ON LANGUAGE Roman Jakobson EDITED BY Linda R. Waugh AND Monique Monville-Burston Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusets London, EnglandSabancs Oniverstes! 2 HOOTENANNY es 3010100624700 190 api hn cn ona Ma ‘Roman Jkaon sd Kream ates Fowaton,. Ft Harel ety Pe apc ton, 98 Uy f Cones Cone btn Dat ori Rom ben ete by nk, Mugh and How owes aay ISnwoersenie! ju) Emi 2 Lea oe. Wg Line To the memory of Krystyna Pomorska, who persuaded us to-do this book, ‘and to our husbands, Ronald L. Breiger and Jack L. Burston, who gave us support and encouragement throughout our wark on this volumeContents Prefice xf Editorial Method sv Phonetic Symbols “i Abbreviations Introduction: The Life, Work, and Intuence of Roman Jakobson ‘By Linda R. Waugh and Monique Monile-Burston 1 The Science of Language: General Overviews Curent Issues of General Linguistics 49 Efforts toward a Means-Eods Mod! of Language in Inerwar CContiseatal Linguistics 36 My Favorite Topies 61 The Function and Structure of Language: Some Fundamental Concepts ‘The Speech Event and the Functions of Language 69 Langue and Parole: Code and Message 80 Parts and Wholes in Language 110 ‘Two Aspects of Language and TWo Types of Aphasic Disturbances 1/8 ‘The Concept of Mark (ith Krystyna Pomorska) 134Contents Dimensions of Language: Invariants and Variants across Time and Space 9. Typoogical Stoies and Their Contbuton to Historical Comparative Linguistics 148 10. Implications of Language Universal for Linguistics 152 11, The Time Factor in Language (with Krystyna Pomorsa) 162 42. The Space Factor in Langue (with Krystyna Pomorska) 176 13, Principles of Historica Phonslogy 1 14, On the Theory of Phonological AMites between Languages 202 Parry The Sound System of Language 15. The Concept of Phoneme 217 16, The Concept ofthe Distinctive Feature (with C. Gunnar Fant and Morris Halle) 242 17, Ques fo the Uimate Constiuents (with Linds R. Waugh) 259 48. The Sound Laws of Chil Language and Their Pace in General Phonology 290 19. Why "Mama" and “Popa”? 305 Meaning in Language: Grammatical and Lexical 20. Some Questions of Mesning 375 21. Bows View of Grammatical Meaning 224 22 Contribation to the General Theory of Case 32 23 Shifters and Verbal Categories 286 PART vr Sound and Meaning in Language: Their Interelations 24, The Phonemic and Grammatical Aspects of Language in Their Interetations 305 25. Quest forthe Esence of Language 407 26, The Spel ofthe Speech Sound (with Linda R. Waugh) 422 Contents The Place of Language: Interdisciplinary Perspectives 27 Linguistics in Relation o Other Sciences 451 28 Linguistics and Communication Theory 489, 29. Brin and Language #38 Nowes 515 References 541 Name Index "615 Subject index "627Roman Jakobson was one ofthe great thinkers of our time; the eects ‘otis genius have been fl in inguin, as well sin many Bel where Tnguiste considerations are influent. Despite the impact that i eas have fa, those interested in ceading selection of his writings in order to grasp the fundamentals of Jakobsoa's linguistic thought have been faced onthe one hand with the eight massive volumes of Selected Wr ings and on the other hand with narowly specialized collections. There has been no single volume that was atthe same time representative, relatively Conse, and accessible othe general reader “This hook is meant ofl hat gap It pves an overall view of Fakobson’s ‘general linguistic theory. I includes those texts tha ae bes sited to Introduce readers tothe general lines of fakobson's approach o language tis meant for those whose dnterests lie in es that Jakabsoa's own work touched: linguists, psycholinguistics, ethnolinguistics, scilin ‘ust, neuroinguistes, poetics and trary theory, semiotics, antho- polo, and philosophy of ange. ‘Although i dfteult to separate akobson's interest in ngage from his equal passion for poet, Ira. and semiotic sues, works of his concering these questions have not bees Included her. They can be ound inthe companion volume, Roman Jakobson, Language in Litre: ‘re, edited by Krystyna Pomorska abd Stephen Rudy (18?) akobson's texts have been grouped in seven parts ranging fom the most general questions of language to more specific topics 10 larger {nrdscptnay issues. Parts intended as an intoduction to his work ‘a whole. Itcomain basi theoretic statements tht define his general point of view. Part I brings together ext concerned with some of he undamental concepts that provide the backbone ot his appeoach: speech ‘event function of language, code and message pars and wholes (her farcical structure), similariyeomiguty, selecontcombination, andII AIERZ OM ee03 sl Preface ‘opposition and markedness. Pats il, IV, V, and VI each focus on & Parcular theme: language in reltion tte and space, inclding 'ypology and universal, the relation of synchrony and dachrony, an ‘age change, sociolinguisis, and linguitc ais, phonology in the ‘iest sense (phoneme, distinctive featur, redundancy, other feature, child language acquisition); grammatical morphology and Semantis; and {he dtect connection between sound and meaning iconic and non. Ditrarnes. Past VII provides a wider perspective on akobson's View of language inthe context of iaterdscipinary questions, considering li ssi and semiotics, linguistics and biology, Ingusticy and commun fation theory, and nerolinguistics Jakobson's work, ike the subject matter he writes about, sa complex whole in which everything is related in some way or other o everything ‘se, A theme tat the focus of one atl thus may also be developed ‘elsewhere. Ad even when treating a particular subject, Jakabson tends to bring in central concepts or fundamental propertis of language that the consis to be inseparable from the matter unde consiertion, “Hlnce, there are numerous overiappingsacrostekts and aroe sections, fand some of the associations be makes may seem surprising tthe ‘inate. The’ reader should be aare, therefore, tht the tile of & ‘haptr isnot necessarily indicative of al of ts contents, A particulary Striking examples Chipter 7, “Two Aspects of Language and Two Types ‘¢ Aphasie Disturbances,” which as been inladed les for it lai ‘ation of aphasi disorders (although that i important) thn fr isthe ‘retical discussion of two fundamental properties of langage, silt contiguity and selection combination, is our pleasant duty to thank numerous people for their support and advice in the various stages of preparation of this volume, We ae pa Viculariy indebted to Ronald L- Breigr, E. Wales Browne, Jack L. Barston, Daniel R. Cavicchi, Kathryn 8. Heary, Elizabeth V. Home, Dell Hymes, Johanna Nichols, Craig Noll, Krystyna Pomorsk, John Roberson, Stephen Rudy, Viciora A, Seligman, Michal Sivetsten, Edvard Stankiewiez, Roland Sussex, and Frans van Coxtsea for the lime they have devoied to this projet. We are also gmt to Connie Anderson, Cal. Blyth, I, Steven Caton, John Goldsmith, Gregory Guy, Wayne Harert, Elmar Hiolenstsi, Marca S. Howsen, Anne Mare Hutcheson, Say H. Jasanot, Munkjung Agnes Kang, Barbara A. Lat ford, Richard) Leed, Anatoly Liberman, Sozanne ‘McFayden, Igor Melsuk, Madeleine Neweld, Alea Nurshaum, Harriet Ritvo, Catherine Rombout, Rodney B, Sangster, Davi Silva, and Cornelis H. van Schoo neveld for het help. Theresa Antes, Munkvung Agnes Kang, and Chie tine Moritz were insrumenal in helping us to prepare the indexes. Our Preface xi ‘hanks also o to the following institutions for providing fancal ess- ‘ance ad congenial working environments: Cornell University (Depa ment of Modem Languages and Linguistics, Women's Deveionment Fund, Humantes Research Fin, Inrnatonal Stade” Offs Dsan ‘ofthe Collegeof Ars and Sciences), La Trobe University (Department ‘of French abd School of Humanities), University of Melbourne (Depart: ‘ments of Psychology and French, and Research and Graduate Stace Committee), and Stanford University (Staford Humanities Cente), Permission to publish the texts by Jakobson inthis volume was Mialy ‘granted to the editors and publ by the legtecs of the Takobaon ‘opytghts, The Roman Jakobson and’ Krystyna Pomorska Jakoboon Foundation, Inc., by Pennsylvania State University Press (Chapter 1), by Harvester Wheasha Chaptr 19, and by MI Pres (Chae 8Editorial Method ‘As far as possible, we have tried to present Jakobson’s writings 36 he {ef them, The pubicaion ofa volume a his Kind, however as neces ‘ated certain types of editorial changes in such cases the aim