1

LANGUAGE AS A SEMIOTIC SYSTEM

Jahanzeb Jahan
I.D: 100784-006

LANGUAGE AS A SEMIOTIC SYSTEM

C n!en!":
#1$: %ha! &" 'an()a(e* #+$: E'e,en!" - 'an()a(e #.$: %ha! &" "e,& !&/"* #4$: Te0,&n ' (1 #2$: 3&"! 01 - "e,& !&/". #6$: I,4 0!an! "e,& !&/&an". #7$: Cha0'e" San5e0" 6e&0/e7" !he 01 #18.891814$. #8$: :e05&nan5 5 "a)")00e7" !he 01. #8$ S&(n&-&e0 an5 "&(n&-&e5 &n "a)")00e7" !he 01. #10$: C n/')"& n. #11$: ;&b'& (0a4h1.

LAGUAGE AS A SEMIOTIC SYSTEM

#1$: %ha! &" 'an()a(e*
A// 05&n( ! "a4&0 #18+1$

Language

is

purely

human

and

non-instinctive

method

of

communicating ideas, emotion, and desires by means of voluntarily produced symbols.

A// 05&n( ! Te0(e0,

Language is system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means which a social group co-operates.

A// 05&n( ! Ca,b0&5(e D&/!& na011882 Language is system of communication consisting of set of rules
(synta !, morphology,(phonology, which decides the way to which these parts can be combined to produce massage (function! that have meanings ("emantics!.

A// 05&n( ! (ene0a' 5e-&n&!& n <) !e5 b1 =.%a05ha)(h Language is a system of conventional symbols used for
communication by a whole community.

A// 05&n( ! D.;a0! n> '&!e0a/1 #1884$

+ Language is a symbolic system lin$ing what goes on inside our heads with what goes on outside. %t mediates between self and society. %t is a form of representation, a way of representing the world to ourselves and to others.

A// 05&n( ! N.E % 5e?e' 4,en!:

5> &n 5e'a1e5 "4ee/h an5 'an()a(e

Language is an organi&ed system of linguistics symbols (words! used by human beings to communication through words. (1!' Language is basic to all communication (2!' (ncompass all forms of e pression

#+$: ELEMENTS O: LANGUAGE

63ONETICS:
)he study of speech sounds.

63ONOLOGY:
)he study of the sound patterns of language.

SYNTACTICS:
)he study of structure of sentence or rules that govern how words are combined to form phrases and sentences

63ONEMES:
"maller unit of speech sound.

MO=63EMES:
*ombination of phonemes ma$es morphemes.

SEMANTICS:
)he "tudy of meanings.

#.$: %3AT IS SEMIOTICS?

DE:INITION: :0 , %&@&4e5&a> !he -0ee en/1/' 4e5&a:

"emiotics, also called semiotic studies or semiology, is the study of sign processes (semiosis!, or signification and communication, signs and symbols.

Se,& !&/" ha" been ?a0& )"'1 5e"/0&be5 b1 J3ON LYONS a":
"cience of signs, of symbolic behavior or of communication system.

EA4'ana!& n - "e,& !&/" ;Y DANIEL C3ANDLE=:

)here has been much discussion, within semiotics, of the difference between signs and signals and symbols, and of the scope of the term is BCOMMUNICATION7. "emiotics could be anywhere. )he shortest definition is that it is the study of signs. -ut that doesn.t leave en/uirers much wiser. .0hat do you mean by a sign1. people usually as$ ne t. )he $inds of signs that are li$ely to spring immediately to mind are those which we routinely refer to as .signs. in everyday life, such as road signs, pub signs and star signs. %f you were to agree with them that semiotics can include the study of all these and more, people will probably assume that semiotics is about .visual signs.. 2ou would confirm their hunch if you said that signs can also be drawings, paintings and photographs, and by now they.d be $een to direct you to the art and photography sections. -ut if you are thic$s$inned and tell them that it also includes words, sounds and .body language. they may reasonably wonder what all these things have in common and how

