of language over decades or
centuries. In the following diagram, axis AB is the synchronic, static axis. It can intersect at
any point with XY. The diachronic axis XY has been considered dynamic.

But to study language diachronically relies on the synchronic study of language because
linguists will fail to make any valid statements about linguistic change without good
descriptions of a language. Hence, synchronic linguistics and diachronic linguistics are
correlated in the valid study of language.

3|Page
 4- Syntagmatic /paradigmatic:
Saussure has put forward another pair of concepts: syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations.
The former refers to the horizontal relationship between linguistic elements, which form
linear sequences. The latter means the vertical relationship between forms, which might
occupy the same particular place in a structure. Moreover, a linguistic unit enters into
relations of two different kinds which identify it in the language system. It enters into
paradigmatic relations with all the other elements of the same level which can also be used
in the same context. For example, in the phrase a…of milk; the missing element could be
glass, jar, mug, bottle (all these concrete countable nouns stand in paradigmatic
relationship). A linguistic unit enters into syntagmatic relations with the other elements of
the same level with which it occurs and which make its context. Syntagmatic relations for
the phrase a glass of milk would be between glass and a, of, and milk.

4|Page