December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

Language and Language-based Codes A Seminar in Semiotics 2013

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

Language and Language - based codes

Verbal Communication
Language in a semiotic frame: The aim is to investigate language in relation to semiotics. This in turn, leads to the question of the scope of linguistics. Explicitly semiotic approaches to language aim at extending the scope of linguistics in order to account for the relation between language and other sign systems. The relation between linguistics and semiotics is mutually exclusive, one part-whole relationship, one of interpretation, and one of heuristic (investigative) relevance. The former relation, (mutually exclusive is the least beneficial.

Semiotics as a Part of Linguistics: arthes and also !"elmslev both provocatively proposed a theory of semiotics as a branch of linguistics .#n this view$ linguistics is extended to include the level of the text i.e. semiotics is reduced to the study of textual structures only. !"elmslev argues that %language is a semiotic into which all other semiotics may be translated&. !owever, it should be mentioned here that !"elmslev in this context, he referred to semiotic systems in general rather than natural languages, but this view has been re"ected from the point of view of general semiotics.

Perspective Interpretation: #f semiotics is accepted as the general theory of signs, such theoretical perspective can be applied to every field of language. !owever, core fields of linguistics such as morphology, lexicology and syntax have a tradition which is largely independent of general semiotics. ut there are fields which are naturally dependent on semiotics and require semiotic extension$ these fields are semantics and pragmatics.

Linguistics as the Pi ot Science of Semiotics #t has been argues that 'inguistics as a discipline has a higher degree of development than semiotics and therefore need to be used as a guideline in the more recent field of semiotics. Those who follow this perspective are( Saussure, he deems language as the )patron general* for the study of other sign systems.
2

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

! oomfie d represents the view that )linguistics is the chief contributor to semiotic* +einreich refers to natural language as the , semiotic phenomenon par excellence. -tructurally" !enveniste states three aspects in which language contributes to semiotic( Generative relationship, i.e. language generates other semiotic sign systems. Homology (isomorphism) Interpretance (i.e. language is the interpreting system of all other semiotic systems).

Semiotic #$tensions of Linguistics This topic includes foundations for the extension of traditional linguistics as a semiotic approach to language, it includes seven categories( - Semiotics as the theor% of anguage (In traditional logic semiotic is a philosophical theory of language). - Sign theoretica foundations of anguage (semiotic linguistics is concerned with the structure of the language sign). - &he pragmatic frame'or( of inguistics (i.e. relating signs to their interpreters). - &he te$t semiotic e$tensions of Linguistics (the semiotic approach to language begins with text semiotics). - &he cu tura frame'or( of anguage (extending the study to include the cultural framework). - &he stud% of )onvoca anguages (extension from vocal to Nonvocal languages as a major concern in semiotic linguistics). - Semiogenesis and Language (study of the evolutionary roots of language).

Semioticians in Linguistics and Linguists in Semiotics: .ierce is considered as the ma"or figure in semiotics whose wor/ is influential in linguistics. -aussure, on the other hand, along with !"elmslev, 0a/obson and 1arl
3

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

uhler, their wor/s are considered semiotic. !alliday and -haumyan have proposed a semiotic approach to language. 2or !alliday, his studies are sociosemiotic i.e. language is a product of a social process .-haumyan proposes ! "emiotic #heory of $anguage using applicative 3niversal 4rammar.