C anyone could possibly study such disparate phenomena. %f you get this far they.ve probably already .read the signs. which suggest that you are either eccentric or insane and communication may have ceased. -ut if you study semiotics in linguistics than you can easily identify what type of e planation linguistics gives us in this respect. SIGNS AND SYM;OLS IN COMMUNICATION A=E )")a''1 5&?&5e5 &n! !h0ee b0an/he": Se,an!&/"' 4elation between signs and the things to which they refer5 their denotata S1n!a/!&/' 4elations among signs in formal structures 60a(,a!&/"' 4elation between signs and their effects on those (people! who use them "emiotics is fre/uently seen as having important anthropological dimensions5 for e ample, 6mberto (co proposes that every cultural phenomenon can be studied as communication. 7owever, some semioticians focus on the logical dimensions of the science. )hey e amine areas belonging also to the natural sciences 8 such as how organisms ma$e predictions about, and adapt to, their semiotic niche in the world!. %n general, semiotic theories ta$e signs or sign systems as their ob9ect of study' the communication of information in living organisms is covered in biosemiotics or &oosemiosis. Syntactics is the branch of semiotics that deals with the formal properties of signs and symbols. :ore precisely, syntactics deals with the ;rules that govern how words are combined to form phrases and sentences.; *harles :orris adds that semantics deals with the relation of signs to their designata and the ob9ects which they may or do denote5 and, pragmatics deals with the biotic aspects of semiosis, that is, with all the psychological, biological, and sociological phenomena which occur in the functioning of signs.<<<< 0%=%>(?%@ (A*2*LB>(?%@.

#4$: TE=MINOLOGY
)he term, which was spelled semiotics (Eree$' FGHIJKLJMNO, semeiotikos, an interpreter of signs!, was first used in (nglish by 7enry "tubbes (13CP, p. C,! in a very precise sense to denote the branch of medical science relating to the interpretation of signs. Qohn Loc$e used the terms semeioti$e and semeiotics in -oo$ +, *hapter 21 of An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (13RP!. %n the nineteenth century, *harles "anders >eirce defined what he termed ;semiotic; (which he sometimes spelt as ;semeiotic;! as the ;/uasi-necessary, or formal doctrine of signs;, which abstracts ;what must be the characters of all signs used by...an intelligence capable of learning by e perience;, and which is philosophical logic pursued in terms of signs and sign processes. *harles :orris followed >eirce in using the term ;semiotic; and in e tending the discipline beyond human communication to animal learning and use of signals. :e05&nan5 5e Sa)"")0e, however, viewed the most important area within semiotics as belonging to the social sciences' %t is... possible to conceive of a science which studies the role of signs as part of social life. %t would form part of social psychology, and hence of general psychology. 0e shall call it semiology (from the Eree$ semeSon, .sign.!. %t would investigate the nature of signs and the laws governing them. "ince it does not yet e ist, one cannot say for certain that it will e ist. -ut it has a right to e ist, a place ready for it in advance. Linguistics is only one branch of this general science. )he laws which semiology will discover will be laws applicable in linguistics, and linguistics will thus be assigned to a clearly defined place in the field of human $nowledge. TC&!e5 &n Chan5'e0C" DSe,& !&/" : 0 ;e(&nne0"D> In!0 5)/!& n.

1P

#2$: 3ISTO=Y O: SEMIOTICS

)he importance of signs and signification has been recogni&ed throughout much of the history of philosophy, and in psychology as well. >lato and @ristotle both e plored the relationship between signs and the world, and @ugustine considered the nature of the sign within a conventional system. )hese theories have had a lasting effect in 0estern philosophy, especially through "cholastic philosophy. :ore recently, 6mberto (co, in his Semiotics and philosophy of language, has argued that semiotic theories are implicit in the wor$ of most, perhaps all, ma9or thin$ers. (arly theorists in this area include *harles 0. :orris, :a -lac$ attributes the wor$ of -ertrand 4ussell as being seminal.

