What do you think?
Rate this book
Saussure
Examines the works, methods, and widespread influences of the father of modern linguistics, whom the author ranks with Durkheim and Freud
Paperback
First published January 1, 1976
18 people are currently reading
281 people want to read
About the author
Jonathan D. Culler
50 books88 followersCuller's Structuralist Poetics: Structuralism, Linguistics and the Study of Literature won the James Russell Lowell Prize from the Modern Language Association of America in 1976 for an outstanding book of criticism. Structuralist Poetics was one of the first introductions to the French structuralist movement available in English.
Culler’s contribution to the Very Short Introductions series, Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, received praise for its innovative technique of organization. Instead of chapters to schools and their methods, the book's eight chapters address issues and problems of literary theory.
In The Literary in Theory (2007) Culler discusses the notion of Theory and literary history’s role in the larger realm of literary and cultural theory. He defines Theory as an interdisciplinary body of work including structuralist linguistics, anthropology, Marxism, semiotics, psychoanalysis, and literary criticism.
Culler’s contribution to the Very Short Introductions series, Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, received praise for its innovative technique of organization. Instead of chapters to schools and their methods, the book's eight chapters address issues and problems of literary theory.
In The Literary in Theory (2007) Culler discusses the notion of Theory and literary history’s role in the larger realm of literary and cultural theory. He defines Theory as an interdisciplinary body of work including structuralist linguistics, anthropology, Marxism, semiotics, psychoanalysis, and literary criticism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
March 13, 2019
"To bring us to see social life and culture in general as a series of sign systems which a linguistic model can help us to analyse - this is the contribution which might eventually make him comparable to Galileo." (p.117)
This book a is great introduction to one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century. Often ignored or treated as a footnote to Derrida, Foucault or Lacan, Saussure deserved credit as one of the founders of modern lingusitics, and a great thinker in his own right, even if his influence overshadowed his actual career. Culler explains Saussure's discoveries and cements Saussure position as a great thinker, explaining Saussure's differentiation between langue and parole, Saussure's rejection of diachronic and synchronic linguistics, and his separation of the signified and the signifier.
In the final chapter Culler helps to explore some of the applications of Saussure in both the structuralist movement in the social sciences, and perhaps more notably the philosophical and literary movements in poststructuralism.
Culler does for some odd reason ignore Lacan, noting the mirror stage but failing to reference the author of the notion. Why he does this I'm unsure, but this is a minor nitpick, in an otherwise perfect entry level introduction.
This book a is great introduction to one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century. Often ignored or treated as a footnote to Derrida, Foucault or Lacan, Saussure deserved credit as one of the founders of modern lingusitics, and a great thinker in his own right, even if his influence overshadowed his actual career. Culler explains Saussure's discoveries and cements Saussure position as a great thinker, explaining Saussure's differentiation between langue and parole, Saussure's rejection of diachronic and synchronic linguistics, and his separation of the signified and the signifier.
In the final chapter Culler helps to explore some of the applications of Saussure in both the structuralist movement in the social sciences, and perhaps more notably the philosophical and literary movements in poststructuralism.
Culler does for some odd reason ignore Lacan, noting the mirror stage but failing to reference the author of the notion. Why he does this I'm unsure, but this is a minor nitpick, in an otherwise perfect entry level introduction.
September 25, 2013
For a founding "father" of an important modern field as linguistics, Jonathan Culler does an incredible job of relating the ideas of language, both the system it represents and the everyday use of it (la langue and parole, as they are frequently described here). Not only is it an Olympic feat, given the collection of notes de Saussure's students cobbled together after his death, but that Culler makes it relatable to how anyone, anywhere might make meaning from the noises other people make. it didn't hurt that their class was situated in the trilingual University of Geneva, however a more global perspective could have been included.
Read
July 23, 2015خیلی سخت بود برام...
