THE OBJECT OF LINGUISTICS LANGUAGE: A WELL-DEFINED OBJECT by F.

De Saussure 1- Definition of Language The article starts out by stating the differences between other sciences and linguistics. The difference lies in the fact that other sciences deal with the object which people are given before whereas linguistics deals with language which cannot be something that can be given in advance. The example given indicates that a sound combination may mean: 1- A concrete linguistic object to a superficial observer 2- The expression of an idea 3- The equivalent of a word from which it could be derived 4- A sound All these different meanings depend upon the viewpoint. All these ways are equally valued, none is superior to other. A linguistic phenomenon has two interrelated sides. In other words: 1- What is articulated is an acoustical impression perceived by the ear. To articulate, vocal organs are used. However, language cannot be simply reduced to sound or sounds cannot be detached from oral articulation. What vocal organs produce by their movements cannot be defined without taking into account their acoustical impression. 2- We cannot say that every simple sound constitutes speech. Sounds can be instruments of thoughts. As a complex acoustical vocal unit, a sound combines with an idea to form a complex physiological-psychological unit. 3- In a speech, there is an individual side and a social side. 4- Speech exists in its present form as an established system, an existing institution and speech has a history (evolution). In other words what speech was and what it is at present show us how it has evolved. Past form and present form are closely related. There are debates about object of linguistics. There have been attempts to link speech with other sciences such as normative grammar, anthropology, psychology etc. but they are all distinct from linguistics and they claim that speech is one of their objects. When thinking about how speech manifests itself, both language and use of language must be accepted as the norm. Language (Langue) and the human speech (Langage) are not the same thing. Language is a part of human speech and it is essential. Language is the social product of the faculty of speech and it is the collection of some conventions that have been adopted by a social body to allow individuals to use that faculty. In other words speech has physical, physiological and psychological aspects. It is the possession of individual and society. Because we cannot discover its unity, it cannot be categorised as a human fact. On the other hand, language has its own rules and it is a principal of classification. When language is given first place among the other facts of speech, a natural order is introduced into a mess that cannot be classified. This principle of classification may be objected to owing to the fact that use of speech is based on a natural faculty whereas language is acquired and rule governed (conventional). For example, if Im not mistaken two girls were raised in a forest by wolves. It was seen that they could communicate but not through language. They were producing sounds by using their speech faculty but because they had not acquired a language and not socialized, their communication was through just a set of sounds. Therefore language should not be given the first place in classification but it should be subordinated to the natural instinct.

For example, speech faculty, according to Broca, is in the left hemisphere of the brain. If this part is damaged, one cannot acquire language. However, objecting to the idea that language should be given first place among the facts of speech is refuted. It has been proven that speech is purely natural. In other words, as Whitney puts it, humans use of the vocal tract as the instrument of language is merely out of chance. We could have used gestures and visual symbols rather than acoustic symbols. However, what Whitney said has been found to be too dogmatic because language is not similar to in all respects other social institutions. The job of producing sounds was given to the vocal tract by nature. Whitney has been found to be right when he said language is a social convention and the nature of the sign upon which there has been an agreement does not matter. The place of the vocal apparatus does not take the first place. The faculty of constructing a language is natural in mankind not oral speech. In light of Brocas discoveries, speech has been attributed a natural quality. However, it is also known that the area that Broca said to be directly linked to speech activity also includes the writing activity. Thus, any oral speech disorder would mean a disorder in written speech. This implies that besides the functioning of the various organs, there is a more general faculty governing signs and this would be the linguistic faculty proper. Therefore the conclusion to be reached is that language gives to speech. 2-Place of language in the facts of speech The act of speaking takes place at least between two people which is necessary to complete the speaking circuit.