#6$: IM6O=TANT SEMIOTICIANS

Cha0'e" San5e0" 6e&0/e #18.891814$> the founder of the

philosophical doctrine $nown as pragmatism (which he later renamed ;pragmaticism; to distinguish it from the pragmatism developed by others li$e 0illiam Qames!, preferred the terms ;semiotic; and ;semeiotic.; 7e defined semiosis as ;...action, or influence, which is, or involves, a cooperation of three sub9ects, such as a sign, its ob9ect, and its interpretant, this tri-relative influence not being in any way resolvable into actions between pairs.; (;>ragmatism;, Essential Peirce 2' +115 written 1RPC!. 7is notion of semiosis evolved throughout his career, beginning with the triadic relation 9ust described, and ending with a system consisting of ,R,P+R (U #1P, or # to the 1Pth power! possible elements and relations. Bne reason for this high number is that he allowed each interpretant to act as a sign, thereby creating a new

11 signifying relation. >eirce was also a notable logician, and he considered semiotics and logic as facets of a wider theory. Vor a summary of >eirce.s contributions to semiotics, see Lis&$a (1RR3!.

:e05&nan5 5e Sa)"")0e (1D,C81R1#!, the ;-a!he0; of modern

linguistics, proposed a dualistic notion of signs, relating the signifier as the form of the word or phrase uttered, to the signified as the mental concept. %t is important to note that, according to "aussure, the sign is completely arbitrary, i.e. there was no necessary connection between the sign and its meaning. )his sets him apart from previous philosophers such as >lato or the "cholastics, who thought that there must be some connection between a signifier and the ob9ect it signifies. %n his *ourse in Eeneral Linguistics, "aussure himself credits the @merican linguist 0illiam ?wight 0hitney (1D2C81DR+! with insisting on the arbitrary nature of the sign. "aussure.s insistence on the arbitrariness of the sign has also greatly influenced later philosophers, especially postmodern theorists such as Qac/ues ?errida, 4oland -arthes, and Qean -audrillard. Verdinand de "aussure coined the term semiologie while teaching his landmar$ ;*ourse on Eeneral Linguistics; at the 6niversity of Eeneva from 1RP3811. "aussure posited that no word is inherently meaningful. 4ather a word is only a ;signifier,; i.e. the representation of something, and it must be combined in the brain with the ;signified,; or the thing itself, in order to form a meaning-imbued ;sign.; "aussure believed that dismantling signs was a real science, for in doing so we come to an empirical understanding of how humans synthesi&e physical stimuli into words and other abstract concepts.

Ja@ b ? n UeA@E'' (1D3+81R++! studied the sign processes in

animals. 7e introduced the concept of 6mwelt (sub9ective world or environment, lit. ;world around;! and functional circle (Funktionskreis! as a general model of sign processes. %n his Theory of Meaning ( edeutungslehre, 1R+P!, he described the semiotic approach to biology, thus establishing the field that is now called biosemiotics.

12

Fa'en!&n

F ' "h&n ?

(4ussian'

WXYZ[\]^[

_]`aYX^Zb]c

WaYa^d][ab! (1DR, 8 Qune 1#, 1R#3! was a "oviete4ussian linguist, whose wor$ has been influential in the field of literary theory and :ar ist theory of ideology. 0ritten in the late 1R2Ps in the 6""4, foloshinov.s Mar!ism and the Philosophy of "anguage (tr.' :ar$si&m i Vilosofiya 2a&y$a! developed a counter-"aussurean linguistics, which situated language use in social process rather than in an entirely deconte uali&ed "aussurean langue.

L )&" 3Ge',"'e? (1DRR81R3,! developed a formalist approach to

"aussure.s structuralist theories. 7is best $nown wor$ is Prolegomena to a Theory of "anguage, which was e panded in #$sum$ of the Theory of "anguage, a formal development of glossematics, his scientific calculus of language.

Cha0'e" %. M 00&" (1RP181RCR!. %n his 1R#D Foundations of the

Theory of Signs% he defined semiotics as grouping the triad synta , semantics, and pragmatics. "ynta studies the interrelation of the signs, without regard to meaning. "emantics studies the relation between the signs and the ob9ects to which they apply. >ragmatics studies the relation between the sign system and its human (or animal! user. 6nli$e his mentor Eeorge 7erbert :ead, :orris was a behaviorist and sympathetic to the fienna *ircle positivism of his colleague 4udolf *arnap. :orris has been accused of misreading >eirce.