*esign +eatures ,*+- of Language: -emiotics draws the attention of linguists to the new frontier of a theory &capable of explaining the characteristics of human language&. -everal attempts have been made to achieve this goal by contrasting human language with nonlinguistic semiotic systems. The most influential proposal in this context is !oc/ett,s list of design features. .oc(ett developed a list of 56 design features of language, by comparing languages with communicative systems of various animal species$ !e divided these features according to their semiotic features( DFs Relating to the Channel *+ 1( %ocal&!uditory 'hannel( 'anguage is produced by means of the vocal tract. The signals are received through the ears. *+ 2( (roadcast #ransmission and )irectional *eception( -ound moves in all directions from its source and can pass around obstacles. The receiver is able to locate the direction of the source of speech. *+ 3( *apid +ading( -po/en signals vanish quic/ly, leaving the channel free for further messages. *+s of the Pragmatic *imension *+ /( Interchangeability. 7dult members of a speech community can be both senders and receivers of messages. *+ 0( 'omplete +eedback. The spea/er can hear immediately, and thus monitor by feedbac/, his or her own message. Together with 82 9, total feedbac/ has also a social dimension. *+ 1( "peciali,ation. The act of spea/ing is speciali:ed to the communicative functions of language. -pea/ing does not serve any additional physiological functions. #t requires little physical effort, and its energetic consequences are biologically irrelevant. The spea/er is free to perform other activities while spea/ing. *+s of the Semantic *imension
4

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

*+ 2: "emanticity. #n his view, human language is a semantic system of communication because its elements have &associative ties with things and situations, or types of things and situations, in the environment of its users.& *+ 3: !rbitrariness. The signal - ob"ect relationship is arbitrary and not iconic. *+ 4( )isplacement. The language sign can refer to ob"ects remote in time and space. *+ 10( -revarication. +e can say things that are false or meaningless. Eco considers this feature to be characteristic of semiosis in general. *+ 11: *eflexiveness. 'anguage can be used to communicate about language. This is 0a/obson,s metalinguistic function. Semiogenetic +eatures *+ 12( #radition. The conventions of language are passed down by teaching and learning, not through the germ plasm. 'anguage is thus acquired by culture, not by nature. *+ 13( $earnability. The spea/er of one language can learn another language. Characteristics of the Code *+ 1/( )iscreteness. The sign repertoire consists of discrete and recurrent units. There is no gradation of linguistic elements in terms of more or less. The units of language are not continuous. *+ 10( -roductivity or .penness( &;ew linguistic messages are coined freely and easily, and, in context, are usually understood.& .roductivity is primarily due to the syntax of language. ;ew messages are generated by the creative combination of linguistic signs. *+ 11( )uality of -atterning. This is the feature which semioticians, following <artinet (5=9=), also refer to by the term double articulation. The discussion of this /ey concept of linguistics and the semiotic theory of codes requires a separate paragraph (see 9.5).
Design features of language (Hockett1960)

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

According to Channel

According to Pragmatic Dimension

According to Semantic Dimension

According to Semiogenetic features

Characteristic s of the code

Vocal auditor!

"nterchangea#ilit !

Semanticit!

%radition

Discreteness

$roadcast %ransmissio n and Directional &ece'tion

Com'lete (eed#ack

Ar#itrariness

,earna#ilit!

Producti)it! (-'enness)

S'eciali*ation

Pre)arication

Dualit! of Patterning

&a'id (ading

Dis'lacement

&efle+i)eness

>f the previous 56 82s, !oc/ett regards only four can be considered central and to some extent unique of human languages, these are( openness/ displacement/ duality/ and traditional transmission.
6

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

7s an anthropo-semiotic framewor/, 5ounin spea/s of six features of human language( 5- 2unction of ?ommunication. @- 7rbitrariness. Aeing a system.

9- 'inearity.(unli/e visual communication) B- 8iscreteness. 6- 8ouble articulation. >sgood (5=CD) proposes as system of defining characteristics of languages relying on theoretical, behavioristic and comparative linguistic considerations. Language as a Code Two important directions of influence between semiotics of language and the theory of codes are discussed. The first is that double articulation has become essential for the study of other semiotic systems$ the other is that &language as a code&, has led to the belief that language is derived from more general theories of codes and information, since code is synonymous to system.

