Faculty of Humanities and Social Science > English

Why theory?

<< < (6/7) > >>

Gopa B. Caesar:
Conclusion: Saussure's structuralism is based upon three assumptions

the systematic nature of language, where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts
 the relational conception of the elements of language, where linguistic "entities" are defined in relationships of combination and contrast to one another
the arbitrary nature of linguistic elements, where they are defined in terms of the function and purpose they serve rather than in terms of their inherent qualities

Gopa B. Caesar:
The Structuralists

Saussure (Course in general linguistics, 1915) holds that ‘linguistics is only a part of the general science of semiology [signs]): 1. What is the object of linguistic investigation? 2. What is the relationship between words and things? Langue (social system) and Parole (individual utterance)
Levi-Strauss sought the common element of all cultures, traceable ultimately to universal structures embedded deep in the human mind (The Raw and the Cooked). Mythemes.
Vladimir Propp (1928) studied fairytales to trace 7 possible characters and 31 functions.
A.J. Greimas (Structural Semiotics 1966) combined Saussure and Levi-Strauss to find a pattern for all stories, centring on the conflict between the hero’s quest for individual freedom and the constraints of the existing order.
Roland Barthe in S/Z: “to see whole landscape in a bean …to see all the world’s stories within a single culture…the text thereby loses its difference.”

Tamanna Islam:
carry on!

Gopa B. Caesar:
thabk you! :)

Ferdousi Begum:
lemme ask, "Why theory"? :P

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page