1 Stefanie Schrder, Introduction to English Lexicology, The Linguistic Sign (Saussure)

The linguistic sign:

Saussure describes language as a system of signs that relate to each other within this system
In his theories he distances himself from concrete communication to describe an abstract
language system, which he calls langue !e builds a basic conce"t of a binary relation
between a gi#en notion, the concept, and the associated "honic image image acoustique,
both of which are mutually conditioning and e#o$ing The conce"t of a tree conditions the
"honic image tree and #ice%#ersa This relation of both sides ma$es u" the signe, the sign (as
shown below)

The sign is a com"letely mental unit, that only lin$s the conce"t and "honic image, the latter
of which is not "hysical but sim"ly a mental im"ression of a sound &once"t and "honic
image are later renamed to the internationally acce"ted terms signifi and signifiant, the
signified and the signifier
The sign doesn't ha#e to be a word, it can also be a whole sentence, "hrases or e#en single
mor"hemes( eg the conce"t of "lural can be signified by the suffix -s
Saussure bases his theory on two "rinci"les( The sign itself is arbitrary, meaning that there is
no necessary connection between signifier and signified The same conce"t has a different
"honic image in e#ery language, or e#en different "ossible images in the language itself, as
eg with street and road, or the )erman Strae *nomato"oeic words, howe#er, such as
cuckoo and ouch show a #arying decree of arbitrariness, as they are often #ery closely lin$ed
to the conce"t they re"resent and might therefore be considered non%arbitrary in some
cases Saussure "oints out that the first "rinci"le only holds for sim"le linguistic signs In
modern studies this "roblem is sol#ed by di#iding the signifier into two categories( The
moti#ated, non%arbitrary signs, called icons and the basic arbitrary sign, the symbol (These
elements ha#e been discussed in the Synchronic Linguistics 1 Seminar)
The second "rinci"le is that of the linearity of the signifier It's based on the fact that one is
only able to "roduce one sound at a time, which causes the signifier to be a chain of
successi#e ("honetic and "honological) elements, which in turn are again regulated by the
s"ecific language's in#entory of sounds and "honotactic




Stefanie Schrder,
Denotation:
If one wants to understand
denotation of that sign The denotation
ex"licit meaning that is encoded in the signifier, that means is ex"resses the ob+ecti#e
content of it The signifier tree
signifiers might denote the same ob+ect, "erson, things, "laces, etc(
Li"$a lists the exam"les of
denote,refer to the same "erson,
The same signifier can also denote different things when ta$en from another context( The
president can denote different "ersons, de"ending on the year and "lace
To be able to understand the
sa#ed the form%meaning "air in the mental lexicon -hen we assume that one of those
entries might loo$ li$e the sign model of Saussure, se#eral "roblems arise E#en though
e#eryone $nows the conce"t of a tree, the actual mental image that is e#o$ed by the
signifier can be different for e#ery s"ea$er of the language
The meaning of words
To really understand the conce"t of the tree
the conce"t on -hich "ro"erties of an ob+ect define it as a tree.
The picture theory
It would be easy to +ust imagine the meaning of a word
E#eryone would agree that this is an image of a tree
is that the "icture is too detailed
a tree (eg si/e, color, sha"e, etc) So if we establish that the tree is allowed to stray from
the image, how can one "re#ent to categori/e a shrub as a tree. 0eside "hysical ob+ects
there are many lexemes that ca
semantics


Schrder, Introduction to English Lexicology, The Linguistic
understand the actual meaning of the sign, what is im"ortant is the
denotation of that sign The denotation, or reference when considering longer "hrases,
ex"licit meaning that is encoded in the signifier, that means is ex"resses the ob+ecti#e
tree denotes the actual "hysical ob+ect of a
signifiers might denote the same ob+ect, "erson, things, "laces, etc(
Li"$a lists the exam"les of the victor at Jena and the loser at Waterloo
the same "erson, Napoleon
denote different things when ta$en from another context( The
can denote different "ersons, de"ending on the year and "lace
To be able to understand the denotations of a signifier or sim"le lexemes, one must ha#e
meaning "air in the mental lexicon -hen we assume that one of those
entries might loo$ li$e the sign model of Saussure, se#eral "roblems arise E#en though
e#eryone $nows the conce"t of a tree, the actual mental image that is e#o$ed by the
e#ery s"ea$er of the language
understand the conce"t of the tree, we ha#e to thin$ about what criteria we base
the conce"t on -hich "ro"erties of an ob+ect define it as a tree.
It would be easy to +ust imagine the meaning of a word as a $ind of "icture in the mind(