Th)0e ? n UeA@E'' #1RPD82PP+!, the ;father; of modern

psychosomatic medicine, developed a diagnostic method based on semiotic and biosemiotic analyses.

= 'an5 ;a0!he" (1R1,81RDP! was a Vrench literary theorist and

semiotician. 7e would often interrogate pieces of cultural material to e pose how bourgeois society used them to assert its values upon others. Vor instance, portrayal of wine in Vrench society as a robust and healthy habit would be a bourgeois ideal perception contradicted by certain realities (i.e. that wine can be unhealthy and inebriating!. 7e found semiotics useful in these interrogations. -arthes e plained that these

1# bourgeois cultural myths were second-order signs, or connotations. @ picture of a full, dar$ bottle is a sign, a signifier relating to a signified' a fermented, alcoholic beverage 8 wine. 7owever, the bourgeois ta$e this signified and apply their own emphasis to it, ma$ing gwineh a new signifier, this time relating to a new signified' the idea of healthy, robust, rela ing wine. :otivations for such manipulations vary from a desire to sell products to a simple desire to maintain the status /uo. )hese insights brought -arthes very much in line with similar :ar ist theory.

A'(&05a" J)'&en G0e&,a" (1R1C81RR2! developed a structural

version of semiotics named generati&e semiotics, trying to shift the focus of discipline from signs to systems of signification. 7is theories develop the ideas of "aussure, 79elmslev, *laude Livi-"trauss, and :aurice :erleau->onty.

Th ,a" A. Sebe @ (1R2P82PP1!, a student of *harles 0. :orris,

was a prolific and wide-ranging @merican semiotician. )hough he insisted that animals are not capable of language, he e panded the purview of semiotics to include non-human signaling and communication systems, thus raising some of the issues addressed by philosophy of mind and coining the term &oosemiotics. "ebeo$ insisted that all communication was made possible by the relationship between an organism and the environment it lives in. 7e also posed the e/uation between semiosis (the activity of interpreting signs! and life 8 the view that has further developed by *openhagen-)artu biosemiotic school.

J)0& L !,an (1R2281RR#! was the founding member of the )artu (or
)artu-:oscow! "emiotic "chool. 7e developed a semiotic approach to the study of culture and established a communication model for the study of te t semiotics. 7e also introduced the concept of the semiosphere. @mong his :oscow colleagues were fladimir )oporov, fyacheslav fsevolodovich %vanov, and -oris 6spens$y.

U,be0!

E/

(1R#28present! made a wider audience aware of

semiotics by various publications, most notably A Theory of Semiotics and his novel The 'ame of the #ose, which includes applied semiotic

1+ operations. 7is most important contributions to the field bear on interpretation, encyclopedia, and model reader. 7e has also critici&ed in several wor$s (A theory of semiotics, "a struttura assente, "e signe, "a production de signes! the ;iconism; or ;iconic signs; (ta$en from >eirce.s most famous triadic relation, based on inde es, icons, and symbols!, to which he purposes four modes of sign production' recognition, ostension, replica, and invention.

(liseo ferjn (1R#,-present! developed his ;"ocial ?iscourse )heory; inspired in the >eircian conception of ;"emiosis;.

The M) G0 )4 #G0 )4e H$ (founded 1R3C! developed a structural

version of rhetorics, and the visual semiotics.

#7$: Cha0'e" San5e0" 6e&0/e #18.891814$

0e seem as a species to be driven by a 5e"&0e ! ,a@e meaning-ma$ers. meanings ?istinctively, our

,ean&n("'
we ma$e and

above all, we are surely Homo significans through creation

interpretation of .signs.. %ndeed, according to >eirce, .we thin$ only in signs. #6e&0/e 18.1-

28> +..0+$. "igns ta$e the form of words, &,a(e", sounds, odours, flavours,
acts or ob9ects, but such things have no intrinsic meaning and become signs only when we invest them with meaning. .Aothing is a sign unless it is interpreted as a sign., declares >eirce #6e&0/e 18.1-28> +.17+$

#8$: :e05&nan5 5e Sa)"")0e #18279181.$

1, Verdinand de "aussurehs Course in General Linguistics #1816$ is a summary of his lectures at the 6niversity of Eeneva from 1RP3 to 1R11. "aussure e amines the relationship between speech and the evolution of language, and investigates language as a structured system of signs. )he te t includes an introduction to the history and sub9ect-matter of linguistics5 an appendi entitled >rinciples of >honology5 and five main sections, entitled' >art Bne' Eeneral >rinciples, 6a0! TI : S1n/h0 n&/ L&n()&"!&/">J 6a0! Th0ee: D&a/h0 n&/ Linguistics, >art Vour' Eeographical Linguistics, and >art Vive' *oncerning 4etrospective Linguistics.

