Talk:Course in General Linguistics

message: the comparison between differance and blackadder's joke is superflous. that is not what saussure meant at all
::I agree with you, which is why I have replaced the section with something that is actually accurate: an explanation of value, which was missing from the page. This section links to another article, in which value is explained in much more detail and pure difference is somewhat elucidated. --Le vin blanc (talk) 12:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Difference and Value

message: signifier/signified ~ latent/manifest dream content - please clarify. Can't see it myself.
Also there should be a serious attempt to incorporate a critical viewpoint on his theory of meaning. Are signifiers like squares of a map? An arbitrary grid (defined by differences) with correspondences to arbitrarily areas of depicted land (which is a representation of real land)? Map ref square E5 (which does not actually exist on the earth) refers to a part of the earth. E5 means nothing apart from being a meeting of square (signifier) and area of map(signified) i.e. is a sign. But Saussure suggests the map is incoherent until there is a grid. Is that true? And do languages/societies differ in their grids and maps? Is the map a representation of 'real' land only or does it picture 'social structures' too? And mental structures? And what about a Wittgensteinian criticism? Perhaps language is several maps of different sorts taken to be one.... Etc Pliny 12:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Freud Maps Wittgenstein

message: Paradigms and Syntagms seem to be pretty important aspects of Saussure's linguistics, so I am surprised that they have been left out of the article. If I get the chance, I will write a section between the sections on value and the diachronic/synchronic distinction, but everyone else can feel free to have a go. --Le vin blanc (talk) 13:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have added a small section on paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations. It's a start, but it could use a lot of work. I felt that I could not leave the article lacking even such a small description, however, because, combined with value, these relations are essential for understanding the usefulness of Saussure's linguistics. --Le vin blanc (talk) 22:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Note, however, that the Cours has the axes the other way around.-- ExpImptalkcon 23:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Relations

message: All of the articles about Saussure and structural linguistics seem to have been edited by an individual who insists on quoting the relatively unknown "Norman Holland" in an effort to create the (mistaken) impression that Saussure is completely irrelevant to Linguistics. This is in my opinion extremely misleading and inaccurate. One could just as easily (and unjustifiably) include in the opening paragraph about Albert Einstein a sentence to the effect of: "there are no contemporary physicists who hold Einstein's views." That may be true, but not because Einstein has been "disproven", but rather as a result of the evolution of the field since Einstein's (and Saussure's) work was done. Elements of Saussure's work continue to be of theoretical importance in linguistics. The fact that structuralism has been superseded in subfields such as syntax should if it all be referenced in the main part of the text. 130.231.116.205 (talk) 07:52, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Norman Holland

message: Could someone who knows linguistics/semiotics please update for Writings in General Linguistics?  I've read the French edition and it seems a rather important collection. Wikiain (talk) 05:52, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writings in General Linguistics