Structuralism & Poststructuralism (1):

Linguistic (De-)Constructions of Me
anings and Subjectivities

1. Structuralism--Basic Concepts
2. Structuralist Reading of Narratives
3. Semiotics and "The Myth Today"
4. From Structuralism to Poststructuralism:
Binary Opposition & Deconstruction
Structuralism: Introduction

1. How does language produce meanings?

2. Structuralist Approach (1): basic pattern a
nd binary opposition
 How is structure different from form? H
ow is New Criticism different from Stru
cturalism?
Outline

1. How does language produce meanings?

A. Language in Daily Language: Example 1
B. Different views of language: Example 2:
sign = signifier and signified  referent;
-- Structuralist view
2. Structuralist Approach (I):Binary Oppositi
on and Basic Pattern
Example: 1, 2, 3, 4
3. From New Criticism to Structuralism
A. Language in Daily Language

 罵髒話； the uncertainties of meanings.

The meanings of language are not inherent ( 內在
的 ) ． They depend on the context.
Structuralism: Language is a system of relation a
nd difference.
「政府官員」的意義決定於它和「平民百姓」
的不同；和「相聲演員」相近 ．

 白馬非馬 White Horse is Not Horse. Wh

y?
白馬非馬︰
Possible interpretations
 「馬者，所以命形也；白者，所以命色也。
命色者非名形也。故曰：
“白馬非馬”。」
公孫龍子 - 白馬論第二
1. 「白」是顏色 「馬」是形狀，
2. 馬是大範疇  白馬（馬中的一小範疇﹚
3. Structuralism: 白馬 is a sign; it refers to our c
oncept of “white horse,” but not the actual h
orse.
De Saussure
sign = signifier and signified
Signifier + Signified  Referent
意符 意旨 指涉
[ 白馬 ] concept of the actual
白馬 馬 we refer
to (?)
The inclusion of the concept within the triad of significatio
n suggests that there is no natural or immediate relati
on between the words 白馬 (as a sign)
and the ‘thing’ 馬 (actual white horse).
Different Views of Language

A. In Chinese Philosophy
 言者，所以在意，得意而忘言。〈莊子．外
物〉得兔忘蹄、得魚忘筌、得意忘言
 王弼說：「言者象之蹄也，象者意之筌。…
…言者所以明象，得象而忘言。象者所以存
意，得意而忘象。」 （ reference﹚
 語言（言、象 : 象卦﹐ symbols?﹚ 用為做
工具
 意： the meanings referred to or
道．
Different Views of Language

B. Structuralism: Meanings happen in language.

A rose is a rose, because it is different from . . .

[ros] Carnation

grass

rose
[doz] (p. of rise)
Different Views of Language
B. Structuralism:
Meanings happen in language.
A rose is a rose, because
-- its phoneme [o] is different from [ai] in [rise];
-- its morpheme [rose] is different that with an extra morphe
me [roses];
 Its meaning is determined by the syntax or context it exist
s in ; e.g.
“Then glut thy sorrow on a morning rose . . . “
“Plant thou no roses at my head,
Nor shady cypress tree:
Be the green grass above me
With showers and dewdrops wet;”
“The pillow rose and floated under her, pleasant as a h
ammock in a light wind. ”
sign = signifier and signified

"The linguistic sign is arbitrary. It is unmotivated, i.e.

arbitrary in that it actually has no natural connecti
on with the signified."  
-- e.g. The signs “dog,” “chien,” “ 狗” arbitrarily ref
er to the concept of the animal dog.
-- Can be replaced by other signs;
-- Can create ambiguities.
-- What about Onomatopoeia, 象形文字 ? Are there
natural resemblances between the signs and what t
hey refer to? （ e.g. Cock-a-doodle-do, cocorico
& 喔喔啼 ; ruff & 汪汪 )
 structural linguistics: Ferdinand de S
aussure (textbook chap 3 pp. 89-95)

1857-1913, Swiss linguist; one of the foun

ders of modern linguistics.
Major ideas:
1. The synchronic vs. the diachronic; lang
ue vs. parole
2. Language is a system of difference. M
eaning occurs in binary opposition bet
ween two signs. (e.g. toy, boy)
3. sign = signifier and signified; the connec
tion between them is arbitrary.
 Language as a system of
relation and difference
Relations: toy  boy (sound),
 table (noun; grammatical unit),
 girl (antonym), etc.
Difference: binary opposition
I saw a girl in red. (syntagmatic relations)

I am a girl.
a boy,

a dog, (paradigmatic relations)

an ironing board.
Different Views of Language

 de Saussure: synchronic studies of language as

a system of difference;
 Roman Jakobson: meaning happens in commu
nication from sender to receiver, determined also
by the medium and code used.
 Kristeva’s the semiotic: The language as rhyth
ms and drives supporting and disrupting the logi
cal/linear communication in language.
 Atwood: Language as both social and self const
ructions. (e.g. love and her narration)
Structuralist Approach (1):
Basic Objects of Study
Rules: How to
Units:
 combine into words
Example – phonemes

 Select and combine in

words to a sentence.
 combine into a fairy-t
Princess, prince and a
ale. (Snow White and
stepmother Cinderella are in struc
Patterns –of basic units; ture the same story.)
--of selection and
combination
Structuralism: From Units & Rules to
Basic Structure of a Certain Langue
Langue or signifying syste -- "fashion“ (in clothes,
m 表意系統 : food, cars, etc.)
Examples: -- any kind of
-- Literary work, advertisement
-- narratives (e.g. myth)
-- tribal or community ritua
l (a wedding, a rain danc
e, a graduation ceremon
y)
Structuralist Approach (1)