KSa)"")0e 5e-&ne" '&n()&"!&/" a" !he "!)51 - 'an()a(e an5 a" !he "!)51 - !he ,an&-e"!a!& n" - h),an "4ee/hJ

. 7e says that linguistics is also concerned with the history of languages, and with the social or cultural influences that shape the development of language. Linguistics includes such fields of study as' Phonology (the study of the sound patterns of language!, Phonetics (the study of the production and perception of the sounds of speech!, morphology (the study of word formation and structure!, Syntax (the study of grammar and sentence structure!, Semantics (the study of meaning!, pragmatics (the study of the purposes and effects of uses of language! , and language acquisition.

Sa)"")0e 50aI" a 5&"!&n/!& n be!Ieen:

'an()a(e #langue$ and the activity of spea$ing #parole$.

13 EA4'ana!& n: when we say of someone that he spea$s (nglish, we can mean one of two things' (a!5 that he, habitually or occasionally, engages in a particular $ind of behaviour or (b!' that he has ability(whether he e ercised it or not! to engage in this particular $ind of behaviour referring to the former as 6E=:O=MANCE and latter as COM6ETENCE, we can say hat performance presupposes competence, whereas competence does not presupposes performance the concepts of competence and performance is given by *homs$y.<<<< b1 J3ON LYONS> LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS INT=ODUCTION. "pea$ing is an activity of the individual5 language is the social manifestation of speech. Language is a system of signs that evolves from the activity of speech.

Lan()a(e &" a '&n@ be!Ieen !h )(h! an5 " )n5:

Language is a lin$ between thought and sound and is a means for thought to be e pressed as sound. )houghts have to become ordered, and sounds have to be articulated, for language to occur. "aussure says that language is really a borderland between thought and sound, where thought and sound combine to provide communication. "po$en language includes the communication of concepts by means of soundimages from the spea$er to the listener. Language is a product of the spea$erhs communication of signs to the listener. "aussure says !ha! a '&n()&"!&/ "&(n &" a / ,b&na!& n - a / n/e4! an5 a " )n5-&,a(e. The / n/e4! &" Iha! &" "&(n&-&e5> an5 !he " )n5-&,a(e &" !he "&(n&-&e0 . The / ,b&na!& n - !he "&(n&-&e0 an5 !he "&(n&-&e5 &" a0b&!0a01L &.e.> an1 " )n5&,a(e /an / n/e&?ab'1 be )"e5 ! "&(n&-1 a 4a0!&/)'a0 / n/e4!J.

1C @ sign can be altered by a change in the relationship between the signifier and the signified. @ccording to "aussure, changes in linguistic signs originate in changes in the social activity of speech. "aussure says that linguistic signs are by nature linear, because they represent a span in a single dimension. @uditory signifiers are linear, because they succeed each other or form a chain. fisual signifiers, in contrast, may be grouped simultaneously in several dimensions. 4elations between linguistic signs can be either' syntagmatic (linear, se/uential, or successive!, or associati&e (substitutive, or having indeterminate order!.

S!)51 - "&(n" #Se,& ' (1$:

sassure defines semiology as the study of signs, and says that linguistics is a part of semiology. 7e maintains that written language e ists for the purpose of representing spo$en language. @ written word is an image of a vocal sign. K Sa)"")0e a0()e" !ha! 'an()a(e &" a "!0)/!)0e5 "1"!e, - a0b&!0a01 "&(n".J . @ symbol may be a signifier, but in contrast to a sign, a symbol is never completely arbitrary. @ symbol has a rational relationship with what is signified. Linguistic signs may, to a varying e tent, be changeable or unchangeable. ?eterrents to linguistic change include' the arbitrary nature of signs, the multiplicity of signs necessary to form a language, and the comple ity of the structure of language. Vactors that promote change in language include' individual variation in the use of language, and the e tent to which language can be influenced by social forces. "aussure distinguishes between synchronic (static! linguistics and diachronic (evolutionary! linguistics.

