Structuralism is a literary movement, proposed by a Swiss linguistic “Ferdinand de Saussure” also known as father of modern linguistics, began in France in the 1950s and was first seen in work of the anthropologist ‘Claude Levi-Strauss and the literary critic ‘Roland Barthes’. It was imported into Britain in 1970s.
Structuralism can be defined as:
“Structuralism is a mode of knowledge of nature and human life that is interested in relationships rather than individual objects or, alternatively, where objects are defined by the set of relationships of which they are part and not by the qualities possessed by them taken in isolation.”
The principles of linguistics which proposed by Ferdinand de Saussure suggest new method of language research and different from historical approach which used before this view appear. Ferdinand de Saussure is the first person who formulates the way to analyze the language systematically which also can be used to analyze signs system. Structuralism is a conceptual and methodological approach to describing and analyzing a variety of objects of inquiry including cultures, economics, language, literature, mythologies, politics, and societies.
What are Structures in Structuralism?
The term structuralism refers the method that proceeds from a description of systems of abstract, generalizable rules that govern actual instances of expression. This starting point is considered the best explanation for how actual expressions in any symbolic form (linguistic, visual, etc.) are formed, generated, and understood.
For de Saussure, a linguistic (or any cultural meaning-unit) is a “sign,” specifically defined as the arbitrary–but internally necessary–coupling of a sensory vehicle (speech sounds, printed words) and a mental concept. This model of abstract and necessary learned, conventional conditions for expression and meaning influenced linguistics, semiology (models for a grammar of meaning applicable to all cultural forms like writing, images, and music), and anthropology.
Basic Assumption and Principle
- Meaning is Arbitrary: He questioned the conventional “correspondence theory of meaning” and argued that meaning is arbitrary, and that language does not merely reflect the world, but constitutes it. He was undermining the very notion of language by proposing the relationship between words and meanings as arbitrary. The structure of language ensures that when we use words, however arbitrary their meaning might be, we register certain differences and make sense of them.
- Meaning of Words are Relational: His conception of meaning was purely structural and relational rather than referential: primacy is given to relationships rather than to things. Words make sense to us, or have ‘value’ (Saussure’s term) for us in their relationality: in their difference from other words. Words are therefore related to each other in the form of difference and have no absolute value of their own. The meaning of signs was seen as lying in their systematic relation to each other rather than deriving from any inherent features of signifiers or any reference to material things. Saussure’s relational conception of meaning was specifically differential: he emphasized the differences between signs.
- Meaning is always attributed to the object/idea by Human Mind: Ferdinand De Saussure says, “Meaning is always attributed to the object or idea by the human mind, and constructed by and expressed through language: it is not merely contained in the thing.”
- It means that the choice is left for the human mind. The structure of language, or the system, ensures that we recognize difference. Well-known examples of this process would be the choice between paired alternatives like ‘terrorist’ or ‘freedom fighter’. There is no neutral or objective way of designating such a person, merely a choice of two terms which construct that person in certain ways. It has been said that there are three versions of every story, your version, my version, and the truth, but the case here is more complicated than that, since all the available terms are purely linguistic – there is no truth about these matters which exists securely outside language.
Meaning occurs through difference and SIGNS’ relationship to each other. Meaning is not identification of the sign with object in the real world or with some pre-existent concept or essential reality; rather it is generated by difference among signs in a signifying system. Ex: woman vs. lady. The meaning of the words “woman” and “lady” are established by their relations to one another in a meaning-field. They both refer to a human female, but what constitutes “human” and what constitutes “female” are themselves established through difference, not identity with any essence, or ideal truth, or the like.
Much of our imaginative world is structured in binary sets (opposites) which assign structure and meaning to signs. Structuralism notes that much of our imaginative world is structured of, and structured by, binary oppositions (being/nothingness, hot/cold, culture/nature); these oppositions structure meaning, and one can describe fields of cultural thought, or topoi, by describing the binary sets which compose them. Ex: cruel vs. humane. Forms the basis of SEMIOTICS, the study of signs.