has ben {fo make the texts acessibeto the English eader without destroying the Interty of Jakobson's original ‘We includ the edited versions of thee texts (the bass of Chapters 1 5, and 20) tht Jakobson never published. Many of the chapters were ‘riginally writen in languages other than English The translation from the French of Chapters 5 and 14, and pars of Chapter 20, vas prepared for thi volume hy Maria. Hoviden. Seven other ehapiers (11,12, 1, 15,1, and 22) appeared originally in Russian, French, of German ‘and subsequent in English We have checked all these tansation and Imodied them where necessary. All the chapters include quotations fom linguistic works in other Languages, each of which we have translated into English, We have sso sappicd an English glow or rendition of samples and other material im fanguages other than English. For the transliteration of Russian we follow the “Ungustc™ system throughout the Book. "As mich as posible, the texts cluded hore appear in ther entirety, in Keeping vith akobson’s own dictum that pare a rule, should not be extracted from a coherent whole. Practical exigencies, however, forced us to abandon tis piacpleon several occasion. Six chapers fre excerped from books: Chapters I, 12,15, and 16 represent whole ‘haptrs inthe orginal work 17 consis of materia from to sucessve, and 26 conatitites the bennng section of long chap possible, In addition, we have incleded only the beginning put of wo ther texts (Chapters # and 2). Jakobson himself had used these {Wo texcerps separtay from the rest ofthe text ce the Notes for deal),, st Béitorial Method hich was eter oo specialized fr this volume or nt dict relevant {or eur puposes, To rect al ofthese changes new es weve shee {o Chapters 4 and 15, and subtle provided for Chapters sa a Foal we have supped appendixes to tre chapters and 2) The appended material comes from ee wings by akaboos ea sould i in understanding the topic unr considraon alle texts we hive coreceobviau ypopantical, punctuation, and gmail enor, completed or spplid Gopal rence ji when possible (added tothe text in parentheses), and provided explan. Phonetic Symbols ‘ory material where needed (enclosed in bracket). We hae ae eg Jaze the various phone trsciptin sje ised by Jako to onto the systems shown ne flowing ce bic Vowels and semivowels owt _Umounied Rounded Urol Uarowniod_ Rowied id : ° . : er * 1 Tesolin wn Bic aly ean! iw von Baswit Phoneie Symbols Phonetic Symbols ste Consonants, liquids, and glides Diseries “in cae essing Sin Enon aoe of Bia! Aol’ Aeopal! Ta Accented rene) 4 tricion bodenar “esa” rp Fai Vela® Uva” "a mes G é sion pe td ——e d= be ae Dowisd potion) a ‘ Prone! Diothone 5 ® “Nom fy et 4k eh ty ae tot ™ tex) & ‘or Ema , E sting oo si ‘ed ln onde, c ee aimee ty 8 ey ba 4 “eareed pureed, Nat wh ET SS, hetero ‘ is Side Nise a Dental Palatal Volar Uva Pharyagral Glo aa 5 wef 1 The race ash pec me lt cee Pe ssid Seong. pyro eran owe sepsisON LANGUAGE Abbreviations Fight volumes ofthe Selected Writings of Roman Jakobson have been Published by Mouton beginning in 1942—the fist five volumes fa The Hague, the subsequent three in Berlin. These volumes ae abbrevisted inthis work as SW to SW VIIL SWI Vo. 1, Phonological Stuies,192; od expe 197 SWI VoL, Word ond Language. 17 SW IML VoL I, Poe af Grammar and Grammar of Poetry 198 SWIV. Vol. IV, Stave Epc Sn. 1 SW. Vol. V, On Verse, Mares ond Explorers 1978 ‘SW VI Val. Vi, Er lve Pats and Cros Ps. 1-Comparav Slee ‘Studs: The Cyrle-Methodan Tadton, Pr. 2, Media Saks Sas, 195 SWI Nol VIN, Conrbutons to Canparaive Mythology: Studs in Lin tics and Phil, 1972182. 