1D

S1n/h0 n&/ '&n()&"!&/": is the study of language at a particular point in

time.

D&a/h0 n&/ '&n()&"!&/": is the study of the history or evolution of language.

@ccording to "aussure, diachronic change originates in the social activity of speech. *hanges occur in individual patterns of spea$ing before becoming more widely accepted as a part of language. "pea$ing is an activity which involves oral and auditory communication between individuals. Language is the set of rules by which individuals are able to understand each other. "aussure says that nothing enters written language without having been tested in spo$en language. Language is changed by the rearranging and reinterpreting of its units. @ unit is a segment of the spo$en chain that corresponds to a particular concept "aussure e plains that the units of language can have a synchronic or diachronic arrangement. "aussurehs investigation of structural linguistics gives us a clear and concise presentation of the view that language can be described in terms of structural units. 7e e plains that this structural aspect means that language also represents a system of values. Linguistic value can be viewed as a /uality of the signified, the signifier, or the complete sign. #8$: S&(n&-&e0 an5 "&(n&-&e5: )he linguistic value of a word (a signifier! comes from its property of standing for a concept (the signified!. )he value of the signified comes from its relation to other concepts. )he value of the complete sign comes from the way in which it unites the signifier and the signified. "aussure offered a .dyadic. or two-part model of the sign. 7e defined a sign as being composed of'

a .signifier. (signifiant! - the form which the sign ta$es5 and

1R

the .signified. (signifi$! - the concept it represents.

)he sign is the whole that results from the association of the signifier with the signified (Sa)"")0e 188.> 67L Sa)"")0e 1874> 67!. )he relationship between the signifier and the signified is referred to as .signification., and this represented in the "aussurean diagram by the arrows. )he hori&ontal line mar$ing the two elements of the sign is referred to as .the bar.. %f we ta$e a linguistic e ample, the word .Bpen. (when it is invested with meaning by someone who encounters it on a shop doorway! is a sign consisting of'

a signifier' the word 4en5 a signified concept' that the shop is open for business.

@ sign must have both a signifier and a signified. 2ou cannot have a totally meaningless signifier or a completely formless signified ( Sa)"")0e 188.> 101L Sa)"")0e 1874> 10+-10.!. Aowadays, whilst the basic ."aussurean. model is commonly adopted, it tends to be a more materialistic model than that of "aussure himself. )he signifier is now commonly interpreted as the material (or physical) form of the sign - it is something which can be seen, heard, touched, smelt or tasted. Vor "aussure, both the signifier and the signified were purely .psychological. ( Sa)"")0e 188.> 1+> 14-12> 66L Sa)"")0e 1874> 1+> 12> 62-66!. -oth were form rather than su*stance' A '&n()&"!&/ "&(n &" n ! a '&n@ be!Ieen a !h&n( an5 a na,e> b)! be!Ieen a / n/e4! an5 a " )n5 4a!!e0n. The " )n5 4a!!e0n &" n ! a/!)a''1 a " )n5L - 0 a " )n5 &" " ,e!h&n( 4h1"&/a'. A " )n5 4a!!e0n &" !he hea0e0C" 4"1/h ' (&/a' &,40e""& n - a " )n5> a" (&?en ! h&, b1 !he e?&5en/e - h&" "en"e". Th&" " )n5 4a!!e0n ,a1 be /a''e5 a C,a!e0&a'C e'e,en! n'1 &n !ha! &! &" !he