July 13, 2024
جاناتان کالر خودش از نامهای آشنای نظریۀ ادبی در قرن بیستم است که سهم بسزایی در شناساندن نظریههای ادبی ساختگرا به جهان انگلیسیزبان داشته و اتفاقاً مؤلف کتاب کوچکی دربارۀ نظریۀ ادبی هم هست که، برخلاف قطر کمش، اثری مهم و درخور توجه در این حوزه است (خوشبختانه این اثر هم با ترجمۀ خوب فرزانه طاهری به فارسی ترجمه شده).
کمتر پیش میآید که درآمدهای عمومی بر اندیشههای متفکرانِ برجسته را کسانی بنویسند که خود اشخاصی برجسته و صاحبنظر باشند. شاید به همین خاطر است که این درآمدها، اغلب، گرهی از کار خوانندگانشان باز نمیکنند. درآمدِ آقای کالر بر اندیشههای سوسور اما از لونی دیگر است.
دیباچۀ کتاب کالر، اگرچه بهظاهر تکرار همان حرفهایی بود که بارها در منابع مختلف دربارۀ مفهوم دلالت و نشانه به نزد سوسور خوانده بودم، بهنحوی آرای او را صورتبندی و تبویب میکرد که حس میکردی تا پیش از این اصلاً به کُنه معنایی که سوسور از اختیاریبودنِ نشانه مراد میکرده پی نبردهای. در فصل دوم کتاب، تحت عنوان «نظریۀ زبانی سوسور»، خطوط کلی رویکرد سوسور به زبان ترسیم میشود. «جایگاه نظریههای سوسور» عنوان فصل سوم کتاب است که در آن کالر جایگاه سوسور را (در مقام بنیانگذار زبانشناسیِ جدید)، از جلمه، با دورکهایم (بنیانگذار جامعهشناسیِ جدید) و فروید (بنیانگذار روانشناسیِ جدید) مقایسه میکند و نقش او را در انقلابی که در علوم اجتماعی رخ داد بَرمیرسد. فصل پایانی کتاب، با عنوان «نشانهشناسی: میراث سوسور»، هم چشمانداز خوبی از رشتۀ جدیدِ نشانهشناسی به دست میدهد و هم، مهمتر از آن، پیگیر میراثی است که سوسور برای مارکسیسم و روانکاوی و شالودهشکنی (= واسازی) به جا گذاشت. کالر، داهیانه، نشان میدهد که آرای سوسور چطور به سویههایی کلیدی در اندیشۀ نومارکسیستی و روانکاویِ لَکانی و واسازیِ دِریدایی شکل داده است.
کتاب کالر فقط تصویر درستی از تأثیر آرای سوسور به دست نمیدهد؛ درآمدِ او، مثل هر اثرِ نظریِ مهمی، باعث میشود گسترههای مرتبطی را نیز که با آنها آشنایی داشتهای، در پرتو تحلیلِ کالر، بازخوانی و بازنگری کنی.
اینجا با تفصیل بیشتر دربارهاش نوشتهام:
https://t.me/khazraeimanesh/126
کمتر پیش میآید که درآمدهای عمومی بر اندیشههای متفکرانِ برجسته را کسانی بنویسند که خود اشخاصی برجسته و صاحبنظر باشند. شاید به همین خاطر است که این درآمدها، اغلب، گرهی از کار خوانندگانشان باز نمیکنند. درآمدِ آقای کالر بر اندیشههای سوسور اما از لونی دیگر است.
دیباچۀ کتاب کالر، اگرچه بهظاهر تکرار همان حرفهایی بود که بارها در منابع مختلف دربارۀ مفهوم دلالت و نشانه به نزد سوسور خوانده بودم، بهنحوی آرای او را صورتبندی و تبویب میکرد که حس میکردی تا پیش از این اصلاً به کُنه معنایی که سوسور از اختیاریبودنِ نشانه مراد میکرده پی نبردهای. در فصل دوم کتاب، تحت عنوان «نظریۀ زبانی سوسور»، خطوط کلی رویکرد سوسور به زبان ترسیم میشود. «جایگاه نظریههای سوسور» عنوان فصل سوم کتاب است که در آن کالر جایگاه سوسور را (در مقام بنیانگذار زبانشناسیِ جدید)، از جلمه، با دورکهایم (بنیانگذار جامعهشناسیِ جدید) و فروید (بنیانگذار روانشناسیِ جدید) مقایسه میکند و نقش او را در انقلابی که در علوم اجتماعی رخ داد بَرمیرسد. فصل پایانی کتاب، با عنوان «نشانهشناسی: میراث سوسور»، هم چشمانداز خوبی از رشتۀ جدیدِ نشانهشناسی به دست میدهد و هم، مهمتر از آن، پیگیر میراثی است که سوسور برای مارکسیسم و روانکاوی و شالودهشکنی (= واسازی) به جا گذاشت. کالر، داهیانه، نشان میدهد که آرای سوسور چطور به سویههایی کلیدی در اندیشۀ نومارکسیستی و روانکاویِ لَکانی و واسازیِ دِریدایی شکل داده است.
