Andreas K.♥Ferdinand De Saussure a father of Linguistic Modern from France in 20th century

Ferdinand De Saussure a father of Linguistic Modern from France in 20^th century.

Many people surely know about this linguist and also he is semiotician from Swiss whose has an ideas laid a foundation for many significant developments in linguistics in the 20th century. He creates a foundation for many significant developments both in linguistics and semiology in the 20th century. This name for this person is Ferdinand De Saussure.

He has a goal of “Cours de linguistique générale”. Before I clarify his goal, I will explain the definition of “Cours de linguistique générale”. The definition of Cours de linguistique générale is about a linguistic study from one that centered on history to one that centers on diachronic (historical) study. His goal is the study by arguing that the speakers of a language do not have a history of the language. Instead speakers use language to relate to each other. From his idea, he clarifies and creates three principles about the linguistic.

First principle from Ferdinand is places diachrony in contrast with synchrony.

 The second principle from Ferdinand is the system of a given language (langue) and the ability to speak or communicate through it (parole.) In essence, the knowledge of a given system is significantly different than the practice of speaking it.

The third principle from Ferdinand is about distinguishes syntagmatic and associative/paradigmatic. In this conceptualization of language, a sign can either make a contribution to the meaning of a sequence of signs or it can be used to contrast with sequence. Ferdinand De Saussure also has the other view from the people.

 As we know that Ferdinand De Saussure is a person who find theories about the connection between paradigmatic and syntagmatic. In this conceptualization of language, he claims that a sign can either make a contribution to the meaning of a sequence of signs or it can be used to contrast with sequence.

Then now I will tell about what is paradigmatic? And what is syntagmatic??

Ferdinand classifies that Syntagmatic relationship is the relationship between the elements contained in a speech, which is arranged in a sequence. Paradigmatic has a linear relationship with syntagmatic. I will give the example for paradigmatic; in the sentence "I wrote the article," there is a syntagmatic relationship between my writing and the article in the sentence pattern SPO (Subject - Predicate - Object).

Then, the other relationship is paradigmatic relationship. The paradigmatic relationship has opposite with the syntagmatic relationship. The paradigmatic relationship is the relationship between the elements of the language in a particular level with the other elements beyond the level that can be exchanged. It has a compare classification with the example in the above.

 In the above sentence "I wrote the article", the word "I" in syntagmatic can be interchanged with a similar sentence. Because the elements of the word "I" is a noun and can be represent as living things (animate) that serves as a subject in the sentence, the word "I" can be interchanged with the word "Brother", "Hoya", or "Man".

Ferdinand De Saussure also knows by the people as the movement leaders of structuralism. In structuralism, peoples think that language considered as a system of related. Before I move to his theories, I will explain a little bit about his biography first. He was born in Geneva in 1857-1913. His family knows well as a scientist. In his town Geneva, he studied about Sanskrit and comparative linguistics. Many people know about him by his famous concept.

 His concept is about the distinction of sign language into two aspects. This concept has a connection with his second principles. The first aspect knows by significant (which make sense) and the second aspect know by signifie (which is interpreted). When one of this two aspect is change, the other also change because this two aspects can’t integral. He used his concepts as tools of communication.

What thing that he got after he espoused all of his principles? The principles that Ferdinand de Saussure has espoused have clearly impacted how contemporary thinkers view the nature of text. Essentially, the progression of Ferdinand de Saussure’s ideas led to the perception that texts do not have meaning until they are read.

 In describing the relation between written word and language, Ferdinand de Saussure states that the written word seems as if it is a concrete object. In the illusion concreteness, it seems as if the written word endures throughout time. Even though this connection seems permanent it is constructed of artifice. However, it seems more enduring than the natural connection between sound and word.

For Ferdinand de Saussure, He also thinks the importance of the spoken language is evident despite the focus many linguists and philosophers place on the written word. It means that is in the spoken word that his principles are most evident. Yet even Saussure cannot dispel the inherent power of the written word.

He finds the importance of writing in the way that the reader provides to the signs in the text. Even while acknowledging the importance of the reader-text relationship, Ferdinand de Saussure maintained the importance of written language.

He also has a suggestion that Saussure indicates that languages are expressed mostly through writing. A person’s knowledge of their home language or their first language is invaded by the written form.

As a conclusion for this topic, Linguistic is a descriptive not a perspective as in a traditional grammar. Saussure also brings influence all through the new social sciences in the early and mid-twentieth century, and ultimately, for better or worse, to literary theory and modern cultural studies.

Ferdinand de Saussure is a person who has responsible for one of the most dramatic intellectual shifts in the 20^th century. His intellectual shift was moved to world from an essentialist perception of reality to a representational and structure dependant one.

He claims Synchronic linguistics, rather than diachronic one, detaches language from the historical progression of the world, which leads to de Saussure detaching the lingual sign from its referent. He also claims that his distinction between Langue and Parole sets language is first and foremost a cultural-social mechanism which exists outside single individuals. Ferdinand De Saussure's notion of the lingual sing as being composed from the signifier and the signified "marginalizes" the actual referential world in favor of its symbolic representations.

This argument by de Saussure led to serious question regarding the relation between the signifier and the signified which haunt western intellectual tradition to this day. One of Ferdinand De Saussure's key notions was in regards to the nature of the linguistic sign. Ferdinand De Saussure's ideas regarding the arbitrariness of the lingual sing gave rise to the understanding that the relation between language and reality, between the signifier and the signified, is socially constructs. Many a things have been signed off since de Saussure as being socially constructed. Other important concepts and considerations that were introduced by de Saussure are those of paradigmatic and syntagmatic.  

Ferdinand De Saussure view of the language as a system or differences is fundamental for the subsequent structuralist movement which sought to map those systems of difference which constructed social reality. This is partly why de Saussure was and still is such a huge influence and founding father of 20^th and 21^st century cultural studies and critical theory. 

 So many linguistic people describe that how people speak and write in their language, not give the decision how people should speak. The movement of structuralism brings influence to the American from Europe. So the linguistic between 20^th and 19^th is very different.

I also found a definition about language in twentieth century from person who summarized Saussure's contribution to linguistics and the study of language. So the other definition of language considered from Ferdinand, "Language is no longer regarded as peripheral to our grasp of the world we live in, but as central to it.

Words are not mere vocal labels or communicational adjuncts superimposed upon an already given order of things. They are collective products of social interaction, essential instruments through which human beings constitute and articulate their world. This typically twentieth-century view of language has profoundly influenced developments throughout the whole range of human sciences. It is particularly marked in linguistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology and anthropology".

Thanks for reading my article =) please fill our questionnaire too : https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1n1QkC26-wehH_jrRHdjQN-WYMQhmxpds8-pQZPsiRKk/viewform?usp=send_form

♥THANK YOU VERY MUCH♥