General Linguistics

English Department, Peking University

He Wei
General Linguistics
Linguistics as the scientific study of language:
E-language
A language L can be regarded as a set of sentences a native speaker could use. Chomsky calls such a set E-
language, where E suggests the external, observed language specified in extension.
I-language
Language as a cognitive system internalized within human brain/mind, i.e. I-language, the “internal,”
“individual” “intensional” linguistic system by which E-language is derived.

From the externalist point of view, linguistics is From the internalist point of view, however, linguistics is，on par
a descriptive science and, as any other with pure，formal sciences such as mathematics and modern
empirical science, it follows the same set of logic, a “reconstructive science”, aiming at a scientific
procedures: stressing evidence by observation, reconstruction of linguistic knowledge, i.e., competence” or “I-
experience, or experiment; describing, language,” a person possesses by revealing the universal
analyzing, classifying its material, and principles underlying all languages.
constructing hypotheses to be tested against
further data in order to validate the descriptions
already made.
Scope of General Lingusitics

Linguistics and its subfields: phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics.

Phonetics: Phonetics is the study of Phonology: Phonology is the study of how Syntax: Syntax is the study of the structure and
the physical sounds of human sounds function within a particular language organization of sentences in language. It
speech, known as speech sounds or languages. It deals with the systematic investigates the rules and principles governing
or phonetics. organization of speech sounds into patterns how words are combined to form phrases and
and structures, known as phonological sentences.
systems.

Semantics: Semantics is the study of Pragmatics is the study of how context

meaning in language. It explores influences the interpretation of language. It
how words, phrases, and sentences investigates how speakers use language in Together, these subfields of linguistics
convey meaning and how meaning is specific situations to achieve communicative provide a comprehensive framework for
interpreted in context. goals and how meaning is negotiated between understanding the structure, function, and
interlocutors.
use of language in human communication.
 Lingusitc Expression=<s,m>
Articulatory-Perceptual Conceptual-Intentional Pragmati
(AP)system (CI) system cs

PF LF
(Phonetic Form) (Logic Form)
Phonetics/Phonology sound meaning Semantics

Computational System Syntax in the narrow

sense

(Based on Chomsky 1995)

Three Fundamental Problems: Knowledge of Language—Its Nature, Origin

and Use.
Ferdinand de Saussure and Structural Linguistics

- Examining Saussure's groundbreaking work in "Course in General Linguistics"

and
its impact on modern linguistics.
- Analyzing Saussure's concepts of langue vs. parole, signifier vs. signified,
syntagmatic vs. paradigmatic relation, and synchrony vs. diachrony.
- Discussing the structuralist approach to language and its influence on
subsequent linguistic theories.
- Saussure‘s legacy--influence on Roland Barthes，Derrida…
Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) was a Swiss Saussure's groundbreaking insights emerged in his Saussure's structuralist approach to language
linguist whose work laid the foundation for lectures on general linguistics, which he delivered at the laid the groundwork for modern linguistics,
modern structural linguistics and semiotics. Born University of Geneva between 1906 and 1911. Although paving the way for the development of structural
in Geneva, Switzerland, into a family of these lectures were never published in his lifetime, they linguistics, semiotics, and structuralism in other
academics, Saussure received a rigorous were compiled and edited posthumously by his students, disciplines. His ideas had a profound impact on
education in languages, literature, and resulting in the influential work "Course in General subsequent generations of linguists, including
philosophy from an early age. He studied at the Linguistics." the Prague School, the structuralists of the mid-
University of Geneva and later pursued advanced
studies in Paris, where he was exposed to the 20th century, and later theorists such as Noam
vibrant intellectual atmosphere of late 19th- Chomsky.
century Europe.
 Saussure’s Contributions to Modern
Linguistics
Langue vs. Parole (speech)
langue: language as the structured system of linguistic signs (abstract,
social, impersonal)
parole: language as a series of speech acts made by a linguistic subject
(individual, personal phenomenon)

