Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by oskhen
Course in General Linguistics by Ferdinand La Saussure
4.0
I think the importance of Saussure's course in general linguistics cannot reasonably be overstated. It birthed the field of semiotics and structuralism, and defined linguistics as we know it today. With structuralism stemming from linguistics, we find not only language but man himself being defined anew.
"The language itself is a form, not a substance". Saussure shows us how language is defined solely in contrast with itself, the sign having no internal logic and merely finding its meaning in opposition to others. A dog is a dog not because of any internal quality linking a "dog" with the concept, but because it's not a cat, a rat, or an elephant. We thus find language in symbiosis with our perception while we're defining the world.
The common view was, and still is, that the sign simply mirrors a pre-defined concept and language thus matches an already existing conceptual framework. There we'd find "dog" serving as a link to the concept of dog, which would exist irregardless of the language. But then we look at the Sámi people and the fact that they have over 10 words for snow. We slowly realize that language define the world around us. We differentiate between things as much as language enables us to. The analogy then acts as the creative principle, the method for differentiating further.
In systematics the form-over-substance outlook extends far further than language itself. Another way to say it would be that it redefines everything in terms of language. Saussure now helps us redefine our understanding of reality. Learning guitar, or a new job, or that tough math class, or Hegel, is in reality the same thing. You start by defining the very small building blocks. You define them in relation to each-other. Then you combine them, and go even further using analogy. You build up a system, an aptic structure (as we find Julian Jaynes saying), by assimilating the previously conscious actions to the unconscious, freeing your mind to look at the bigger picture. Like syllables build the word, words the sentence, sentences the paragraph and paragraphs the essay, so we find that in math we must first learn the basics of algebra before we can solve differential equations (with over 10 years of steps in-between). Embracing the systematic outlook we never have to start from scratch again, because every particularity is just another reinforcing point in the system.
----
Although this book is extremely interesting philosophically and in connection with the entire scientific field of sociology, there's a lot of uninteresting fluff in form of endless french examples (I do not speak french) and way too specific discussions (eg. about the anatomy of the mouth) which must be slogged through.
"The language itself is a form, not a substance". Saussure shows us how language is defined solely in contrast with itself, the sign having no internal logic and merely finding its meaning in opposition to others. A dog is a dog not because of any internal quality linking a "dog" with the concept, but because it's not a cat, a rat, or an elephant. We thus find language in symbiosis with our perception while we're defining the world.
The common view was, and still is, that the sign simply mirrors a pre-defined concept and language thus matches an already existing conceptual framework. There we'd find "dog" serving as a link to the concept of dog, which would exist irregardless of the language. But then we look at the Sámi people and the fact that they have over 10 words for snow. We slowly realize that language define the world around us. We differentiate between things as much as language enables us to. The analogy then acts as the creative principle, the method for differentiating further.
In systematics the form-over-substance outlook extends far further than language itself. Another way to say it would be that it redefines everything in terms of language. Saussure now helps us redefine our understanding of reality. Learning guitar, or a new job, or that tough math class, or Hegel, is in reality the same thing. You start by defining the very small building blocks. You define them in relation to each-other. Then you combine them, and go even further using analogy. You build up a system, an aptic structure (as we find Julian Jaynes saying), by assimilating the previously conscious actions to the unconscious, freeing your mind to look at the bigger picture. Like syllables build the word, words the sentence, sentences the paragraph and paragraphs the essay, so we find that in math we must first learn the basics of algebra before we can solve differential equations (with over 10 years of steps in-between). Embracing the systematic outlook we never have to start from scratch again, because every particularity is just another reinforcing point in the system.
----
Although this book is extremely interesting philosophically and in connection with the entire scientific field of sociology, there's a lot of uninteresting fluff in form of endless french examples (I do not speak french) and way too specific discussions (eg. about the anatomy of the mouth) which must be slogged through.