Monday 7 May 2012

Re-connecting with Nature - Part 1



                     Fig 1 M King “A Rubbish Point of View” 2012 Nature photographed from a cultural perspective

Re-connecting with nature is a term de Botton posits when considering education in his book Religion for Atheists. In order to determine how we can re-connect with nature we have to understand how we became disconnected. If we look at the structure of language it could be said that humans and nature were never connected because one is believed to be the binary opposite to the other.

Nature ­------------------------------ Culture
                                    (Non-human)                                 (Human)

What does this mean? Is the binary opposite to nature culture? What is nature or culture? To understand such concepts we have to go back to glean an understanding of postmodern theory in relation to linguistics. 

Prior to the 20th century thinkers focused their attentions on analysing ideas in the mind in the quest to understand thinking. Since then thinkers such as Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951), Martin Heidegger (1889-1976), and Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) among others had shifted their attention away from ideas in the mind towards the language in which thinking is expressed.  Whilst many have questioned, “What permits meaningful thinking?” agreement has been accepted, albeit in different ways that the answer points towards, the structure of language.

THE STRUCTURE OF LANGUAGE ALLOWS MEANINGFUL THINKING

Linguistics used to be concerned with the historical origins of language in order to reveal meaning.  Contrary to this view, the founder of structuralism, Swiss professor of linguistics, Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) regarded the meaning of language not to be held in its historical origins but as the function of a system. In structuralism universal structures were believed to underlie all human activity.

LANGUAGE IS THE FUNCTION OF A SYSTEM

The Structure of Language – Structuralism


                                          Fig 2 M King "Dog"
 
For Saussure linguistic meanings (whether past, present or future) are effectively made possible through a very small set of sounds or phonemes. A phoneme is the smallest unit in the sound system that show contrasts in meaning. Cat, for instance has 3 sounds or phonemes c, a, t. These phonemes differ ever so slightly from the sounds that make up words such as mat, cot, and cap. Combined, these other sounds generate different meanings which enable us to produce extended dialogues when combined grammatically and syntactically in a sentence. The code or system of language allows us to express personal thought. Each unit is defined by what it is not. We can define heaven because we know hell.

Do we define nature because we know culture?

THE SYSTEM OF LANGUAGE ALLOWS US TO EXPRESS PERSONAL THOUGHT

Sounds (phonemes) such as c, a, t are distinctive units that when combined form words. Each sound has no direct value.

Words (monemes) which are significant units hold its own value (meaning).

Signification

Saussure proposed that language is made up of a signifier and that which is signified. The combination of both produces a sign.

Image of cat (sign)
Signifier cat --------------------------- Signified cat

                                         Fig 3 M King "Dog"
 Signifier – the word or acoustic image, is that which carries meaning - cat

Signified – the concept, the meaning, the thing indicated, is that to which the word cat refers

Sign - the word cat (the signifier) together with the concept of cat (signified) make up a sign - cat

Signification is the process that binds the signifier and the signified together. The result of which is the sign, eg cat.

Signification is the association of sound and what it represents and is the outcome of collective learning. The choice of sound to represent cat is not imposed upon us by meaning itself. A cat, the animal does not determine the sound cat. The sound for cat is different in different languages.

I’m thinking that Saussure may have had it wrong.

Signified
                     Signifier-------------------------------Sign (What we see)

When we are learning we are told and so hear the word cat and our teacher, for instance our mother points to a cat and so we associate the sound cat to the image of a cat whether this is a picture or an actual cat. It is only later that we learn to understand the concept, the meaning of a cat and say the dangers associated with it whether this be pulling its tail and getting scratched or trying to stroke a lion. 

 Maybe it’s the sign that came first, followed by the signifier and signified?

I do find the thought of Ig and Og sat around the fire in their cave remonstrating over the acoustic image of cat or dog with the concept of cat being 1. a small domesticated mammal with thick soft fur and whiskers 2. a wild animal related to the cat, such as lynx, lion, or tiger and the sign for cat quite amusing.

Binary Opposition

For Saussure language is a sign system that functions by an operational code of binary oppositions. To the structuralists a binary opposition is a pair of opposites that are believed to form and organize human thought and culture.

Whilst some binary oppositions are straightforward such as raw and cooked others create a sense of hierarchy, for instance man and woman or black and white. Black conveys a sense of evil or darkness whilst white conveys an idea of purity and goodness. The binary opposition rational and emotional also reinforces the notion of hierarchy; the rational often associated with men is usually more favourable over the emotional which can be seen as weak and is often associated with women.  

LANGUAGE FUNCTIONS THROUGH BINARY OPPOSITIONS

Signifier and signified is a binary opposition.

(Image of cat)
Signifier (cat) --------------------------- Signified (cat)


As Saussure states each unit is defined by what it is not and so by this definition the signifier, the word cat is defined by what it is not, the concept, or meaning, cat. What it is not is a dog. Do we know the word cat because we know the concept cat? I would argue no even though we can understand concepts such as heaven because we know hell.

I’m not sure that the signified is the binary opposition to the signifier. We know the word or acoustic image for cat not through the signified but through the learnt sign.

Another binary opposition that is deemed fundamental to the system of language governing how signs relate to each other is syntagm and paradigm.

SYNTAGM AND PARADIGM GOVERN HOW SIGNS RELATE TO EACH OTHER

Syntagm (combination) -------------------Paradigm (substitution)


A syntagmatic series (contiguity or combination) is the linear relationships between the linguistic elements in a sentence. Signs occur in sequence or parallel operating together to create meaning.

The cat sat on the mat.

Language operates in a sequential manner which means that linguistic signs have syntagmatic relationships. For example, the letters in a word have a syntagmatic relationship with one another, as do the words in a sentence or the objects in a picture. The syntagmatic relationship of a picture is interesting because the objects in a picture are not sequentially set out as in a sentence.

Syntagmatic relationships are often governed by strict rules, such as spelling and grammar. They can also have less clear relationships, such as those of fashion and social meaning. (What does this mean? Does this refer to the fashion of how a word is spelt?)
 
Paradigmatic series (selection or substitution) is the relationship between elements within a sentence and other elements which are syntactically interchangeable.

The      cat       sat       on        the       mat
A         dog      led       in         this      bed
                                      That      fish     swam   by        a           rock   

  
  
                                                       Fig 4 M King "Dog"

A paradigmatic relationship is one where an individual sign may be replaced by another. Individual letters have a paradigmatic relationship with other letters; one letter may replace another which subsequently changes meaning. Letters and numbers do not have a paradigmatic relationship.

Items on a menu have paradigmatic relationship when they are in the same group (starters, main course, and sweets) as a choice or a selection is made. Courses have a sequential (syntagmatic) relationship, as they are combined and so an item from the starter menu does not have a paradigmatic relationship with an item from the sweet menu.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

De Botton A, 2012 Religion For Atheists Penguin London: UK
Appignanesi R et al Introducing Postmodernism: A Graphic Guide to Cutting-Edge Thinking Cambridge: UK

ONLINE

http://changingminds.org/explanations/critical_theory/concepts/syntagm_paradigm.htm

http://www-as.phy.ohiou.edu/~rouzie/307j/binary.html

Image Copyright Mark King

1 comment:

  1. Interesting concept Mark regarding the sign following the signified and signifier - got me thinking now.

    ReplyDelete