Ferdinand De Saussure

School of thought of the author:

While a student, Saussure published an important work in Indo-European philology that proposed the existence of ghosts in Proto-Indo-European called sonant coefficients. The Scandinavian scholar Hermann Möller suggested that they might actually be laryngeal consonants, leading to what is now known as the laryngeal theory. It has been argued that the problem that Saussure encountered, trying to explain how he was able to make systematic and predictive hypotheses from known linguistic data to unknown linguistic data, stimulated his development of structuralism. His predictions about the existence of primate coefficients/laryngeals and their evolution proved a success when Hittite texts were discovered and deciphered, some 50 years later.

Theory publication year:

The beginnings of the Laryngeal theory were proposed by Ferdinand de Saussure in 1879, in an article chiefly devoted to something else altogether (demonstrating that *a and *o were separate phonemes in PIE). In the course of his analysis, Saussure proposed that what had then been reconstructed as long vowels *ā and *ō, alternating with *ǝ, was actually an ordinary type of PIE ablaut. That is, it was an alternation between e-grade and zero grade like in “regular” ablaut (further explanations below), but followed by a previously unidentified element. This “element” accounted for both the changed vowel color and the lengthening (short *e becoming long *ā or *ō). So, rather than reconstructing *ā, ō and *ǝ as others had done before, Saussure proposed something like *eA alternating with *A and *eO with *O, where A and O represented the unidentified elements. Saussure called them simply coefficients sonantiques, which was the term for what are now in English more usually called resonants; that is, the six elements present in PIE which can be either consonants (nonsyllabic) or vowels (syllabic) depending on the sounds they’re adjacent to: *y w r l m n.

These views were accepted by a few scholars, in particular Hermann Möller, who added important elements to the theory. Saussure’s observations, however, did not achieve any general currency, as they were still too abstract and had little direct evidence to back them up.

Main premises:

At 21, Saussure published a book entitled Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes (Dissertation on the Primitive Vowel System in Indo-European Languages). After this he studied for a year at the University of Berlin under the Privatdozenten Heinrich Zimmer, with whom he studied Celtic, and Hermann Oldenberg with whom he continued his studies of Sanskrit. He returned to Leipzig to defend his doctoral dissertation De l’emploi du génitif absolu en Sanscrit, and was awarded his doctorate in February 1880. Soon, he relocated to the University of Paris, where he lectured on Sanskrit, Gothic and Old High German and occasionally other subjects.

Contributions to study of language:

De Saussure’s contribution to modern linguistics was responsible for three key directions in the study of language. He distinguished between Synchrony and Diachrony, between langue and parole, between signified and signifier. He also contributed by describing the distinction bet6ween syntagmatic and paradigmatic, the theory of associative value. Saussure’s contributions to linguistics are given below:

First, he broke with the young grammarians by pointing the distinction between historical linguistics and the state of language at any point in time. He was determined to delimit and define the boundaries of languge study. To this end he began by distinguishing between historical linguistics and descriptive linguistics, or diachronic and synchronic analyses respectively. The distinction was one that comparative philologists had often confused, but for Saussure landing, subsequently for linguistics it was essential. Synchronic linguistics sees language as a living whole, existing as a “state” at a particular point in time. It is descriptive linguistics that concerns with the state of a language at any point in time, especially the present. According to Saussure, “Synchronic linguistics will be concerned with the logical and psychological relations that bind together co-existing terms and form a system in the collective mind of speakers.”

Drawbacks of the theory:

The closing sentence of Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics has been challenged in many academic disciplines and subdisciplines with its contention that “linguistics has as its unique and true object the language envisioned in itself and for itself”. By the latter half of the 20th century, many of Saussure’s ideas were under heavy criticism.

Saussure’s linguistic ideas are still considered important for their time but have suffered considerably subsequently under rhetorical developments aimed at showing how linguistics had changed or was changing with the times. As a consequence, Saussure’s ideas are now often presented by professional linguists as outdated and as superseded by developments such as cognitive linguistics and generative grammar or have been so modified in their basic tenets as to make their use in their original formulations difficult without risking distortion, as in systemic linguistics. That development is occasionally overstated, however; Jan Koster states, “Saussure, considered the most important linguist of the century in Europe until the 1950s, hardly plays a role in current theoretical thinking about language,”More accurate would be to say that Saussure’s contributions have been absorbed into how language is approached at such a fundamental level as to be, for many intents and purposes, invisible, much like the contributions of the Neogrammarians in the 19th century. Over-reactions can also be seen in comments of the cognitive linguist Mark Turner who reports that many of Saussure’s concepts were “wrong on a grand scale”. It is necessary to be rather more finely nuanced in the positions attributed to Saussure and in their longterm influence on the development of linguistic theorizing in all schools; for a more recent rereading of Saussure with respect to such issues, see Paul Thibault. Just as many principles of structural linguistics are still pursued, modified and adapted in current practice and according to what has been learnt since about the embodied functioning of brain and the role of language within this, basic tenets begun with Saussure still can be found operating behind the scenes today