*oub e Articu ation: This principle has often been considered as the single distinguishing feature of human language. <artinet,s theory states that articulation means structuring which involves two levels( 5st articulation, a message is structured into meaningful units consisting of the signifier and the signified (monemes), @nd articulation, structuring the phonetic signifiers of the monemes into non-signifying but distinctive phonemes. -ome other scholars proposed rather different approach which can be illustrated as follows( *ua it% of patterning <artinet*s !oc/ett*s !"elmslev*s 1st Articu ation <onemes <orphemes .lereme 2nd Articu ation .honemes .honemes ?eneme

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

&he anguage Code: ?ode and system are used interchangeably in linguistics$ -aussure once spo/e of language as a code in his dichotomy of langueEparole. 0a/obson proposed to restate these concepts in terms of message Ecode. -everal scholars re"ected the term language ?ode emphasi:ing the difference between natural languages and artificial codes. 'ode implies psycholinguistic processes of encoding, storage, and decoding of language. &he Language Code as Sign 6epertoire 7s sign repertoires, codes consist of a homogenous and closed set of unambiguous symbols. 'anguage however, is an open system of semantically flexible signs. To overcome these implications, 0acobson have introduced two modifications of the concept of code in linguistics. !e proposed the 8ynamic view of language, as a diversified code, its overall code includes a set of sub- codes. The sub-codes of languages are its functional varieties (dialects, idiolects, styles, etc.). ernstein,s sociolinguistic &code theory& of the 5=6Ds distinguishes between the &general code& and the &speech codes& of individuals of social groups.

Codes as 6u es of Semiotic &ransformation ( 0acobson described encoding as a transformation of meanings (signata) into sounds (signantia). #t is a true principle that, in semiotics, expressionEcontent, signifierEsignified are inseparable. >ne can neither divide sound from thought nor thought from sound. Arbitrariness and 5otivation : #n -aussure*s words, the linguistic sign is arbitrary, !oc/ett considers arbitrariness as the defining feature of language. The thesis of conventiona it% of words is precursor to -aussurean dogma. -ocrates admitted that words cannot be completely arbitrary, since, in naming, we cannot follow our own will. -uch conventionality is discussed as a pragmatic dimension regarding its role in social semiotic behavior. +ittingstein argues thatF if language is to be a means of communication, there must be agreementF, language is founded on convention. 7nd grammatical rules are based on grammatical conventions. -ocial agreement is not agreement in opinions but in form of life. 7ustin distinguishes only illocutionary acts (promising, commanding and bapti:ing) as conventional. -earle, on the other hand, distinguishes between conventions and rules, while he further divides rules into Regulative (etiquette or clothing) and constitutive (li/e the rules of chess or football).
8

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

+oundations of Arbitrariness: Precursors: 'oc/e already used this term %words signify by a perfect arbitrary imposition&. -aussure too/ this thesis from +hitney who states ) an internal and necessary tie between the word and idea is absolutely non0existent for the learner1 . !owever, -aussure warned that the choice of the signifier is not left entirely to the spea/er. 7rbitrariness is not freedom of choice, but it means the unmotivated nature of the sign. #n the -aussurean concept, arbitrariness indicates also the conventionality of the language system (the community is essential in the existence and acceptance of signs). 7gainst this principle, enveniste postulates the principle of necessity of the linguistic sign$ it depends on the psychological association between the two sides of the linguistic sign.

Arbitrariness: Relation of Sense or Reference #n -aussurean principle, arbitrariness is a matter of sense only, i.e. the relationship between the signifier and the signified. 7rbitrariness in the Triadic <odel of the sign is necessarily referential. )if the signifier is arbitrary with respect to the referent and if the signified is necessarily lin/ed to the signifier , the signified must also be considered arbitrary*.

Absolute vs! Relative Arbitrariness: #n -aussure terms, words such as ten, sheep, or apple exhibit absolute arbitrariness, while compound words such as fifteen, shepherd, or apple tree are examples of relative arbitrariness. esides, all rules of grammar restrict arbitrariness and introduce motivation into the system of language.

*egrees of Arbitrariness( .eirce classified signs with respect to their referential dimension into( Signs

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

#con
Higher degree of ar#itrariness. than the inde+ /"t re1uires higher degree of cultural con)entionalit!

#ndex
A sign of minimal ar#itrariness.like natural signs ( e+/ Smoke0 fire)/

-ymbol
A con)entional sign. characteri*ed #! highest degree of ar#itrariness.