2P 0e40e"en!a!& n - )0 "en" 01 &,40e""& n". The " )n5 4a!!e0n ,a1 !h)" be 5&"!&n()&"he5 -0 , !he !he0 e'e,en! a"" /&a!e5 I&!h &! &n a '&n()&"!&/ "&(n. Th&" !he0 e'e,en! &" (ene0a''1 - a , 0e ab"!0a/! @&n5: !he / n/e4! . (Sa)"")0e 188.> 66L Sa)"")0e 1874> 66! "aussure was focusing on the linguistic sign (such as a word! an5 he C4h n /en!0&/a''1C 40&?&'e(e5 !he spoken word> referring specifically to the image acousti+ue (.sound-image. or .sound pattern.!, seeing writing as a separate, secondary, dependent but comparable sign system (Sa)"")0e 188.> 12> +4-+2> 117L Sa)"")0e 1874> 12> 16> +.-+4> 118$. @ sign is a recogni&able combination of a signifier with a particular signified. )he same signifier (the word .open.! could stand for a different signified (and thus be a different sign! if it were on a push-button inside a lift (.push to open door.!. "imilarly, many signifiers could stand for the concept .open. (for instance, on top of a pac$ing carton, a small outline of a bo with an open flap for .open this end.! - again, with each uni/ue pairing constituting a different sign. )he a0b&!0a01 aspect of signs does help to account for the scope for their interpretation (and the importance of conte t!. )here is no one-to-one lin$ between signifier and signified5 signs have multiple rather than single meanings. 0ithin a single language, one signifier may refer to many signifieds (e.g. puns! and one signified may be referred to by many signifiers (e.g. synonyms!. "ome commentators are critical of the stance that the relationship of the signifier to the signified, even in language, is always completely arbitrary (e.g. LeI&" 1881> +8!. Bnomatopoeic words are often mentioned in this conte t, though some semioticians retort that this hardly accounts for the variability between different languages in their words for the same sounds (notably the sounds made by familiar animals! (Sa)"")0e 188.> 68L Sa)"")0e 1874> 68.MMMMMMMMM C&!e5 &n Chan5'e0C" DSe,& !&/" : 0 ;e(&nne0"D> In!0 5)/!& n. . )hus, "aussure shows that the meaning or signification of signs is established by their relation to each other. )he relation of signs to each other forms the

21 structure of language. "ynchronic reality is found in the structure of language at a given point in time. ?iachronic reality is found in changes of language over a period of time. "aussure views language as having an inner 5)a'&!1, which is manifested by the interaction of the synchronic and diachronic, the syntagmatic and associative, the signifier and signifiedMMMMMMMMMMMMM :e05&nan5 5e Sa)"")0e> Course in General Linguistics> e5&!e5 b1 Cha0'e0 ;a''1 an5 A'be0! Se/heha1e &n / ''ab 0a!& n I&!h A'be0! =&e5'&n(e0> !0an"'a!e5 b1 %a5e ;a"@&n #NeI Y 0@: M/G0aI-3&'' ; 1866$ 44. 68-7.. @ C ,4an1>

#10$: C n/')"& n
%n early 1Rth century many semioticians described theory that language as semiotic system. *harles pierce and Verdinand de "aussure also generator of this theory but saussurre is considered to be V@)7(4 of modern linguistics. he described language as semiotic system in his boo$. 7is concept of language as semiotic system is based on structuralism, which was his famous theory based on language structure. %n describing language as semiotic system, he described characteristics of language as arbitrariness, duality etc.7e has paved way for new researches in linguistics.

22

;&b'& (0a4h1:
J3ON LYONS> LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS AN

INT=ODUCTION. MA=IE EMMITT> J3ON 6OLLOCN> LINDA NOMESA=O::> IN LANGUAGE AND LEA=NING !h&05 e5&!& n A- 05 40e"".

Dan&e' /han5'e0> "e,& !&/" - 0 be(&nne0" &n!0 5)/!& n. :e05&nan5 5 Sa)"")0e> / )0"e &n (ene0a' '&n()&"!&/"> e5&!e5 b1 Cha0'e" ;a''1 an5 A'be0!Se/heha1e &n / ''ab 0a!& n I&!h A'be0! =&e5'&n(e0> !0an"'a!e5 b1 Ia5e ba"@&n#neI 1 0@:M/ G0aI-3&'' ; @ C ,4an1>1886$44.68-7.. %&@&4e5&a> -0ee en/1/' 4e5&a.