1S. ‘SW VI VoL VI, Major Woks, 1973-182 197Introduction: The Life, Work, and Influence of Roman Jakobson Linda R. Waugh and Monique Monville-Burston “The texts in Part introduce Roman Jakobson’s view of ngage The reader might slo profi from a discussion hare ofthe foundations of Is approach, since many themes are developed even in those easier shapers. Several studies expleating bis point of view have recently Sppeared and are for the most prt sil availabe." Rater than reapit late them, we explore here Jobs's ideas inthe content of hs inte Tectual development, asking us he once did (19776248) in an article on (Carles Sanders Perce, What sre the roots of his thought? How di is ideas prow’ The reader should be warned that no single discassion, especially a schematic one lke ours, can do justice to all facets of Jakabson's contbutons to general and theoreti linguistics. We agree ‘ith Edward Stankiowiez (1983421): “Like the gest works of the ls Ses, Jakobson's work) has @rchaess of texture and a multiplicity of ngs that wil forever intrigue the atentive reader.” Intellectual Biography git mn nim ae rat Moscow Period ‘Bain in Moscow on October 1, 1896, o a chemical engineer and ‘prominent industrialist, Roman Osipovit Jakobson was fortunate enough2 Introduction to srow up inthe intelectual ively mew ofthe Russian intelligentsia jst before the Revolution. From the begianing, he was interested in Poetry and language, orto put the later more precisely, language std languages, since he was always to study the one in light ofthe other. Bilingual in Rosia and French, Jakobso learned many other languages ‘throughout his ie. He himself (198M) pointed to the importance that his cay command of wo languages had for his intellect development as ‘wel as fr his terest in language sll. As a youngster, he was fsck hated by chilrens countingout rhymes, proverbs, iiomatic pass, fides, magical incantations, and graf ah boy of en, he compiled ‘ong tists illustrating the diferent meanings and ses of the cases of Russian (RI I98Od:19-26; see Chaper 22): and asa high-school stent, he had already begun serious analysis of contemporary verse (or example, that ofthe French pot Stephane Malla). Jakobson recsived his high-school education atthe Lazare Intute ‘of Oriental Languages, Moscow, tom which he pradted cu lade in 1914, and his university traning in the Slavic section of the historic iological acl at Moscow University. He was warded the Buslaey Prize in 1916 for hin work on North Russan folk epics," which was accepted in lieu of masters thesis; the degree wah awarded in 1918 “He wrote is first scholarly article as nineteen year-old on the phonetics ‘ofa Northern Great Russian det (pubished ts RD 1927, ‘The dominant linguistic school at Moscow University was that ofthe followers of FF. Fortunatov, whose approach was esentaly that of ‘he neoprammarian tradition. The Neogrammarians (sce Malmberg 194, Robins 1968) decare thatthe ony scene sty of language possible ws historical and genetic: for example, the way to understand the sounds fof given language was to trace each sound ia trn tos manifestation inan eater tage ofthe language, Moreover, they thought tha languages ould vary without order and without limit and they ignored the fonction of language for communication. Already as student Jakobson reacted ‘gains his way of thinking Ashe himself pati ‘Though the ings textbooks of oar cllege yeas used odie [nngnge eat inure communicate, chet utenon Is these ‘minis was pi othe pares of deta memiva tered Fars. No anawerappened fo the cca queso ho dot ‘verse components tis toa pais? OY Tae) Despite this orientation, Jakobson found kindred elements in Fortuna- tows views. He was attracted by the nation tht lnguage isnot merely the expression of ready-made ideas but fst and foremost f tool thi ‘as is own independent existence. Hence ican be used for thinking. Jakobson also praised his teachers for "thelr uncommon open-minded troduction 3 ness” (1971), ther promotion of igor of thousht, their concern for the discovery of gonerl lav asthe primary object of ingustis, and their conviction that the study of language shoul be closely tied to that ‘of iterature (Bd 19800), While nsogrammarian conceptions were dominant among hi teachers, in those formative years Jakobvon bocame acquainted with the Work of Tngulsts who had developed the basi for stryturl linguistics. AS a fst- deat stadent, he sead the work of Lev V. Seerba (1912), which was in the tation of the Kazan" School Jan Bandovin de Courtenay and “Mikoa} Kruszewsk; these two Polish linguists of the Inte nineteenth fd the arly wenith centuries had laid the foundation of modern ‘honology by ther dscusion of the nation ofthe phoneme Adin 1977 ‘eres Karcevsi turned to Mosoow from Geneva, bringin wi hin the ideas of