Synchronic vs. Diachronic

diachronic：language change, the historical development of a language
synchronic：a particular state of a language at some given point in time
the priority of synchrony: concentration on the structure of language
Signifier vs.Signified
signifier: the sound image
signified: the concept it represents
Ferdinand de Saussure
(1857~1913) Syntagmtic vs. Paradigmatic

de Saussure, F. (1986). Course in general linguistics (3rd ed.) Chicago: Open Court
Publishing Company, p. 9-10, 15.
Language and Linguistics
Language: Complexity in defining the
proper object of linguistic
Language, the principal means used by science
human beings to communicate with one
another. Language is primarily spoken,
although it can be transferred to other
media, such as writing. A language is considered to be a
system of communicating with other
Microsoft Encarta 2006. people using sounds, symbols and
words in expressing a meaning,
idea or thought. This language can
language，a language，languages，natural language, human
language… be used in many forms, primarily
Speech/Utterance,
through oral and written
expressions.
Linguistic Competence/Performance
 Design Features of Language

1.Vocal-Auditory Channel Spoken language is produced in the vocal tract

and transmitted/heard as sound, whereas sign language is produced with
the hands and transmitted by light.
2.Broadcast transmission and directional reception The audible sound of
language is heard in all directions but listeners will interpret it as coming
from one specific direction.
3.Rapid fading The sound made by speech diminishes quickly after being
released.

Hockett, Charles F. and Altmann, Stuart. 1968. A note on design features. In

Sebeok, Thomas A., (ed), Animal communication; techniques of study and results
of research, pp. 61–72. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Design Features of Language
4.Interchangeability The speaker has the ability to receive and also send the
same message.
5. Total feedback Individuals are able to hear and internalize a message they
have sent.
6.Semanticity – Speech sounds can be linked to specific meanings.
7. Speciality- Specialized for communication
8. Arbitrariness – There is no direct connection between the signal and its
meaning.
Design Features of Language
9. Discreteness – Each unit of communication can be separated.
10. Displacement – The ability to talk about things that are not physically
present.
11. Productivity – The ability to create new messages by combining
already-existing signs.
12. Traditional transmission – The learning of language occurs in social
groups.
13. Duality of patterning – Meaningless phonic segments (phonemes) are
combined to make meaningful words, which in turn are combined again to
make sentences.

While Hockett believed that all communication systems, animal and human
alike, share many of these features, only human language contains all of
the 13 design features. Additionally, traditional transmission, and duality of
patterning are key to human language.
The Object of Linguistic Study

What is it that linguistics sets out to analyze? What is the actual object of study in its entirety?
The question is a particularly difficult one.
Other sciences are provided with objects of study given in advance, which are then examined
from different points of view. Nothing like that is the case in linguistics. –Saussure: p.8

Linguistics is defined as the scientific study of language. The most embar-rassing situation we don’t really know what object language is. The scientific concept
of language remained undefined until the appearance of Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics at the beginning of the 20th century.
The Object of Linguistic Study
Language in its entirety has many different and disparate aspects. It lies astride the boundaries separating various domains. It is at
the same time physical, physiological, psychological. It belongs both to the individual and to society. No classification of human
phenomena provides any single place for it, because language as such has no discernible unity. Sassure: p.10

So however we approach the question. no one object of linguistic, no one object of linguistic study emerges of its own accord.
Whichever way we turn, the same dilemma confronts us. Either we tackle each problem on one front only, and risk failing to take
into account the dualities mentioned above, or else we seem committed to trying to study language in several ways simultaneously,
in which case the object of study becomes a muddle of disparate, unconnected things. By proceeding thus one opens the door to
various sciences - psychology, anthropology, prescriptive grammar, philology, and so on - which are to be distinguished from
linguistics. These sciences could lay claim to language as falling in their domain; but their methods are not the ones that are needed.
Saussure: p.9
Fundamental Principle: Structure as the
Object of Linguistic Study

The linguist must take the study of linguistic structure as him primary
concern, and relate all other manifestations of language to it.
A language as a structured system…is both a self-contained whole and a
principle of classification. As soon as we give linguistic structure pride of
place among the facts of language, we introduce a natural order into an
aggregate which lends itself to no other classification (Ibid. p.9,p.10.)
hints: natural order on Number System: 0<1<2<3,….
structure: a set together with a relation: S=(N,<)
S={1, 4, 9, 16, 25,…}
Example: fish
Is it an example of an independently given linguistic object. What are the facts about fish?
Fish – a sound, an expression of an idea?
-- fis ( Middle English) , fisc (Old English) ; cognate with vis (Dutch), Fisch
(German), fiskr （Old Norse）
John caught a big fish. fish, chicken, duck, pig, sheep, cowanimal
He had fish for supper. fish, chicken, duck, meat (pork, mutton,beaf…)food
⽆鸡鸭也可⽆⻥⾁也可唯⻘菜萝⼘不可少半⽂钱不得
Relations between Linguistic Units

