1. Meaning occurs through difference
“Concepts are purely differential and defined…by their relations with other terms of a system… In language there are only differences.”
– Saussure
The meaning we give to signs is always relative:
Woman = NOT Lady = NOT just or = NOT a gentleman
manwoman
3. Binary oppositions
Binary oppositions (pairs of opposites) are particularly common ways we structure the world:
Some theorists (like Claude Levi-Strauss) even suggested that all human thought is structured by binary oppositions…
up/down good/evil just/unjust friend/enemy nature/nurture
civilized/primitive
life/death win/lose
Binary Oppositions are everywhere…black / whitebody / soulpure / corruptedfather / sonmale / femalespeech / writingsex / gendermaster / slaveMac / PCtruth / fictionphilosophy / mythsciences / humanitiesclassical / romantic
modern / postmodernpoet / criticcenter / marginsnormal / deviantnatural / unnaturalstraight / gayself / otherhigh culture / pop
culture base / superstructurewaking / dreamingthe library / the web
2. Some signs are based on contiguity
Some signs are related somehow to what they signify: Onomatopoeia: 쨍그랑 , crash, boom, tick-tock
Or depend on their relation to other signs: “The White House announced yesterday…” “run the gamut” (not walk the gamut)
But even signs with some connection to reality are arbitrary as soon as we express them:
Why write 쨍 and not jjaeng or Ж◊Ω?
2. Most signs gain meaning by substitution “The bond between the signifier and the
signified is arbitrary,” not “motivated” (by natural resemblance). – Saussure
The meaning of signs is arbitrary Why do ㄷ and D represent similar
sounds? Does that sound actually have any ㄷ
ness? D-ness?
Does a have any treeness?
Signifier & Signified
All signsconsist of two parts:
Signified (signifié):
a concept
Signifier(signifiant): a sound-image or a written mark
(often iconic or expressed in an alphabet)
arbor木
tree
equus “Mimi” horse
มาperd
atngựa
马koń
Signs are arbitrary; many signifiers are possible for one signified
woman woman woman woman
Signifiers are ambiguous & polysemic; one signifier can be associated with many things
Signs don’t depend on physical reality
“We feel the 8:25 p.m. Geneva-to-Paris Express to be the same train each day, though the locomotive, coaches, and personnel may be different. This is because the 8:25 train is not a substance but a form, defined by its relations to other trains. It remains the 8:25 even though it leaves twenty minutes late, so long as its difference from the 7:25 and the 9:25 is preserved. Although we may be unable to conceive of the train except in its physical manifestations, its identity as a social and psychological fact is independent of those manifestations.” – Saussure
Signs All language is signs—all words & letters are
signs Pictures can be signs (“iconic signs”) ANYTHING can be a sign! Signs have no inherent meaning; it can shift:
skinny jeans = cool skinny jeans = stupid (Remember: cool and stupid only make
sense to us because of the usage context & their relation to other signs we know)
Many signs can be mythic: communicating large, often vague cultural meanings
power
patriotism
Obama
democracy
greedhope
Bourgeouis imperial capitalism
Signs & CultureSigns are a product of culture Meaning is assigned based on context &
cultural codes So the study of texts is actually a study of:
relations between signs the cultural construction of meaning
Structuralism is the “study of cultural construction or identification of meaning according to the relations of signs that constitute the meaning-spectrum of the culture.”
– Gérard Genette
Anything can be a sign!
Do we make signs by mass agreement? By our intuition? By conventions established by those with greater power and influence?
∴ signs construct our reality!
The I in “I am” is meaningless except as it relates to other signs.
All of those signs are defined by culture
Our sense of who we are is determined by culture
Even our specific desires are determined by culture
Reality Your unconscious isn’t your unconscious—it
is just culture (and sub-culture) you’ve internalized
Thus, you are defined and constructed by culture
Reality is constructed by language & by culture: That cross shape – God? Sign of the Infidels? That raw fish – Something desirable? Something
to be avoided? That skinny girl – Beautiful? Sick-looking?
So Far… We experience reality based on signs Signs have no meaning by themselves—no
neutral, absolute, or objective meaning Signs gain meaning in:
the context of a culture relation to other signs (often binary
oppositions) Our sense of ourselves is also based on signs If everything is made up of signs (books,
words, ourselves, reality)… …everything can be viewed as a text!!
So what…?
We are surrounded by signs and don’t realize it
We don’t realize how arbitrary our sign systems are
We don’t realize that our sign systems define our reality
We don’t realize that our signs may encode and imprint on us power relations that may be problematic
If everything is a text…
“Literature” is no longer just a bunch of special, privileged works…
But literary methods can now be used to understand everything!
Examples: Human lives as narratives with shifting,
absurd, undetermined meanings Religious beliefs and rituals as symbol
systems that construct concepts of self
Structuralism Applied to Lit
Reality/normality and fantasy/absurdity/abnormality are all defined by cultural codes:
Donald told Jenna he loved her. She glared, slapped him, then kissed him on the mouth, a long kiss that caught the attention of everyone in the church.
Structuralist reading: “There is a juxtaposition of cultural codes: a slap and glare, which in our culture tend signify hostility, and a kiss, which tends to signify affection.”
How does the text relate to culture?
In our culture, what are the dominant conventions/codes of behavior that define activity in a church?
Does the text subvert/deviate from or follow those cultural codes?
How does that subversion relate to the other elements in the text—the kiss and the slap?
How do these elements together (cultural codes & textual elements) function to create possible meaning?
Genre is another code
Cultural codes establish expectations in a text
Genre codes likewise establish expectations
Texts may be generic or may subvert expectations:
There once was a man from Nantucketwho ate all his meals from a bucket
when asked ‘bout his style, he replied with a smile,
“No more damn limericks. Alcoholism is no joke.”
How can we use this stuff?
To explain how a dominant meaning is created from the elements of a text
To explore the relationships among elements within a text
To explore the relationships between textual elements and expectations created by genre and by culture (or sub-culture)
To find possible polysemy (arising from ambiguity) in the text and in all the elements within
Exercise: Structuralist Reading of a Diet Coke Ad
Areas to Focus on: Cultural expectations as related to:
Gestures Color codes
Technical codes Music codes: genre, signification
in lyrics Intertextual readings (other ads) Paradigmatic analysis More…?
extras
"STRUCTURALISM AND LITERARY CRITICISM“
http://www.brocku.ca/english/courses/4F70/genette.php
Semiotics for Beginners http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Docum
ents/S4B/semind.html Notes on Saussure http://group249.blogspot.com/2010/
10/how-do-you-like-them-apples.html