Structuralism forms the basis for semiotics, the study of signs: a sign is a union of signifier and signified, and is anything that stands for anything else. Sign = union of SIGNIFIER and SIGNIFIED. Ex: c-a-t, fuzzy critter that goes “meow”.
Central too to semiotics is the idea of codes, which give signs context cultural codes, literary codes, etc. The study of semiotics and of codes opens up literary study to cultural study, and expands the resources of the critic in discussing the meaning of texts. CODES provide signs with context – cultural context, literary context, etc.
In the view of structuralism our knowledge of ‘reality’ is not only coded but also conventional, that is, structured by and through conventions, made up of signs and signifying practices. This is known as “the social construction of reality.” Reality is conventional; our perceptions of the world around us are bound up in conventions, codes, signs, etc.
Concepts of Structuralism
Sign
A sign is the basic unit of langue (a given language at a given time). Every langue is a complete system of signs. The sign is divided into two elements:
- The signifier- a sound-image, or its graphic equivalent
- The signified- the concept or meaning
Signifier
The signifier is the material aspect of the sign — the word on paper, the spoken word, or a traffic sign or a supermarket. First there’s the bit that you can see or hear. One can imagine signs that are accessible to each of the senses. Audible and visible signs have priority for Saussure because they are the types of sign that make up most of our known languages. Such signs are called “verbal” signs (from the Latin verba meaning “word”). The sensible part of a verbal sign (the part accessible to the senses) is the part you see or hear. This is its signifier.
Signified
The signified is the concept that results in your mind — the idea of a dog, or a chair, or liberty or whatever. That meaning is not inside something, but is the product of a set of relationships, often negatively defined. And that we do not have direct access through language to reality itself. And, most eerily, although we only saw the mark, we simultaneously heard it in our heads- not actually but that part of our brain that listens out for sounds took one look at a non-existent word and heard something too. The signified is what these visible/audible aspects mean to us. Now we know very well that some marks mean very different things to different people at different times. The signified is thus always something of an interpretation that is added to the signifier.
Langue and Parole
The distinction between the French words, langue (language or tongue) and parole (speech), enters the vocabulary of theoretical linguistics with Ferdinand de Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics, which was published posthumously in 1915 after having been collocated from student notes. Ferdinand De Saussure is regarded by many as the creator of the modern theory of structuralism, to which his langue and parole are integral. He believed that a word’s meaning is based less on the object it refers to and more in its structure. There are two primary components of language according to Ferdinand de Saussure and modern structuralism. They are:
- Langue
- Parole
Langue
Langue represents the “work of a collective intelligence,” which is both internal to each individual and collective, in so far as it is beyond the will of any individual to change. Langue consists in the homogeneous social product that has the potential of speech and is comprised of distinctive linguistic attributes and is defined as the normal and traditional social product of the faculty of speech which will be accumulated in every individual’s brain in the speech community after listening to many speeches. Langue is explained by Saussure by the analogy he makes between langue and similar copies of the same dictionary issued for every individual.
Parole
Parole designates individual acts, statements and utterances, events of language use manifesting each time a speaker’s ephemeral individual will through his combination of concepts and his “phonation”—the formal aspects of the utterance. This adds another dimension to the chosen word’s meaning. Parole indicates the noticeable indication of this faculty. Since parole is by nature heterogeneous, it indicates the defective reflections that have been involved in the structure of the language and, thus, Saussurian linguistics gravitated to the study of langue.
Saussure drew an analogy to chess to explain the concept of langue and parole. He compared langue to the rules of chess—the norms for playing the game—and compared the moves that an individual chooses to make—the individual’s preferences in playing the game —to the parole.
Difference Between Linguistics Structuralism and Literary Structuralism
| Feature | Linguistics Structuralism | Literary Structuralism |
|---|
| Founder | Ferdinand de Saussure | Roland Barthes, Lévi-Strauss |
| Focus | Language system & rules | Text structures & narratives |
| Method | Analyzing linguistic units | Identifying patterns in literature |
| Key Concepts | Sign, Langue vs. Parole, Syntax | Binary oppositions, Myth, Narrative codes |
| Example | How words form a sentence | How fairy tales share the same structure |