Syntagmatic relation at the phonetic level--a sentence is simply a set of words listed in order:
.
S=<John, caught, a, big, fat, fish>

Syntagmatic relation at the syntactic level

Subj. Pred. Obj
S=<John, caught a big fat fish>
Pred.=<caught, a big fat fish>
 Every linguistic unit occupying a position in S is assigned a linguistic value and hence plays a certain
syntactic function.
Linguistic Structure and Linguistic Relations

Structure as a set S and the relation on S:

〈S,R〉
Basic linguistic relations：

syntagmatic relation
paradigmatic relation
 Syntagmatic Relation Defined in mathematical terms as Ordered Relation
：
Letters arranged in order：
sturdy 〈s，t，u，r，d，y〉
Words strung together one after another：
John caught a big fat fish.

Ordered Relation:Given a A , a relation R is an order on A iff

R is reflexive (aRa for any a in A ),
R is antisymmetric (aRb and bRa a=b, for any a,b in A), and
R is transitive （aRb and bRc  aRc, for any a,b,c in A).
Paradigmatic Relation
Associative Relation: Words having something in common are associated together in the memory:
seig: enseignement, enseigner, enseignons, renseigner
-ment: enseignement, armament,changement，enseignement, education, apprentissage
Paradigmatic Relation or Relation of Replacement

ant
Mary bird
John caught a big fat fish.
the man chicken
duck…

Equivalence : Given a set A , a relation R is an Equivalence Relation on A iff

R is reflexive (aRa for any a in A ),
R is symmetric (aRb  bRa, for any a,b in A), and
R is transitive （aRb and bRc  aRc, for any a,b,c in A)。
Equivalence Class: given a set A and an equivalence relation R on A, the equivalence class of an element
n in A is the subset of all elements in A which are equivalent to n.
Word Class (Lexical Category) as an equivalence Class in the Vocabulary of a given language:

Noun={fish,chichen, duck,bird,…}
Adj.={big, fat, tall, handsome, pretty,…}
V={ catch, hold, smile, walk, steal,…}
 The Linguistic Sign as a Function from Sound to Meaning

The established theory of the sign

Sound-Meaning Relation in Western Metaphics:
natural vs. arbitrary/imitative vs. symbolic

Saussure’s definition of the sign as a function from sound to meaning:

arbitrary nature of the sign; linguistic difference; linguistic value

Saussure’s Legacy:
the sign as a signifier; the death of author
What is a sign?

Words and Ideas: words are simply vehicles for ideas, which have an independent, self-
sustaining existence.
Spoken words are signs of concepts.
--Aristotle
It was further necessary that [man] should be able to use these sounds as signs of
internal conceptions, and to make them stand as marks for the ideas within his own mind;
whereby they might be made known to others, and the thoughts of men’s minds be conveyed
from one to another. --John Locke
Although words may be the midwives of ideas, their true parents are experience and reason.
Sound-Meaning Problem in Language

Binary Opposition between Sound and Meaning

Sound-Meaning Relation:
natural vs. conventional/imitative vs. symbolic
Plato's Cratylus
Logocentricism Assumption: the word as the unity of sound and logos，
speech as an ideal representation of logos (thought, concept, meaning,
essence…)
Linguistic implication: a sign is definable in terms of an original, irreducible
object of which the logos is representative.
Nature or Convention

Hermogenes: I should explain to you, Socrates, that our

friend Cratylus has been arguing about names; he says that
they are natural and not conventional; not a portion of the
human voice which men agree to use; but that there is a truth
or correctness in them, which is the same for Hellenes as for
barbarians.
--Plato Cratylus
Charles Sanders Peirce’s Classification of Signs:

Symbol: arbitrary and unmotivated, reliant on

conventional usage to determine meaning.
Index: Indices always point, refer, or
suggest something else.
track--
pawn print of a dog, lingering scent
of perfume (physical, cause & effect
relationship, but not simultaneous)
symptom –
fever of infection, smoke of fire
designation–
points or signifies while
being distinct from their object: proper
names, a pointed finger, and the word
'this'
 Icon: has a "topological similarity" to their object
image--
shares "simple qualities" or "sensory qualities"
with their object;
metaphor–
represents the representative character of an object by
representing a parallelism in something else
diagram–
shares relations or structures with the object.