Ferdinand de Saussre, one of the founders of modern linguistics Here Jakabson found afiniies with his own views, a partc= Ur the overarching notion of language as stem of sins. The sign (Gignu, in the Latin terminology that Jakobsoa fevered) is composed ‘of signer cond form, signans) abd sigifed (meaning, signatum) ‘The sipnifer is pereplble sensuous” or “sensible”; the signed is concept (2 Chapter 1) “Every linguistic signi aunty of sound and ‘meaning” (RI 1976423) and is normally diagramed asin Figure 1 Tings sign can be exempted by grammatical morphemes, lexical items, syntactic constructions, whole discourses, andthe Ike in those yeas, to, the stadentsof linguistics at Moscow University ‘were discustng the newest developments in the phenomenology of lan fsuge, They feared, in paticulr, to dstagush between linguistic Imeaning (olgntum) and” exralingustic reference (denotarum: RI Tse2e-30) they absorbed the stone Russian tradition of Hegelian and pest Hegelian islecties, which stessed the importance of antnames [Gichotomis), Jakobson added te idens of Edmond Husser (913) and ‘Anton Mary (508) on universal grammar as the only firm theoretical is for linguistic work (Holensten 1976, 1987). Jakobson then core- lated this basis with the work on Gestalt poychology which insisted on gure Lt The ings senBS EEE ES 4 troduction Introduction 5 ‘elations (especialy part-whole relations) on their onstitutivecharscer, 1nd onthe importance of contetualization (Chapter 8. ‘Strong antposivist and antimechanistc views in Ressan thought of the time left ther imprint on Fakobson (RI 19290). He di not favor formalistic abstractions, however, or dismiss the physical aspect of he omens, As Ei Helenstein pts it (17:1), Jakobson wes an ei ‘cal scientist and philosophical theories served him only as heurnc ‘uides which must he both theoretically specified and empirically under ine” He sirove for rigor and precision inal is work the disliked fausrie in work and ine), without sacrificing the complexity and integrity of his object of study. Characterizing himself 3, reali Jakobson nonethciess fought against a naive realism inst and scence (ud 192la), He championed the reality of linguistic phenomena, os well 858th point of view of language users (speakers and addressees) rather than hat ofthe aberver who outside ofthe ste ap hs et ae to understand is reali, 1c very dangerous ope with he er “ely.” A phys snail er the pyc itu at pk up te ig bt tire haar, Rf te pcos gy Bethe i fa an tha des na a scenay Conesnt the psc fa uTIe) ret He thas favored the paripatobserver_over the “crypt” ‘(Chapter 28; RJ 1956a:475-476, 1962c:658, 1979b). " ‘The suongestinfeace on Jaobio's thinking was “the turbulent atic movement ofthe early twentieth century (R 96261. Hinall 4 fhend of nonrepresentational sinter nd posts, Jakobsen patted ‘nthe renewalin the artsan scenes tha tok pice n Bare ncoing Rosi) nthe 1010s, He served wih nee the arse capone ofthe avan-pade for example, Mess, Bagh, Stank, Joye, Sebi Le Corbi) he lowed ential the Futuris obits (9 1919, Rudy 983, 198) and wrote Futur (ranean) Boers hime under the peony Abas Rudy 187 Valier 198) ‘What particu suck him abot eens rew artistic wehds was tel ‘au feclng fer the dalectca enon between prs and th ig Whole, snd Beween the conugted pars, pinay tween he te ‘spats any artes, ston and sigan DSS) ‘What proved an even grater impetus for hee eas and ped ‘kobion witha conviction hat he evr lossy, the seer of Science and. Artes the development of modern pas (8 1982633 in parla te theory of ray. lah soil sta ‘he took inspiration rom Ennis covey that tin snot abst tut force ints own right and that ime and meion must be understood in relation to each other, Jskobson was drawn tothe fact tat for Ein- Sinan physics, as for Cubism, everthing is based on relationship 19T2a, 1986). The arts eredo “donot believe in things, belive in their relationship" (Georges Brague) thus Joined the mathematicians ‘moto “Iti ot tags that mater, but the ations between them” (Bell 1948) Oras Jakobson himself put it much later "Atention must be paid ot the material units themseves butt ther rations” (RI 1973.29. {Later stil, award Sapi's dictum (1924139) "What eters