1- In As brain, mental facts are associated with the representations of the linguistic sounds. 2- Impulse corresponding to the image is transmitted to the organs to produce sounds. 3- The sound travels from As mouth to Bs ear. 4- The sound waves go from the ear of B to the brain. 5- The image is associated with the corresponding concept in Bs brain. The first and the fifth phases are psychological, the second and the fourth phases are physiological and the third phase is physical dimensions of the process. There are also associative and coordinating faculties apart from the isolated signs and they have an important role in the organisation of the language as a system. In other words, rather than looking at the speech as an individual act, it can be approached as a social fact. People who are linked up with speech will reproduce the same signs to refer to the same concepts. Then how can language be socially crystallised? When a language is spoken if the signs used are not united with the same concepts, then there will be a social fact but those who do not understand it will be left outside. Therefore, for social crystallisation of language our main concern should not include the nonpsychological part. However, it cannot be said that psychological part of the circuit is totally responsible. There needs to be the executive side because collectivity cannot carry out

execution. Execution is individual and individual is the master of execution. The executive side is speaking (PAROLE). By the use of the receptive and coordinating faculties, the impressions that are perceived the same way by all are made on the mind of speakers. If people could not hold the total of the word images that are stored in the minds of all individuals, then we could identify the social bound that constitutes language. There is a storehouse and there is a community and the members of this community fill this storehouse through their active use of speaking, through a grammatical system that potentially exists in the brains of that group of individuals. Therefore, we can say that language is not complete in any one speaker; it exists only within a collectivity. When language is separated from speaking, two different things are being separated: 1- What is social and what is individual 2- What is essential and what is accessory Language is a product that is passively assimilated by the individual. Language is not a function of the speaker. There is no necessity to plan in advance. However, speaking is an individual fact. It depends on the will of the speaker and it is intellectual. Within the act of speaking, we should differentiate between two things: 1- What combinations does the speaker use to express his thoughts 2- What psychophysical mechanisms allow him to prefer some of these and exclude others In this article the writes states that he has defined things rather than words because he believes that starting from words in defining things is a bad procedure. In conclusion, following are the characteristics of language: 1- There are many speech facts and language is a well defined object in this mass. There is a speaking circuit that is between a speaker and a listener and in this circuit there is a stage when an auditory image becomes associated with a concept. Language is localised there. Language is the social side of the speech. The individual cannot create or modify language. Language exists by some kind of a contract signed by the members of the community. There are stages in the assimilation of language; it assimilated gradually. In other words, an individual must go through certain steps in order to learn the functioning of language. For example a man who cannot speak still retains it so long as he understands the vocal sounds that he hears. 2-Language can be studied separately whereas speaking cannot. Even the languages that are no longer spoken can be studied and their linguistic organisms can be analysed. 3-Language is homogenous whereas speech is heterogeneous. In other words, speech is a system of signs in which the union of meanings and the sound images are essential and both parts of the sign are psychological. 4-Language is concrete just as speaking is. Linguistic signs are not abstract. That is they are the product of collective approval. And when these linguistic signs added together, they constitute language. Linguistic signs are realities in the brain. Linguistic signs are tangible. That is they can be reduced to conventional written symbols whereas act of speaking cannot be reduced. That is in the pronunciation of the smallest word there are an infinite number of muscular movements. In language, however, there is only one sound image that can be translated into a fixed visual image.

3-Place of language in human facts: Semiology Language can be classified among human phenomena whereas speech cannot. Language is a social institution but its characteristics distinguish it from other political, legal institutions. Language is a system of signs expressing ideas. Therefore it is comparable to a system of writing, polite formulas, military signals. Semiology is a science that studies the life of signs. Semiology shows the continuance of signs and the laws governing them. Linguistics is only part of the general science of Semiology and the laws that semiology discovers will be applicable to linguistics. It is the task of the psychologist to determine the exact place of semiology whereas to find out what makes language a special system among semiological data is the duty of the linguist. The question of why has semiology not yet been recognised as an independent science with its own object like all the other sciences? is being discussed. And the answer they come up with is that the semiological problem can be understood if language is a basis, however; it is necessary to study language in itself but language has always been studied from other viewpoints in connection with other things. First of all general public has a superficial notion of language. That is, people see language as a name giving system and prohibit research into its true nature. Secondly, there is the viewpoint of the psychologists but their study does not reach the sign which is social. They study the sign mechanism in the individual. Thirdly, when signs are studied from a social viewpoint, the traits that attach language to other social institutions are emphasised. As a result specific characteristics of semiological systems and of language are ignored. In conclusion, its only in language that the distinguishing characteristic of semiological systems from other institutions can be shown. The language problem is mainly semiological. If the true nature of language is to be discovered, what it has in common with other semiological systems must be learned, and linguistic forces such as the vocal apparatus that seem very important are of secondary importance if their function is to distinguish language from the other systems.