| F. D. Saussure is considered to be the father of modern linguistics, and his position in linguistics holds firm though there occurred various changes in the field of linguistics in the 20th century. He is not only a linguist, but also a philosopher of language. His thought on philosophy of language played an important historic role in the development of modern Western philosophy. At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, there was a big turn in modern Western philosophy ---a turn from epistemological philosophy to the philosophy of language. The centre of Western philosophy shifted from 'ego'to 'language', and since then modern Western philosophy entered an era of the philosophy of language. Philosophers conducted studies on language at various levels and from various perspectives, elucidating issues and disputes in philosophy through studying and analysing language phenomena. There are three branches in this turn: analytical philosophy represented by Frege; phenomenology and hermeneutics represented by Martin Heidegger and structural linguistics represented by F. D. Saussure. Analytical philosophy takes artificial language in its study of language, which is based on modern mathematical logic. This is in reality a turn of new logic. At the end of the development of analytical philosophy, philosophers, represented by L. Wittgenstein, realized the limit of artificial language, which they abandoned later. They then turned to ordinary language, through the analysis of which they studied philosophical issues. This is a big step forward in the philosophy of language. But their concern on ordinary language still followed a logic tradition, and lacked a comprehensive analysis of ordinary language. Hermeneutics laid much importance on poetic language, which concerns human existence through the analysis of the poetic nature of philosophy. Both artificial language and poetic language are based on natural language, but not the natural language proper. Both of them bear some features of natural language, and meanwhile abandon some other features of natural language. In other words, they are purified forms of natural language. Artificial language centres on the clearness of language, trying to create a highly formal ideal language by means of modern mathematical logic, while poetic language centres on the vagueness of language, trying to achieve some special expressive effects by means of imagination, implication, recollection, and rhetorical devices like metaphor and metonymy. Modern Western philosophy takes language as the bearer of thought. The study of language is that of thought. The analysis of the purified forms of language cannot reflect the real human consciousness. Only through the comprehensive analysis of natural language can one approach the natural state of human beings, thus further reflect their real state of existence. And Saussure realizes this aim of philosophy. Saussure's structural language philosophy attends to natural language proper. He reveals the real state and inherent properties of natural language through the analysis of its structure. This not only promotes human being's understanding of the world and philosophy, but also leads to inspirations in other humanities, and thus new and provoking philosophical problems are raised. Natural language exists along with human being. Its existence is closest to the human world of life. The analysis and study of the structure of natural language proper is one of the best ways to resolving philosophical issues. The modern linguistic approach established by Saussure is a tendency of modern Western philosophy. Western philosophy is derived from 'logos'. The artificial language in analytical philosophy and that in hermeneutics are both sublimed from natural language. In this sense, Saussure's linguistic studies are a return to the origin of philosophy, a process of retrieving 'logos'and the best approach to philosophical understanding. This paper aims to study Saussure's thought on philosophy of language and his philosophical contributions from the perspective of the linguistic turn in Western philosophy. Saussure takes natural language as the object of study, analysing the state of its ontological existence and rules of existence. The second part of this dissertation elaborates Saussure's ideas and study of languagenoumenon. According to Saussure, human speech activities are of a heterogeneous process. Language exists in speech activities, but speech activities are themselves not language proper. In order to retrieve language noumenon, he proposes that it is necessary to abstract human speech activities, and thus find out the ontological existence of language. He proposes two concepts: langue and parole, which are embedded in speech activities but different in nature. Langue is an abstract system of signs and rules shared by all the members of a speech community, and is characterized as a static system of symbols with social value which exists a priori in the mind of each member of the speech community. Parole, on the other hand, is the concrete use of the conventions or application of the rules. It is individual and subject to psychological, physiological and physical constraints. It is concluded that langue is a priori existence of social practice, an abstract social identity, and it is the language noumenon being retrieved. Language has three states of existence. First, language is a system. System is the key notion in Saussure's linguistic theory, which is realized under the government of systematic theory. The prerequisite of the existence of the linguistic system is its synchronicity. Sausssure makes a strict distinction between synchrony and diachrony. He claims that system lies in synchrony, and there is no diachronic element in system. In such a system, linguistic units exist at the crossing point of two relations: syntagmatic relation and paradigmatic relation. The synchronicity of the linguistic system and the theory of syntagmatic relation and paradigmatic relation are the metatheories of structural