the mind and Ieaumbs the spr is ever the dogged acceptance of absolutes” served 2 the epigrph for The Sound Shape of Language (RY 1973). "The other sde of relativity, as Jakobson Was fond of pointing out, is ‘nvariance—~in particular, invariance in relationship (equivalence). This notion arose simultaneously in physics, mathematics, and linguistics and [sconcermed withthe defining characieristcs of given phenomenon: (1) they are constantly associated with ft, and (2) the) relate Mt to- and ‘itferentate i from other eis inthe same stem. i tan neat Fance i ansocited withthe complementary notion of aration: an entity may, as it occurs In leven contexts situations, be altered and Influenced ia various ways. Yt certain constant, invariant characteristics remain, Iakobsonuntringly claimed thatthe question of equivalence i ‘ference, ofinariance in the mids of variation, "the cardial problem ‘of language and the pivotal concern of linguistics” (RY 1959; See also Chapter 3, Tm TBS, together with other stodets (in particular, Bogayré), Jakobson funded the Moscow Linguistic Circe, dedicated to “he stay ‘of linguistics, pots, metres, and folklore” (RI 1958 see also 158, T9RSb), and served ts president unl 1920. In the same period be cofounded the Society forthe Sty of Poetic Language (OPOJAZ) in Saint Petersburg and was couuthor with Jun Tyajanov of is progr mati statement (RI 1928). These two groups, which today go Unde the Ine of Rusian Formalism, consisted of linguists, iterary scholar, and Writers especialy estheticians and. poets). They insisted om the futonomy of literary studies and ealed for an immanent analysis of literary works, with a focus onthe properties that distinguish terry ‘materal from any other kind” This interes implied focus on the text fn on it relational properties, in prticlar those based on linguistic Strutue fr istane, accent and vowel legth, which underlie meter in ‘ese: see Ry 192Hb, 1923) Jakobsoa's fst hngusi tudes, thea, were {entered on poetry: “I's by din of enlyng poems tha I Began t work fn phonology” (RI 19756128). Poety became, as it were a testing bound fr, and a catalyst of, hs own emerping theory of language6 ntroduction Introduction 7 Prague Period Jn 120 Jakobon went to Prague and sabsstemly decided 19 ‘enai ht, bed y the pola event the Sova Une ‘ive is octrat 190tom Prue Une Was tens caching a he TG, Masaryk Utverty xo, an 837 aed th ro Risin piogy an Od Caches at oon Brag was congenial enon fr him Std a oe tee of est and eastern European clr as aeine pat oo here dere teas of modem tous icing hse fs fret, me ew tease om tthe a ach in common withthe linguist woking tcc and 1956 fond te Pras Ling Cie dee a se tee sts pis ante hoy ofthe Svan, ted ules He serv its vie poi hs tps fa hs ‘oslovakia in 1939, = “ The Prague Circle, which i own as th cra ofthe strat novenet in orn lng, beame na ce in ace entry ings. e ston for bth» fnstoa a's essa of language: Langage serves for common fem is Pee ins eld, comes the fandom “aed to aye al Oy esa of fngage rom the nip athe wa hey soe {Coape'3)Language is «nem witht natal suc, Pay these commie tas, Ince. Taktson who cone ig tem “neutral” 1939 Gepblahed te RF TIC se coe tem forth poi Were me fo comps he leading ie of present scene in te ‘ot Varios mneitions we old arly nds me eproniae ‘sition than sractraln Any st of enone ened oe « Inlke fashion, what seems tobe the sme acoustically maybe iterent steveturly, For example, the Danish 3s weaker (a) in lation fo), in wordintal postion and stonger (lense) in elation to [0] in word ‘medial positon, asin Figure L6- Thus, the worl [a] and word. ‘medial (are sirueturaly fret trom eachother “The fourth sage in Jakobsonian phonology culminated in bis last major otk, The Sound Shape of Language (1979), writen with Linda R ‘aus n general, this stage could be characterized a futher widening of functional concer. For example, Jakobson and Waugh concentrated ‘on the multifintionaly of the specch sound, They developed the Hea that speech sounds are tually defned by a variety of festre types, ‘ot only the distinctive, reduadan, and conguative(demarcatve) fea: tures fined cartier, but also expressive (stylist) and pysiognomlc features (se also