Peirce, C.S., 1931–36. The Collected Papers. Volume 2. Eds. Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss. Cambridge M.A.: Harvard University Press，pp. 49–58

Where Plato gave mimetic images an

inferior position by marking the mediating
line between true existence (Idea, the
original) and images that copy things in
the physical world (see Mimesis)
 Traditionally, Western philosophy has distinguished "reality" from "appearance,"
things themselves from representations of them, and thought from signs that
express it. Signs or representations, in this view, are but a way to get at reality,
truth, or ideas, and they should be as transparent as possible; they should not
get in the way, should not affect or infect the thought or truth they represent. In
this framework, speech has seemed the immediate manifestation or presence
of thought, while writing, which operates in the absence of the speaker, has
been treated as an artificial and derivative representation of speech, a
potentially misleading sign of a sign

--Jonathan Culler，Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction (p.11)

Logocentrismphonocentrismmetaphysics of phonetic writing Phonocentrism: that spoken language is the
primary and most fundamental method
of communication whereas writing is merely a
derived method of capturing speech; that
sounds and speech are inherently superior to,
or more primary than, written language or sign
language.
 The Sign as a Function from Signifier to Signified

Signifier: sound image

Signified: concept or meaning
The linguistic sign as a sound-meaning pair: <s,m>
sign function ---Hjelmslev,L Prolegonmena to a Theory of Language,Winsconsin Unversity Press,1969

--In the language, there are only differences, without positive terms.
--Strictly speaking there are no signs but differences between signs.
--In the end, the principle it comes down to is the fundamental
principle of the arbitrariness of the sign.
Sign as the sound-meaning relation

In our terminology, a sign is the combination of a concept

and sound pattern…We propose to keep the term sign to
designate the whole but to replace concept and sound
pattern respectively by signification (signified) and signal
(signifier).
--Saussure, Course, p.67

--In the language, there are only differences, without positive terms.
--Strictly speaking there are no signs but differences between signs.
--In the end, the principle it comes down to is the fundamental principle of the arbitrariness of the sign.
Hjelmslev: sign function from expression form to content form

Hjelmslev distinguished the mathematical logical significance and etymological significance of the term "function,"
pointing out that such "intermediacy and fuzziness of concept" are precisely what linguistics needs:

。 Within the text (or system), an entity possesses various functional

relationships, hence we first associate, in a logical mathematical sense,
the dependence of this entity on other entities... and then, in an
etymological sense, we associate this entity with having a certain function,
performing a certain role, and occupying a specific "position" in the chain
of speech.
Hjelmselev,
1953,
Hjelmslev,L：Prolegonmena to app. 21-22.
Theory of Language, Winsconsin Unversity Press,1969
Linguistic Sign as a function F: S
M

S= Set of all possible sound forms M= Set of all

possible meanings
a ⼀个
ab, af, ak… ？
as，ad. ,at，…

be, bus, bike…

clandestine, diphthong，spectrogram ,
rutabaga，…

F(x)=y, for all x in S, with the value of x defined, there exists

as its value one particular y in M.
The language can be nothing other than a system of pure values.
As an element in a system, the word has not only a meaning, but also—above all—a value. (Saussure,
p.110)
Linguistic Difference
In the language (that is, a language state) there are only differences. Difference implies to our mind two
positive terms between which the difference is established. But the paradox is that: In the language,
there are only differences, without positive terms. Strictly speaking there are no signs but differences
between signs.

The system leads to the term and the term to the value. Then you will see that the meaning is
determined by what surrounds it.