Para anguage: 7s a branch of nonverbal communication, it is the study of vocal signals beyond the verbal message in the narrower sense. #n the broadest sense, it comprises seven areas, the broadest of which are (20non0human and human vocali,ations/ and 30 non0vocal as well as vocal features of human communication).!owever, paralanguage in the narrower sense will be adopted here, i.e.(human vocali:ations only). 7lthough dedicated to non-verbal communication, yet, .aralanguage is not concerned with gestures for examples because gestures convey messages independent of language. "aralanguage is communication that occurs with verbal messages. "aralinguistic messages are supra-segmental and thus not inherent in the words. 2rom a linguistic point of view, the borderline between linguistics and paralinguistics is expressed as follows(

10

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

!istorically, and from a purely semiotic point of view, paralanguage was one of the steps in the extension of structural linguistics toward a semiotic theory of human communication. Gauch locates para-linguistics between linguistics and semiotics, since it is concerned with indexical signs.

11

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

#n !"elmslev*s terminology, the semantic unit is "leremic writing while the phonetic unit is Cenemic one. *efining +eatures of Spo(en and 7ritten Language Spo(en 7ritten 3ses vocal-auditory channel 3ses visual channel ( fails in the dar/) roadcast transmission 8irectional reception 'ess speciali:ed in the treatment of !ighly speciali:ed, requires higher content. energetic effort, more freedom in editing and revising. Gapid fading .ermanent recording and information storage. #n addition to the communicative function which is shared by the spo/en mode, writing, as a semiotic mode, serves the following(

12

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes Semiotic +unction of 7riting

5agic +unction
Secret and magic forms of 2riting like Hierogl!'hic 2riting and sacred car)ings/

Poetic +unction
,ike calligra'h!. marked letter forms in architecture and aesthetics

7riting and Speech: Autonom% vs8 .eteronom%: The question of whether the grapheme is a sign or not depends heavily on the autonomy or heteronomy of writing. Therefore, for those who follow the autonomous view, written segments the si:e of a word or morpheme are signs of writing. +hile a heteronomous view considers the single letter as having the status of a sign which refers to a phoneme. The primacy of writing over spo/en mode has been dealt with in terms of "hono# centrism or Grapho#centrism! 9niversa anguage ,9Ls-: To overcome the shortcomings of linguistic features of arbitrariness and tradition, hundreds of 3niversal 'anguages have been proposed or developed during the history of semiotics. The roots of semiotic dimensions for 3's are simplified below( Semiotic *imensions of 9Ls

5%tho ogica
"n search of ,ingua Humana/. (to sol)e the to2er of $a#el confusion)/

Language #vo ution

&%po og% of 9Ls ,Priori and Posteriori-

Priori 9L: 3sing artificial elements and structures invented independently for any existing natural language.

13

December 16, 2013

Language and Language-based Codes

Posteriori 9L: ?omposed of elements from one or several historical languages with the goal of creating a simpler, more regular and easier to learn language. <edia proposed for 3's pro"ects are speech$ alphabetic writing and numbers are the ma"or, other means are also suggested li/e music and pictographs. Sign Language -ign languages (-'s) in the narrower sense are semiotic systems of gestural communication with the communicative potential of a spo/en language. -uch gestural languages have been developed in contexts where speech is not available (as in -' of the deaf), or where speech is forbidden (as in monastic -'s), or as a universal language for people of different native languages. #n the very broad sense, -' is used as a synonym of semiotic systems in general. -'s differ from spo/en languages in that they are visu0centric and lac/ing the ability to discuss in-depth abstract themes, while, spo/en language is phono-centric, creative and expressive of abstract themes. Language Substitutes 'anguage substitutes are secondary codes whose signs are molded on the form of primary linguistic code. 'anguage substitutes include speech surrogates such as drum and whistle languages, as derivatives of speech. -uch surrogates are utili:ed in contexts delimited by geographical distribution and communicative function. 7lphabetic ?odes Examples of 7lphabetic ?odes( a- <orse code. b- raille code. c- The binary code of the alphabet.

14