A. J.

Greimas (1917-1992)
Semiotics
Based primarily on the material by Louis Hebert

• Born in Russia
• Studied at Sorbonne, became a central figure in the Paris School of Semiotics
• Followed Saussurean semiological principles.
• With his renowned “semiotic square”, he attempted to provide a visual representation of the logical structure
of an opposition.
• The semiotic square stems from a given opposition of two, increased to eight or even ten.
• At the heart of Greimas’s work lies the principle of difference. The significance of any element in a language
depends on its difference from other elements in the system. Meaning is differential. There cannot be a
uniquely meaningful element in language.
3 phases of his work

• 1st phase: the semiotic square, elementary structure of signification,

working out of Sausurean linguistics based largely on the
developments by Roman Jakobson and Louis Hjelmslev
• 2nd phase: narrative grammar, a syntactic analysis of discourse
• 3rd phase: modalization, a transformational process linking more
abstract deep structures with perceptible surface structures of
language or other systems of meaning.
Background to his work
Three fundamental notions introduced by Saussure was influential in Greimas’s work: synchrony, opposition,
structural levels

1. Synchrony: system of relations that exists by itself at any given moment

2. Difference: Meaning is differential. Meaning of a sign is determined by its formal difference from other signs in
the system. The meaning of a “cat” is determined not by content or referential relation (bewhiskered meowing
animal) but by form, that is, its difference from other combinations of sounds in English such as from bat, hat,
cot, Kate, cats, etc.
Principle of difference was widely made use of by structural phonologists in Europe after Saussure (Prague
School- Trubetskoy, Jakobson)
The notion phoneme was inspirational for Greimas in using the word “sememe” in semantics.
Phoneme: a bundle of distinctive features, the minimal linguistic element that has the function of changing
meaning
/p/ voiceless
/b/ voiced (binary oppositions)
A phoneme’s definition consists of a list of its distinctive features.
Sememe: a proposed unit of transmitted or intended meaning. It is the minimum signifying element S (a semic
unit). It is a structure (a bundle of at least two opposing elements). It’s parts are called “semes”. Two semes S1
and S2 exist as contraries. They are conjoined in a semic unit S, since they are meaningful in relation to each
other, and disjoined as they are opposed to one another. (Go to slide nr. 7 to see how a sememe is represented)
3. Structural levels: a hidden system of grammar, langue, underlies the
production and reception of spoken language, parole

Recognizing langue as a “form” created a basis for studying it as a physical

science (i.e., -logy in semiology)

To sum up;
• The heart of Greimas’s work is the principle of difference as deployed in the
phonological model
• The significance of any element in langue depends upon its difference from
other elements in the system, so there cannot be a uniquely meaningful
element. Meaning is always differential. Minimum signifying element has to
be a structure (a bundle of at least two elements)
 A. J. Greimas’s Semiotic Square
• The semiotic square shows the logical structure of an opposition. It organizes the possibilities of
conceptualizing signifiers, which govern the possibilities of understanding signifiers as they appear in actual
communication.

5. (=1+2)
COMPLEX TERM There are four kinds of relationships of the
Rich poor constituents within the square:
1. TERM A 2. TERM B
rich 9. (=1+4) poor 1 contrariety – each horizontal line (e.g. Term
7. (=1+3) 10. (=2+3) 8. (=2+4)
POSITIVE DEIXIS NEGATIVE DEIXIS
A and Term B)
3. TERM NOT-B 4. TERM NOT-A 2 contradiction – each transverse line (e.g.
Rich, not poor Not poor Not rich Poor, not
Term A and Term not-A)
rich
Not poor not rich 3 complementarity – each vertical deixis (e.g.
6. (=3+4) Term A and Term not-B)
NEUTRAL TERM 4 implication – each vertical deixis
Terms and Metaterms
Terms 1 and 2: Primary units of semantic opposition
– semes
Terms 3 and 4: the negation of the primary opposing
terms
Metaterm 5: Complex term formed by combining 1
and 2
Metaterm 6: The neutral term, neither one, formed
by combining 3 and 4
Metaterms 7 and 8: positive (1+3) and negative
(2+4) deixes. They intensify a term by affirming a
positive value and simultaneously negating the
opposite of that value (e.g. Rich, not-poor! / Poor,
not rich!) Deixes indicate a higher intensity of a term
A or B from which they are derived.
Metaterms 9 and 10: (1+4 and 2+3, respectively)
They are not recognized in classical semiotics
because of the fact that Aristotelian principle non-
contradiction is followed. However, we may
postulate their existence from a theoretical
perspective (e.g. He is rich and not rich).
There are four kinds of relationships of the
constituents within the square:

1 contrariety – each horizontal line (e.g. Term

A and Term B)
2 contradiction – each transverse line (e.g.
Term A and Term not-A)
3 complementarity – each vertical deixis (e.g.
Term A and Term not-B)
4 implication – each vertical deixis

S: Semic unit (minimum

signifying unit)
S1 and S2: two contrary
semes (bundles of distinctive
features) conjoining to form
the minimum Semic Unit
Constituent elements of the semiotic square

1. Terms (Term A, Term B, Term not-A, Term not-B)

2. Metaterms / Compound Terms (attained by combining the Terms –
e.g. 5 is the result of combining 1+2)
3. Objects (referents classified on the square)
4. Observing subjects (who do the classification)
5. Time (of the observation)
An example of a semiotic square
Masculine + Feminine
"androgyne"
"hermaphrodite"

Masculine Feminine
"man" "woman"
Masculine + Not-feminine 9? Feminine + Not-masculine
"real man", "macho" 10? "ultra-feminine",
"vamp? "
Not-feminine Not-masculine
"mannish", "macha" "effeminate"

Not-feminine + Not-masculine
"angel"
Veridictory status (corresponding to facts or not: true/false) can be sometimes part of the analysis, so are the
observing subjects.

The primary opposition: life vs death

The object being observed: Jesus
Observing subjects: apostles (not-death resurrection)
Observing subjects: non-believers (not-death: empty, as for those non-believers, Jesus simply moved from life
to death)

Two positions can be identified: reference positions and assumptive positions

Reference positions are defined by the observing subject that determines the ultimate truth of a text (usually
the narrator)
Assumptive positions: all possible positions including those that may be contradicted by reference elements.

When stating the believers’ (assumptive subject) thesis and non-believers’ (assumptive subject) thesis, the
narrator of a Christian text (reference subject) will validate the former and invalidate the latter.
For semantic and syntactic usages of the Semiotic Square see
Section 2.7.
Let’s work together
The primary terms PEACE vs. WAR