Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Course in General Linguistics
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Value== {{see_also|Value (semiotics)}} The value of a sign is determined by all the other signs in the ''langue''. [[File:Semiotic Value.GIF|thumb|700px|center|''Fig. 3 – Value'']] Saussure realized that if linguistics was going to be an actual science, language could not be a mere nomenclature; for otherwise it would be little more than a fashionable version of [[lexicology]], constructing lists of the definitions of words. Thus he argued that the sign is ultimately determined by the other signs in the system, which delimit its meaning and possible range of use, rather than its internal sound-pattern and concept. ''Sheep'', for example, has the same meaning as the French word ''mouton'', but not the same value, for ''mouton'' can also be used to mean the meal lamb, whereas ''sheep'' cannot, because it has been delimited by ''mutton''. Language is therefore a system of interdependent entities. But not only does it delimit a sign's range of use, for which it is necessary, because an isolated sign could be used for absolutely anything or nothing without first being distinguished from another sign, but it is also what makes meaning possible. The set of synonyms ''redouter'' ("to dread"), ''craindre'' ("to fear"), and ''avoir peur'' ("to be afraid"), for instance, have their particular meaning so long as they exist in contrast to one another. But if two of the terms disappeared, then the remaining sign would take on their roles, become vaguer, less articulate, and so lose its "extra something"—its extra meaning—because it would have nothing from which to distinguish itself. This is an important fact to realize for two reasons: (A) it allows Saussure to argue that signs cannot exist in isolation, but are dependent on a system from within which they must be deduced in analysis, rather than the system itself being built up from isolated signs; and (B) he could discover grammatical facts through [[syntagmatic analysis|syntagmatic]] and [[paradigmatic analysis|paradigmatic]] analyses.
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)