Course in General Linguistics by Ferdinand de Saussure

Ambiguity would disappear if the three notions involved here were designated by three names, each suggesting and opposing the others. One tends to forget that arbor is called a sign only because it carries the concept “tree,” with the result that the idea of the sensory part implies the idea of the whole. I call the combination of a concept and a sound-image a sign, but in current usage the term generally designates only a sound-image, a word, for example ( arbor, etc. Our definition of the linguistic sign poses an important question of terminology. Whether we try to find the meaning of the Latin word arbor or the word that Latin uses to designate the concept “tree,” it is clear that only the associations sanctioned by that language appear to us to conform to reality, and we disregard whatever others might be imagined. The linguistic sign is then a two-sided psychological entity that can be represented by the drawing: pic] The two elements are intimately united, and each recalls the other. We can avoid that misunderstanding by speaking of the sounds and syllables of a word provided we remember that the names refer to the sound-image. This term, which suggests vocal activity, is applicable to the spoken word only, to the realization of the inner image in discourse. Because we regard the words of our language as sound-images, we must avoid speaking of the “phonemes” that make up the words. Without moving our lips or tongue, we can talk to ourselves or recite mentally a selection of verse. The psychological character of our sound-images becomes apparent when we observe our own speech.

The sound-image is sensory, and if I happen to call it “material,” it is only in that sense, and by way of opposing it to the other term of the association, the concept, which is generally more abstract. The latter is not the material sound, a purely physical thing, but the psychological imprint of the sound, the impression that it makes on our senses. The linguistic sign unites, not a thing and a name, but a concept and a sound-image.

We have seen in considering the speaking-circuit that both terms involved in the linguistic sign are psychological and are united in the brain by an associative bond. But this rather naive approach can bring us near the truth by showing us that the linguistic unit is a double entity, one formed by the associating of two terms.

It assumes that ready-made ideas exist before words it does not tell us whether a name is vocal or psychological in nature (arbor, for instance, can be considered from either viewpoint) finally, it lets us assume that the linking of a name and a thing is a very simple operation-an assumption that is anything but true. We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically

Course in General Linguistics by Ferdinand de Saussure