Chapter 16 RY 16, Waugh 1987). Since ll ofthese features together represent the entize make-ap of a sound Gs “shape”, there is aoting that is “pure” sound, nothing that docs not combine function and sound essence. Jakobson ad earlier sid that since the universal distinctive features are defined in acousio-perceptal ate Fal) terms and since they are reltionaly invariant, the Sausuran diy tinction between form and substance fs invalil ne cannot feentate Phoneme | Word-iial | Word: modal gare L6- ‘The Dish del consonants ‘between structure and the concrete material that manifests tha stractre Moreover, “since the sound matter of language is «matter orgnized and formed to serve a 9 semiotic instrament, not only the signatvefone- tion ofthe distinctive estres bat even tee phonic essence cull sarfct” (RJ 1949-23). The sound shape ara whole, then, i cultural frst. The oppositions tadtionally made between igus and non- linguistic, “abstract and. concrete, functional and nonfunctional, (phonemic and (phonetic ae consequently inappropriate (ee aso Levi Strauss 1972. “The sound:shape stage is also characterized by further refinements in the acoustic defintion of the distinctive features and by 4 relational application of the notion of markedness> either pole of an opposition fin be marked, depending on the context in which the Tetue foun. Tn telangular systems, the tip () is marked in the consonats, wheres fhe bas (ui marked in the vowels (See Figure 1.7.) Evidence for this difereace i provided by the order ofseqinitonin clea and by language typology and universal, especialy implictional rales. “Another concern at this sage isthe question of arbitrariness. As men- tioned shove, Jakabson hal Been able ta pt his argunent aint arbi trainess om a diferent footing ater his discovery af Pire (Chapter 2) In Sound Shape, anew dichotomy was defined, namely, mediay vers ‘immediacy: an indirect relation between sound and meaning (Jobe aniculation) versus direct relation between sound and eating see also Waugh 1987). Immeditcy jx exempifed by phenomena ranging {rom sound symbols and synesthesia (Chapter 26) to mshi and poetic ‘uses of sound. This dichotomy was also related to the hemisperes the brain left versus right rexpectively) the top of oe of Jakobsen’ last theoretical texts (Chapter 2). ‘Sound Shape was also an answer to what Jakobson and Waugh saw as excesses in generative phonology. In particu, the callapsing of to Sharply delineated functions of the distinctive features and phonemes ‘was rejected on the grounds that they serve ferent pragmatic end (RS Ts79b:83-89. The fst function i that of keeping apart words th re Aieret in meaning (pin versun bin) this distinctiveness pret (ens6- ‘scrimination) andi primary. On these grounds the concept of phoneme yy ‘gure LT Marednesrelions in conoaus d Wonel (athe sounds ore Unde2 Iniroduction should not be abandoned, since sense-dscimination is carried out by both the distinctive features and ther combinations, the phonemes (ee the Appendix to Chapter 16) RY 1966, 197%). Tie second function, ‘which Jakobson and Trubetkoy evgnally called morphonological (mor. ‘hophonemi), was Tater renamed sense-etermination; its domsin Enconmpasses the phonsogial structure of merpemes, the alternations ‘tiwonds and morphemes (for example, wife and wives, tke and foot, hd, ina given word, the aangement of features that way supply infor ‘maton abou ts derivation and inflectional stractre and grammatical Inconing » These ta functions are aillerent pot only operationally it tthocros-Ungusticaly: for example, universal law operate mich more Widely and rgorooly in ease-dscrmination than in sense-dtermins tion, whore scope and structure diler radically from one language Tkobson's interest ia the seasedetermiaative function of sound is rmanfsted in works in which he examined in detail the phonological ‘hpes of morpemes. “Russian Conhgation” (RJ 148) provided a max- imallyeconomial description of «complex grammatical paradigm. Tn 8 stritly formal analysis he was able to predict the variant forms of the Rassian verb, piven (1) one basie form of the stem (not to, a8 in taditioal analyses) and (2) sal et of rules that state the changes the tem