linguistics and structural philosophy. The notion of system in Saussure's linguistic theory is the reflection of modern systematism in linguistic studies, and it further fosters the progress of systematism. The second state of the existence of language is of its sign nature. Language exists as a system of signs. Just as Saussure puts it, 'Language is a system of signs that express ideas, …'(Saussure, 1960:16). The linguistic signs are composed of the signifier and the signified. The signifier is the sound-image, while the signified is the concept. The sound-image and the concept are the two poles of a linguistic sign. Their relation is like the two sides of a sheet of paper, which are inseparable. The absence of either of them will not make a complete sign. Meanwhile, the relation between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary, i.e., it is not regulated to use aparticular sound-image to represent a concept. Their relation is conventional. Arbitrariness is another key notion in Saussure's theory of linguistic signs, and it is the point d'appui in his theory of signs. Starting from linguistic signs, Saussure further proposes to establish semiology ---'[a] science that studies the life of signs within society…'(Saussure, 1960:16). He claims that the approaches in linguistics can be applied to the study of semiology, and that linguistics is just a branch of semiology. Language is the ideal sign. His proposal met positive responses. Many scholars entered the field of semiology after Saussure. Nowadays semiology has become an important branch of science in human studies. And signs also become an important cut-in point in the study of human phenomena. The third state of the existence of language is of its social nature. Language is a social existence. Saussure notes that 'language is a social reality'and that 'language is a social institution;'('but several features set it apart from other political, legal, etc. institutions.'). The social nature of language is the inherent feature of natural language, which is self-evident for Saussure. When he makes distinctions between langue and parole, he endows language with its social nature. According to Saussure, when he distinguishes langue and parole, he distinguishes what is social and what is individual. Language is a social reality, which is best justified by the arbitrariness of linguistic signs. Meaning is always a key issue in the philosophy of language. There are claims that Saussure's linguistic theory is undermined by his neglect of the discussion of meaning. This is in reality a misunderstanding of Saussure. I claim that meaning is explicitly discussed in Saussure's Course in General Linguistics, and it is elaborated in the third section of my dissertation. Saussure's theory of meaning is different from that of the philosophical tradition, which centres on words in the study of meaning, and it is also different from those of other schools of modern Western philosophy of language. Saussure establishes his theory in a systematic linguistic view. He surpasses his predecessors in that he sets up his own theory of meaning. Saussure claims that words alone are not enough to undertake meaning. The meaning of a linguistic sign is not the thing it refers to, nor is it the concept it refers to. We should not seek the meaning of language outside language; the meaning of language exists within the linguistic system. Meaning is related to signified, but it is not signified. Meaning is related to value, but itis value, either. The meaning of language is determined by the relations within the system. Saussure discards the extralinguistic world and pursues the meaning of language within the language system. His theory of meaning breaks away from the constraints of the external world on language and elaborates meaning from a brand-new perspective, which claims that relation determines meaning. The fourth section of the dissertation elaborates the relation between pronunciation and writing. The relation of pronunciation and writing is always an important issue in philosophy. Saussure inherits the tradition of Plato and Aristotle of ancient Greek in his theory on writing. They hold that the spoken form is first while writing is second. The writing forms are secondary signs which do not belong to the field of language. The only reason for the existence of the writing forms is to record what is said. To language, the writing forms are secondary and accessorial. Saussure proposes that the appearance of writing defilades the essence of language. It is like a tyrant, placing itself above language and usurping the function of language. It deceives the public and affects the changes of language. Saussure's attitude toward writing is purely negative. But in his theory there is a paradox between language and writing. To language, writing is secondary, but the study of language cannot be devoid of writing. They are always mingled with each other. It is necessary to analyse this from Saussure's view of language. To him, language is a self-sufficient system of signs. The sound-image is its signifier and the concept is its signified. Writing is something outside this self-sufficient system. But the present state of the writing forms hides this fact and thus causes such a paradox between language and writing. Saussure's philosophy of language is that of a structural analysis of natural language, pursuing to understand human facts by way of its rules and laws. His theory is provoking in that not only modern linguistics is based on it, but also it causes the linguistic turn in modern Western philosophy. Structuralism and post-structuralism based on his theory of language and linguistic models are influential schools in modern Western philosophy. Structuralism takes language as its first philosophy, regarding all cultural phenomena of the human society as language. It takes Saussure's systematic theory of language, adopting the idea of langue and parole and that of relation determining meaning, etc. and hence makes the linguistic... |
PDF Full Text Request