 Structuralism: Examine the “basic elemen

ts” (or basic units), which form the basic p
attern (or grammar) of each story.
 Basic elements: 最小元素 + “universal”
(or common) grammar  a scientific appr
oach to literature. e.g. binary opposition
Practice I: 樂 府 詩 箜篌引

「公無渡河，公竟渡河，墮河而死，
當奈公何 ? 」
Binary opposition between 公 and 河
； between the speaker ( 女人？ ) a
nd 公。
1. 公試著克服河  公被河克服。
2. 公： ( 男﹚人；河：自然
3. Speaker : 試著阻止公；奈何公
（自覺無力，或景仰公 human a
ttempts to conquer the impossible﹚ 。
Practice I:

Variation (1): 「公無渡河，公竟渡河，墮

河而死，當奈公何 ? 」據說，這是漢代
一對夫妻的悲慘境遇：一名白首狂夫不
理會妻子在岸邊呼喚，逕自直奔水中央
而捨去性命，他太太吟了這首詩以後，
也投河自盡。（ source: 枯萎年代 ﹚

Another basic unit: Mythemes (or themes):

-- Liebestod (love death). 梁祝
-- Conquering Nature: Prometheus  激流四勇
士
Practice I:

Variation (2): 向陽的四句聯

叫你別看
偏偏還看
看了也好
免掉煩惱
Variation (3): 公無渡河
──詩誌八掌溪事件 《李友
煌》 .
Practice II:

 “The Jilting of Granny Weatherall”

New Criticism:
-- ironic tension built around the concept
of ‘jilting’ and weatherall vs. aging.
-- ambiguities produced in Granny’s min
d.
“Granny Weatherall”: A Structuralist
Reading

binary opposition between being jilted and trying t

o love and to keep;
  Differences:
-- jilted by her lover  her husband (who died)
-- keeps a farm house and all the children but not Hap
sy  loses her youth and beauty,
-- loses touch with reality (without her knowing it) but
keeps her self-consciousness;
-- almost jilted by God  keeps her dignity by facing
her death. (Her greatest loss is also a greatest gai
n.)
Practice III:

 The Oval Portrait binary opposition between

Living background-- night, delirium of the spe
aker vs. clear narration of the past
 abandoned castle:, vs. decoration rich but tatt
ered and antique;
Armorial trophies vs. paintings in frames of ri
ch golden arabesque
Image alive and soft vs. thick frame and the tr
adition of vignetting
Practice 4

 Cube Man Cube: Try to find out its patter

n and what different signs refer to.
 e.g. signs of “human” – bodily parts, hu
man tools, human actions; setting.
 Cube Men Cube
by Cerrit van Didn

 Beginning and ending: why different?

Cube Men Cube: ending
Cube Men Cube

 Setting one: outdoor scene; one cube appe

ars.
Cube Men Cube

 Setting two:grass (then with zipper);

Cube Men Cube

 Setting three: domestic scene;

Cloud
Cube Men Cube

 Setting four: outdoor again, smoking and

producing little cubes.
Cube Men Cube

 Setting five: building facade

Cube Men Cube

 Tools: zipper, camera  Human Action: takin

, national flag, g photos, singing, dou
 Human attributes: eye bling, lifting one flap
, hand, photos, after another,
Cube Men Cube

Action: swimming in a clothes-like sea,

smoking, birthing, fighting
Cube Men Cube

Human: buildings, money bill,

Tools: hand (fist), foot, stone, gun, machine
gun, cannon
Cube Men Cube: Interpretation

1. Theme:
• gradual loss of nature; (e.g. nature zipped, in snow ball)
• A story of human growth, connections(e,g, human tools; do
ubling actions, extinguishing fire) and achievements, which
turns to have more and more conflicts (cigarette, canon).
• Form:
• Human beings presented as cubes so that
1. Humans and their lives are simplified and de-naturalized –just
a group of signs forming some patterns;
2. Humans with layers;
3. Merging of humans and objects (e.g. tea box; camera eye; bird
becoming one layer of a cube)
4. Background music –light and beautiful, but can be militarist so
ngs, too.
 From New Criticism to Structuralism: Search for “the
common” or the universal
Form     Structure: basic pattern
an entity with interrelated parts.

Pygmalion And Galatea,

by Jean-Leon Gerome, after 1881
From New Criticism to
Structuralism Russian Formalism
1920’s

 New Criticism: set up studies of English

Literature as a discipline.
 In the 50’s, there are more attempts at
making English studies scientific and
objective. e.g. archetypal approaches;
Northrop Frye
spring summer autumn winter
comedy romance tragedy satire
From New Criticism to
Structuralism
 Compared with New Criticism, structurali
st approaches to literature are
-- reductive; （化約式的﹚；
-- more objective & scientific, does not rely o
n common sense.
-- anti-Humanist
-- Form to Structure, (later multiple language
structures and the racial relations they impl
y).
Readings for next week:

 Structuralism: Historical development, se

ctions on Saussure and Assumptions chap
3 (87-98; 100)
 "Should Wizard Hit Mommy?"
Feel Free to read more. 