کتاب کالر فقط تصویر درستی از تأثیر آرای سوسور به دست نمیدهد؛ درآمدِ او، مثل هر اثرِ نظریِ مهمی، باعث میشود گسترههای مرتبطی را نیز که با آنها آشنایی داشتهای، در پرتو تحلیلِ کالر، بازخوانی و بازنگری کنی.
اینجا با تفصیل بیشتر دربارهاش نوشتهام:
https://t.me/khazraeimanesh/126
Read
November 22, 2007This is a good introduction to the linguistic theory of Ferdinand de Saussure and to the impact of that theory on subsequent thinkers across a range of disciplines. Culler writes clearly about complicated ideas and so provides a good foundation for understanding the most basic ideas and debates that have subsequently animated structural linguistics, structuralism, and semiotics.
January 16, 2025
A much better introduction to Semiotics than Barthes' Elements of Semiology. A short, readable book. A very good introduction to Saussure.
Chapter 1 deals with Saussure's Life. Chapter 2 deals with the arbitrary nature of the sign, the relation between signifier-signified, the langue-parole distinction, the synchronic-diachronic distinction, the syntagmatic-paradigmatic distinction, and analysing language as a social fact. There is also a distinction between meanings which are properties of utterances and meanings which are properties of elements of the linguistic system. Saussure uses the words signification and valeur (value) to characterise this. Chapter 4 delves into semiology and Saussure's legacy in that regard.
Chapter 3 deals with the place of Saussure's theories in history by analysing linguistics before Saussure -- 17th century Port Royal Grammar which was synchronic and took language as a picture of thought, 18th century Condillac et al. who argued that abstract ideas and thought are a result of the natural process by which signs are created, 19th century comparative philologists who lost interest in the link between word and thought to investigate the relation between languages at the level of form alone. The 19th century linguists used the organic organism as a model for language, confusing diachronic and synchronic perspectives. The latter half of the 19th century brought forth the Neo-Grammarians who theorised that sound changes occur according to regular invariable rules. This absolute nature of sound change is due to the arbitrariness of the sign. Another major change was that comparative study of languages became historically oriented. But even they, according to Saussure, confused the synchronic and diachronic study of languages. They also neglected the representational aspect of language. Culler also compares Saussure to Freud and Durkheim, especially Durkheim's notion of social facts who all brought forward a conception of social reality that was not just individual and not just scientifically objective. This study of social reality and the social, political, and cultural constitution of the subject would be what would become the mainstay of later continental philosophy a la Foucault et al. Freud, Saussure, and Durkheim essentially reversed the process of explanation -- instead of making society the result of individual behaviour (as the Utilitarians also did), they made society the cause of individual behaviour. Saussure's major influence on modern linguistics has been to set the tone and the important questions of the discipline. Some other developments of note follow. The langue-parole distinction was important but unclear. Hjelmslev developed it into the distinction between schema, norm, usage, and parole. The synchronic-diachronic distinction has been problematised by transformational grammarians who allege that sound changes arise within language system itself. As to relations in the linguistic system, some theorists like Jakobson have noted the centrality of binary oppositions to the nature of language itself. With Chomskyan transformational-generative grammar, the syntagmatic-paradigmatic distinction has been partially overcome. Saussure would however be disappointed in how his notion of language as a system of signs has not been fully developed.
