Saussure-structuralism

Langue vs. Parole

"Langue" is the structured, social system of language shared by a community; "Parole" refers to the individual, concrete acts of speech. Critical analysis prioritizes langue as the object of study to uncover structural norms.

Sign

For Saussure, the basic unit of language, composed of two parts: the signifier (sound-image) and the signified (concept). Their union forms meaning but is arbitrary and socially constructed.

Signifier

The “sound-image” or psychological imprint of a word (not the spoken sound itself). It exists in the mind and is linked to a concept to form a sign.

Signified

The concept associated with a signifier. Together they form the sign, but the connection is arbitrary—not based on natural resemblance.

Arbitrariness of the Sign

There is no natural connection between signifier and signified; language is based on convention. This underpins structuralist ideas of constructed meaning.

Value vs. Signification

"Value" emerges from a word’s relation to other words in the system; "signification" is the conceptual meaning. Saussure emphasizes value as more fundamental to meaning.

Synchronic vs. Diachronic Analysis

Synchronic analysis studies language as a system at a given moment; diachronic analysis traces historical changes. Saussure privileges synchronic analysis to understand structural relations.

Syntagmatic Relations

Linear, combinatorial relations among linguistic units (e.g., word order in a sentence). Important for analyzing narrative or poetic sequence.

Associative (Paradigmatic) Relations

Vertical, substitutive relations between words in the same category (e.g., cat/dog/horse). Critical for understanding metaphor, metaphorical displacement, and lexical variation.

Difference as Meaning

Signs gain meaning not through intrinsic qualities but through difference from other signs. This insight radically alters how we analyze binary oppositions and symbolic structures in texts.

Language as a System of Differences

Language functions as a system where meaning arises through oppositions (e.g., light/dark, presence/absence). No unit has positive value—only relational value.

Semiology

The general science of signs proposed by Saussure. Linguistics is one branch; literature, visual art, and myth can be studied semiologically as sign systems.

Form over Substance

Saussure asserts that language is a form, not a substance. Meaning is shaped by structure, not by referential content—important for structuralist literary interpretation.

Linear Nature of the Signifier

Linguistic signs unfold in time (spoken) or space (written) linearly, limiting them to one-dimensional sequences—important for understanding syntax and rhythm.

Language as Social Contract

Language is a social institution, not under individual control. Meaning is collective, making the analysis of convention and norm essential.

Speech as Execution of Structure

"Parole" merely enacts possibilities already present in the structure of "langue." Literary texts, like speech, instantiate but do not alter the structural rules.

No Pre-existing Concepts

There are no ideas independent of language. Language divides the undifferentiated "thought-mass" into concepts, shaping cognition and interpretation.

Phonemes as Differential Units

Phonemes are defined not by substance but by opposition. Like literary symbols, they have no identity apart from the system of contrasts.

Chess as Metaphor for Language

Like chess pieces, linguistic signs derive function and identity from their position in a structured system—not from intrinsic properties.

Value in Literary Analysis

A word or motif has meaning not in isolation but through oppositional and structural relations with other elements in the text.

Critique of Nomenclature View

Saussure rejects the idea that language simply labels pre-existing things. Instead, it actively constructs the reality it describes—a foundational concept for post-structuralist criticism.

Signification as Relational

Process of signification occurs through structural positioning, not through essence. This challenges essentialist readings in literary theory.

Writing as Secondary System

Saussure sees writing as a secondary representation of speech, yet his framework also supports later theories (e.g., Derrida) that critique this hierarchy.

From Linguistics to Literary Theory

Saussure’s semiotic model provided the groundwork for structuralist literary criticism, especially in the analysis of narrative, genre, and metaphor.

Analogy to Currency

Like money, signs have value only through a structured system of exchange—not intrinsic worth. This insight parallels Marxist readings of ideology and language.

Opposition as Foundation

Opposition (e.g., present/past, male/female) is the basis of grammar and narrative meaning. Recognizing oppositional structures is essential to critical textual analysis.

The Sign as Dyadic and Arbitrary

Saussure defines the sign as a dyadic entity (signifier + signified), radically breaking from earlier triadic models (e.g., Aristotle, Peirce). Crucially, the relation is arbitrary, laying the foundation for structuralist critique of referential meaning.