-- Saussure's Third Course of Lectures on General Linguistics (1910-1911) publ. Pergamon Press, 1993.
Language and Thought

Consequently, in itself, the purely conceptual mass of our ideas, the

mass separated from the language, is like a kind of shapeless nebula, in
which it is impossible to distinguish anything initially. The same goes,
then, for the language: the different ideas represent nothing pre-existing.
There are no: a) ideas already established and quite distinct from one
another, b) signs for these ideas. But there is nothing at all distinct in
thought before the linguistic sign. This is the main thing. On the other
hand, it is also worth asking if, beside this entirely indistinct realm of
ideas, the realm of sound offers in advance quite distinct ideas (taken in
itself apart from the idea).

There are no distinct units of sound either, delimited in advance.

 In the end, the principle it comes down to is the fundamental principle
of the arbitrariness of the sign.

It is only through the differences between signs that it will be possible

to give them a function, a value.

If the sign were not arbitrary, one would not be able to say that in the
language there are only differences.
 Legacy：Roland Barthes’ Semiotic

Myth as a System of Signs

In "Mythologies," Barthes examined how everyday objects and cultural phenomena function as signs within a system of myths. He
defined myths as second-order sign systems, where the signifiers of the first-order (literal meaning) are used to convey second-
order signification (ideological or cultural meaning).

Denotation and Connotation: Sign as Signifier

Barthes makes a distinction between denotation and Drawing on Ferdinand de Saussure's concept of the sign, which consists
connotation of a sign. Denotation refers to the basic, of a signifier and a signified, Roland Barthes emphasized that the
descriptive meaning of a sign, while connotation relationship between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary and
involves the cultural and ideological baggage that the socially constructed.
sign carries. Barthes argued that connotations are The signifier can take various forms, including words, images, sounds, or
shaped by societal values, norms, and beliefs. gestures. Barthes explored how different signifiers convey meaning and
contribute to the creation of sign systems.
Readerly vs. Writerly Text: Horizontal vs. Vertical Reading
Readerly Text--in which the reader is only a passive Horizontal Reading--fostered by the readerly text, concentrating only
and inert consumer of the author’s product. on the storyline of the text, ignoring the play of language.
Writerly Text—which requires the active participation of Vertical Readings—demanded by writerly text, not captivated by the
the reader in establishing the meaning of the text. plot alone, but by the play of language and the layering of significance.
Barthes（1970）： S/Z
 The demise of the author and the simultaneous birth of the
reader

Barthes' later work, particularly "The Death of the Author," highlighted the
active role of the reader in the production of meaning. He argued that the
meaning of a text is not fixed by the author but is created through the
reader's interpretation and engagement with the signs.

By a nuanced exploration of the linguistic, visual, and cultural dimensions of

signs, Barthes continues to influence scholars in semiotics, cultural studies,
and literary theory, providing a framework for understanding the complex
ways in which signs operate within cultural and social contexts.
1. According to Hockett, Design Features are a set of features that characterize human language and set it apart from animal communication. Read the
balcony scene from Romeo and Juliet. Discuss how Shakespeare reveals some of the features in the balcony scene.

2. How do you understand the arbitrary nature of the linguist sign? Compare Juliet’s analysis of the name-thing relation with Saussure’s theory of the
linguistic sign. If the relationship between Romeo the name and Romeo the person is, as Juliet believes, arbitrary，why it is impossible for Romeo to
“doff” his name as Juliet suggests and hence avoid their tragic fate? Explore the paradoxical nature of the name-thing relation and discuss how it
contributes to the tragic theme of the play.

3. Based on Barthes’s analysis of signs, discuss the social and cultural “connotation” of “window” as it appears in the balcony scene.

4. Saussure argues that a linguistic sign is not a link between a thing and a name but between a concept (signified) and a sound pattern (signifier), and
that there are strictly speaking no signs but differences between signs. Discuss how the following assertions are possible in human language:
1. The evening star is the morning star.
2. ⽩⻢，⻢也。
Further Readings：
钱锺书：《写在⼈⽣的边上:窗》
公孙⻰⼦：⽩⻢论，名实论，变通论
G.Frege “On sense and reference” (1892), in Philosophical Writings, trans. by P.Geach & M.Black (Blackwell, 1952)
B.Russell “On denoting” , Mind 14 (1905)