E#eryone would agree that this is an image of a tree The "roblem with this theory, howe#er,
detailed and shows se#eral "ro"erties that are not essential to being
a tree (eg si/e, color, sha"e, etc) So if we establish that the tree is allowed to stray from
the image, how can one "re#ent to categori/e a shrub as a tree. 0eside "hysical ob+ects
lexemes that cannot be resembled by images at all, eg time, air, or lexical
1 inguistic Sign (Saussure)
, what is im"ortant is the
when considering longer "hrases, is the
ex"licit meaning that is encoded in the signifier, that means is ex"resses the ob+ecti#e
of a tree 2ifferent
the loser at Waterloo, which both
denote different things when ta$en from another context( The

denotations of a signifier or sim"le lexemes, one must ha#e
meaning "air in the mental lexicon -hen we assume that one of those
entries might loo$ li$e the sign model of Saussure, se#eral "roblems arise E#en though
e#eryone $nows the conce"t of a tree, the actual mental image that is e#o$ed by the
, we ha#e to thin$ about what criteria we base
s a $ind of "icture in the mind(
The "roblem with this theory, howe#er,
"erties that are not essential to being
a tree (eg si/e, color, sha"e, etc) So if we establish that the tree is allowed to stray from
the image, how can one "re#ent to categori/e a shrub as a tree. 0eside "hysical ob+ects
nnot be resembled by images at all, eg time, air, or lexical

3 Stefanie Schrder, Introduction to English Lexicology, The Linguistic Sign (Saussure)
Componential analysis
-e agreed on the fact that to be a tree certain "ro"erties ha#e to be fulfilled, while others
are o"tional &om"onential analysis tries to s"lit u" the reference into se#eral smaller
elements, or com"onents, of meaning Those com"onents are always binary
Eg( 45,% human6, 45,% male6, 45,% adult6
%7 -oman( 45ali#e6, 45human6, 4%male6, 45adult6
%7 0oy( 45ali#e6, 45human6, 45male6, 4%adult6
The com"onential analysis can be sim"lified by a""lying rules of redundancy 8 hierarchy of
conce"ts stats that if something "ossesses the com"onent 9, it automatically "ossesses the
com"onent : as well
Eg 45mammal6 im"lies 45animal6, 45li#ing being6 and 45"hysical ob+ect6
The in#entory of those semantic "ro"erties are endless, while the in#entory of lexemes itself
isn't That means that e#en with the limited ca"acity of the brain, an endless number of
conce"ts can be reali/ed
There are still some issues with the theory, es"ecially with fuy meanings
Tiger 8( 45li#ing being6, 45stri"ed6, 45orange6, 45; legs6
Tiger 0( 45li#ing being6, 45stri"ed6, 4%orange6, 4%; legs6
The exam"le of the cri""led white Tiger shows that the last 1 com"onents don't seem to be
necessary, but the "ro"erties of Tiger 0 in this case could also describe a /ebra
The most famous exam"le of fu//iness is a diagram about cu"s and mugs by -illiam Labo#
from 1<=3(

So ob#iously the com"onential analysis is not enough to describe the meaning of a lexeme


; Stefanie Schrder, Introduction to English Lexicology, The Linguistic Sign (Saussure)
Prototype theory
In an ex"eriment by 0attig > ?ontague in 1<@<, they had contestants list a number of things
that they lin$ed to a general conce"t, eg A fruits, A "ieces of furniture, etc, and noted that
most of the times they listed the same prototypes These results were later "ro#en and re%
established by se#eral other ex"eriments
The "rototy"e theory states that more "rototy"ical ob+ects can be "rocessed faster by the
brain These ob+ects are generally also referred to as the hy"eronym (umbrella term) more
often(

Ba birdB #s Ba duc$B
The meaning of an ex"ression is to be reali/ed by a s"ecific prototype! These "rototy"es are
learned with the acCuisition of a word in the mental lexicon 8ny further ob+ect is then
com"ared to the sa#ed "rototy"e and +udged by its li$eliness
In the earlier exam"le of the cu"s and the mugs, e#ery other ob+ect would therefore be
com"ared to the ob+ect a, the "rototy"e of a cu", and the ob+ect b, the "rototy"e of a mug
Sadly, e#en this theory has its flaws( eg although a "enguin has #ery little resemblance to
our "rototy"e of a bird, it is still 1DDE bird by definition
Discussion questions:
1 Fsing com"onential analysis, how would you distinguish 4!*GSE6, 4?FLE6 and 42*HIE:6.
"ro"osal( Scientific( !orse( 45 31 "airs of chromosomes6, 45 fertile6
2on$ey( 4% 31 "airs of chromosomes6, 45 fertile6
?ule( 4% 31 "airs of chromosomes6, 4% fertile6
most li$ely answer from the class( Jarentage of the animal
1 -hat is the first fruit that comes to your mind. -hich factors could influence the
BfruitinessB of fruit for an indi#idual.
% Hationality,*rigin
% Jersonal "reference
% 8ge.
% Kisual im"airment
% Taste,smell im"airment