Language as a Differential System

Saussure's model posits that no sign has inherent value; meaning is generated through its **difference** from other signs in the system. In literature, binary oppositions (e.g., life/death, male/female) derive meaning from this relational logic.

Structuralism’s Epistemological Shift

Saussure shifts inquiry from what words mean (content) to how meaning is produced (structure). Structuralist literary theory follows this by analyzing how texts signify through formal relations, not thematic resonance.

Synchronic Primacy over Diachrony

Saussure emphasizes that to understand language (and by extension, literature), one must study its internal rules at a given moment. Structuralist critics model this through close attention to textual structures rather than historical genesis.

Linguistic Value as Relational

The value of a word or sign comes only from its syntagmatic (horizontal) and paradigmatic (vertical) relations. Literary motifs, characters, or symbols gain significance through contrast and substitution within the system of the text.

Autonomy of the Signifying System

Saussure divorces language from external referents; meaning is self-contained within the linguistic system. This anticipates post-structuralist skepticism toward stable reference, authorship, and “truth” in literary texts.

Materiality of the Signifier

Though Saussure downplays the physical sound, his concept of the signifier opens the way to later theories (Barthes, Derrida) that emphasize the unstable, material dimension of signification—crucial for deconstructive literary readings.

Non-motivated Sign Systems

Language is a system of signs **without natural connection** to their referents. This principle challenges mimetic assumptions in literature (i.e., that it reflects reality), encouraging critics to treat fiction as a constructed discourse.

Function of the Syntagm in Narrative

Narratives are syntagmatic chains: each element follows another in a linear sequence. Structuralist narratology (e.g., Barthes, Greimas) builds on this to map how plots are assembled through functions and transformations.

Language and Thought Co-constitutive

Saussure argues that language shapes thought by carving up the “amorphous thought mass.” Literary form and content are thus inseparable; textual meaning is generated not by ideas but by how language configures them.

Phonological Difference as Model for Meaning

Just as phonemes function only through contrast (e.g., /p/ vs. /b/), literary elements (motifs, images, voices) carry meaning by opposition, not essence. This structural principle underlies symbolic and thematic analysis.

Linguistic Inertia and Collective Imposition

Saussure highlights that individuals cannot modify language arbitrarily; it is a social fact. Similarly, literary forms and genres impose constraints that shape individual artistic expression.

Writing as Derivative and Arbitrary

While Saussure viewed writing as secondary to speech, he acknowledged its conventional nature. Derrida later radicalizes this view, suggesting all language is writing—a shift foundational to post-structuralist literary theory.

Langue as Abstract System

Saussure’s “langue” is not the sum of all utterances but a system of potentialities. In literary analysis, this distinction helps critics analyze not just what is written but what is structurally possible or suppressed in a given text.

Semiotic Overlap with Myth and Literature

Saussure’s model of signification is applicable beyond language to all semiotic systems. Barthes’s *Mythologies* extends this to cultural texts, and structuralist critics analyze literature as mythic structure rather than personal expression.

Rejection of Nomenclature Theory

The idea that language names pre-existing things is rejected by Saussure. Literary meaning is thus not a mirror of reality, but a function of discursive construction—an idea foundational to ideological and psychoanalytic criticism.

Non-linear Structure of Paradigms

Though linear in expression, language operates through paradigmatic substitutions. Literary meaning emerges from absent possibilities as much as present choices (e.g., symbolic gaps, silences, unsaid tensions).

Form as Primary over Content

Saussure privileges form—the relational matrix of signs—over content. Literary critics influenced by this shift focus on how texts organize meaning structurally rather than interpret content thematically.

From Saussure to Structuralism

Saussure’s theory made possible a scientific poetics: analyzing the codes, conventions, and oppositions within texts. Critics like Jakobson and Lévi-Strauss built analytic systems to map narrative and mythic structures on this basis.

Relevance to Genre Theory

Saussure’s structural system explains how genres function as sets of rules governing combinations of narrative and linguistic units. Texts gain meaning by conforming to, or deviating from, these genre structures.

Binary Opposition as Textual Motor

In literary structuralism, Saussure’s logic of opposition becomes a method: protagonists/antagonists, nature/culture, male/female, etc. drive narrative and symbolic meaning. Deconstruction emerges when these binaries destabilize.