undergoes before diferent ypes of endings (or example, n= ‘ation ofa vowel-ina stem before a vowel suf). Takobson was even more interested inthe close relationship between sour and meaning. Already in is earliest works he had expressed the conviction that since language communicates meanings through sounds (es maniesied inthe concept of the linguistic sign, both sound and ‘eaning should be analyzed in their interrelations (Chapter 24). In his Studies ofthe 1980s and (96, he dncussed arber the problem ofthe formal expression (grammatical processes") of grammatical catepories: in paula, he worked out gorous typology of declensonal snd onigatonal synretisms In Russian (see Chapter 22 and RI 1958, ef 19sTb.e; TPES). He also established a set of cose pualls between ‘rious morphological and syntactic categories and their formal expre son, thus showing the limits of abivarinss.” For example, a gamma eal category suchas “pla” is eypialy ionic in the sense that i has 2 form that longer or more complex than the form of the eatgary “singular,” because of ts meaning, The topic tat binds together Jekobson’s general linguistic and inter siscptinary studies and his mae specie concerns, especialy in phovol- ‘943, isthe history of linguistics, which attracted his atleation in the 1960s and 197s." His interests were far rom antiquarian: he studied the ‘ast insofar as it was of relevance tothe preset ato the future Ia I Introduction 25 ‘seping with his approach inthe history of languages his pot of view swavalvays a prospective one, He constantly searched in ik predecessors forthe germs of various ideas of modern Inguistics,espectlly his own {sce Sunkiewiez 197. Perhaps the most famous ofthe trophies ofthis bunt are his (escovery and epprasalof the work ofthe forerunners tk modern linguistics, In conformity with this istic faterest, in the lst twenty years of his Wie, Jakabaon focused mare on his own thought (Pomorska 198) eginning with his “Retrospect” to volume I of his Selected Wriings, continuing though the "Retrospcts” to the next five volumes.” and Samiating in the Dialogues (1980, written with Krystyna Pomorska) fad in his “metasetrospees (Chaper 3; 19a), Jakobson traced his ‘oun development” al the same time answering his eres. Going beyond {ure summing up, Jakobson wed these artes to fay down new paths for himself and is readers) to travel. Ics characteris hat ie and suce do no ext as themes in ether Holensten 1976a or Waugh 176 {@ven though Jakobson read and commented on both books when the) ‘ere sili manuscrp), but they area major focal point in the Dialogues UUbind, where they lumina new correspondences between various properties of language (Chapters 11 and 12). The relation between lan ‘tape and the brain which was attached to questions of aphasia in eatir ‘work, likewise became a major focus ear the end of his fe (Chapter 29) In Dialogues andi private talks, Jakobson confessed tht ihe were 2 young linguist today, he would flow closely workin newrolingunes, Parsing questions of child language acqusiion of grammar and of Schizophrenia as a disorder of language and delving futher into the Felaton betwen language and the genetic code, language and the uncoa- ‘ious, distinctive festres snd the brain" He was excited bythe work ‘on hemispheric specialization and onthe loclzation of various functions Within the hemispheres and by the fact hat these discoveries correlated wit findings innit His fascnalion With time as a srvtural factor was combined ih Psc’s elections on ime as felted 1 fon, index, and syrbol (Chapter 28). Icons are “the accomplished image ofan experience ht is alrealy pst; while the index is inked v0 an ongoing experience inthe present ‘The symbol, however, aways possesses a geeral meaning apd is based ‘ona general aw; evrything that stay generals related fo the indie future. Teisapotemtiaity whose mode i ss nur” (RY 198049 92), Ths, the Furst akobson ofthe 110s joined the fats akobson ‘ofthe 1980s. For him, all words are symbol; thus, “the word ad the {Future ae nassoubly inked” (RI 1380892, emphasis aed). This view Teast, ip particular that his Work-—words about words—Was legacy Te the future Ivanov 1983), a vast program of Work In prowess.