Transcript F. De Saussure C.S. Peirce 1857-1913 1931-1958

Text and Sign, Part II
Bent Preisler, Professor of English Language and
Sociolinguistics, Department og Culture and Identity
”My” part of the course description:
Communication Theory – Applied Linguistics
Outline of Part II:
1.
Models of Communication
Saussure, Peirce, Barthes
2.
Speech Acts and Language Functions
Searle, Grice
3.
Code Variation and Meaning – users and uses of
language
Arbitrary relationship between code variation
(quantitative) and social meaning – Trudgill
Social meaning reflected in/created by code variation
(qualitative) – Maltz/Borker vs. Eckert
4.
Language and Power
Social hierarchies in language
5.
Analyzing Discourse as social action
– as reflecting and constructing social roles, attitudes,
events
F. de Saussure
1857-1913
C.S. Peirce
1931-1958
Sign
Sign
Signifier
Signified
”Something which stands for something else”
(signifier)
(signified)
Diadic system
Interpretant
Object
”Something which stands to
somebody for something else”
Triadic system
Peirce: types of sign
Icon: looks like
reality
Index: points
to reality
e.g. smoke  fire
dialects  regions
e.g. map, photo,
onomatopoeia
Symbol:
conventionally
related to reality
e.g. most words,
numerals (though
Roman numerals are
iconic, cp. II >< III !)
”Motivated” vs. conventional signs
Convention

Arbitrary reference
Iconic reference
Motivation

Paradigms and syntagms
e.g.
Syntagm 
Paradigm
Subject
The little girl
A big dog
Bill
(etc.)
+
Verbal
saw
ate
tasted
(etc.)
+
Object
an apple
the steak
the orange
(etc.)
*The brick
*wrote
*an idea
”*” = does not work!
Linguistic signs
 A spoken language sign is composed of one or more phonemes





e.g. /kæt/ (phonological transcription)
Can be represented in writing by graphemes, e.g. cat
Phonemes/graphemes are combined to produce morphemes, i.e.
the smallest linguistic signs (syllables or words)
e.g. /k/ + /æ/ + /t/ = /kæt/
c + a + t = cat
which in turn can be combined to form larger units of meaning
(process called semiosis)
Signs are distinguished from each other by their contrast:
e.g. dog is differentiated from hog, dig and log by a single
letter:
cp. dog/hog, dog/dig, dog/log
Thus knowledge of any term is dependent on knowledge of the
system!
Roland Barthes: the meaning of
signs is interactive/negotiated!
Two orders of signification:
DENOTATION
vs.
CONNOTATION
and myth
e.g. ”freedom fighter” / ”13” / ”politician” / ”liberal”
Metaphor
 The salesman tried to land a contract with the client
 The police finally netted a bank robber after an intense
search
 The con artist managed to reel in another victim
 He was trying to bait her into debate
Based on paradigmatic selection
- imaginative.
Metonymy
 The Kremlin would like to be seen as the peacemaker
Kremlin  Russia
 Denmark won!
Denmark  the Danish team
Syntagmatic selection (parts in relation to the whole)
- realistic
Contrast: Norms and deviation
Prototype Theory
 Eleanor Rosch (1970s): Human cognition is the
primary element for any categorization
 Object assigned to category through comparison with
its prototype object (mental entity in the human
mind)
 e.g. OSTRICH, PENGUIN less ”BIRD” than SPARROW
Kate’s Boobs
Icons:
Indexes:
Symbols:
Pictures (likeness)
Photos and names (reference to actual
people/events) – the text as such (tabloid)
Words other than names (though names
can be symbols! – e.g. Einstein, Hitler
Numbers: ”50” – sexual impropriety!
Variation in type-face (connotes drama,
sensation)
Puns, ”mixing up” spellings/meanings,
generate new connotations: tension
between ”serious” and ”saucy”
e.g. shakes-peer : Denot. wobbles + stare
Connotations ”sexual excitement”
(Kate’s Boobs, cont.)
Interchangeable paradigm members:
Denotations and connotations
 boob (slang) – cp. breast
 saucy – cp. risqué
 carry-on – cp. fuss
 peel off – cp. strip
INFORMAL - FORMAL
 bard – cp. poet
”a no-holds-Bard Shakespeare play” –
pun: ”no holds barred,” ”anything goes” (from wrestling)
Same sound – different meaning (pun): access to different
connotations/myths
 ”Bares her Boobs for the Bard”: alliteration – each (phonological)
syntagm begins with the same paradigm member
(Kate’s Boobs, cont.)
Syntagmatic combinations connoting
informality, non-serious ”news” (gossip!):
1st col.
 ”Sexy TV actress K.O.
 ”The 50-year-old ex-Howard’s Way star”
 ”Twice married Kate”
2nd col.
 ”a right Cleo carry on” (British-English colloquial style)
 ”sultry Kate”
(Kate’s Boobs cont.)
Metaphor and Metonymy
Metophor:
”a no-holds-Bard (i.e. barred) Shakespeare play” –
Vehicle: ”no holds barred” (from wrestling)
Tenor: ”no tricks barred
… strategies …
… effects …
Metonomy: Kate’s ”boob” gets to stand for the whole play!