On The Interactive Relations Between Arbitrariness And Iconicity Of The Linguistic Sign

The discussion on whether the linguistic sign is arbitrary or iconic is deeply rooted in the discovery of language studies. At the end of 19th century, Saussure, father of modern linguistics, put forward his first principle of linguistics—the linguistic signs are arbitrary, which is widely considered and accepted by most linguists. On the other hand, some linguists doubted the significance of this principle and claimed that iconicity is superior to arbitrariness and therefore should be the first principle of linguistic signs instead of arbitrariness. Since then the problems,"which of the two properties should be the first principle of the linguistic sign"and"how are the two properties related with each other", become a hot point of the field of modern linguistics.By reexamining the definitions and scopes of arbitrariness and iconicity respectively, it can be seen that the objects of the two properties are at different levels of linguistic signs, so that it is really unreasonable and even unnecessary to identify which is the first principle of linguistic signs. When it comes to the relations between arbitrariness and iconicity, the methodology of researching from diachronic and synchronic perspectives is adopted. From the diachronic approach, the origin and expansion of linguistic signs are mainly concerned; from the synchronic approach, the relations between sound and meaning in the contemporary English and Chinese are examined. To conclude, the probe into these fields shows that both arbitrariness and iconicity play important roles in language system and the two interact with each other to relate sounds with meanings. Neither of them can be divided from each other and neither of them can exist or function solely to form the language system. With time going by, the two features may converse to each other.