Chapter 1 deals with Saussure's Life. Chapter 2 deals with the arbitrary nature of the sign, the relation between signifier-signified, the langue-parole distinction, the synchronic-diachronic distinction, the syntagmatic-paradigmatic distinction, and analysing language as a social fact. There is also a distinction between meanings which are properties of utterances and meanings which are properties of elements of the linguistic system. Saussure uses the words signification and valeur (value) to characterise this. Chapter 4 delves into semiology and Saussure's legacy in that regard.
Chapter 3 deals with the place of Saussure's theories in history by analysing linguistics before Saussure -- 17th century Port Royal Grammar which was synchronic and took language as a picture of thought, 18th century Condillac et al. who argued that abstract ideas and thought are a result of the natural process by which signs are created, 19th century comparative philologists who lost interest in the link between word and thought to investigate the relation between languages at the level of form alone. The 19th century linguists used the organic organism as a model for language, confusing diachronic and synchronic perspectives. The latter half of the 19th century brought forth the Neo-Grammarians who theorised that sound changes occur according to regular invariable rules. This absolute nature of sound change is due to the arbitrariness of the sign. Another major change was that comparative study of languages became historically oriented. But even they, according to Saussure, confused the synchronic and diachronic study of languages. They also neglected the representational aspect of language. Culler also compares Saussure to Freud and Durkheim, especially Durkheim's notion of social facts who all brought forward a conception of social reality that was not just individual and not just scientifically objective. This study of social reality and the social, political, and cultural constitution of the subject would be what would become the mainstay of later continental philosophy a la Foucault et al. Freud, Saussure, and Durkheim essentially reversed the process of explanation -- instead of making society the result of individual behaviour (as the Utilitarians also did), they made society the cause of individual behaviour. Saussure's major influence on modern linguistics has been to set the tone and the important questions of the discipline. Some other developments of note follow. The langue-parole distinction was important but unclear. Hjelmslev developed it into the distinction between schema, norm, usage, and parole. The synchronic-diachronic distinction has been problematised by transformational grammarians who allege that sound changes arise within language system itself. As to relations in the linguistic system, some theorists like Jakobson have noted the centrality of binary oppositions to the nature of language itself. With Chomskyan transformational-generative grammar, the syntagmatic-paradigmatic distinction has been partially overcome. Saussure would however be disappointed in how his notion of language as a system of signs has not been fully developed.
June 13, 2018
A fantastic introduction to Saussure, written clearly and precisely. However, due to the introductory nature of the book, Culler is not able to argue Saussure’s position as well as needed (from my perspective). He writes things like, ‘to agree with this (contrasting position), you would then think this’ (which I would often times think to be the very logical conclusion based on the argument this far) ‘but clearly this is not the case,’ without making a clear (and necessary from my position) case for why this is.
In my estimation, if you want to challenge engrained linguistic understandings (particularly those that seem to work just fine - I’m referring specifically to the idea that concepts exist prior and independent to language on pp. 21-23 in the 1990 Fontana Press edition), you will need to argue your point without jumping to ‘clearly this is the case,’ when it’s not actually clearly been argued (at least from my perspective). And this is coming from someone who very much desires to see things from Saussure’s point of view (albeit to better understand the intricacies of Derrida’s argument).
This is just one point based on an overall great exploration of Saussure’s linguistic theory.
In my estimation, if you want to challenge engrained linguistic understandings (particularly those that seem to work just fine - I’m referring specifically to the idea that concepts exist prior and independent to language on pp. 21-23 in the 1990 Fontana Press edition), you will need to argue your point without jumping to ‘clearly this is the case,’ when it’s not actually clearly been argued (at least from my perspective). And this is coming from someone who very much desires to see things from Saussure’s point of view (albeit to better understand the intricacies of Derrida’s argument).
This is just one point based on an overall great exploration of Saussure’s linguistic theory.
December 20, 2017
مقدمة المترجم رائعة
March 18, 2020
سختخوان ولی بسیار مفید.
August 14, 2014
نفهمیدمش.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews