Relationship between Hjelmslev and De Saussure
He developed a new theory on language coining the word Glossematik (in English, glossematics) the word was partially derived from the Greek "glossa" which means "tongue" or "language") and mathe (“study”)
Glossematics resemble the work De Saussure that language is a form ,not a substance.
Hjelmslev conclude that in language study entails an investigation of linguistic relation independent of phonetics or semantics.
The basic concept of any language in the conventional sense:
According to the prolegomena to a theory of language:
1. A language consist of a content and a expression.
2. A language consist of a succession or a text and a system.
3. Content and expression are bound up with each other through commutation.
4. There are certain definite relations within the succession and within the system
5. There is no one-to-one correspondence between content and expression.
PROLEGOMENA TO A THEORY OF LANGUAGE
• Prolegomena is prefatory remarks or observation.
• His most well-known book, Omkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse, or in English translation, Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, first published in 1943, critiques the then-prevailing methodologies in linguistics as being descriptive and not systematising. He proposed a linguistic theory intended to form the basis of a more rational linguistics and a contribution to general epistemology. Like Ferdinand De Saussere(1857-1913), he accepted language as a system of sign, from the point of view of language use.
• Prolegomena divided to following section. There are:
1.The study of language and the theory of language
• Language is studied as the relation of human characteristic.
• According to Hjelmslev make a prolegomena as an attempt to formulate and find a premises from linguistic to establish the method and to indicate its path.
2.Linguistic theory and Humanism
the object of linguistic is language. As another science, language must have a constancy.
Humanist may object human activities cannot be studied in the same generalized.
Hjelmslev has his own view that it would seem to be generally valid thesis that for everyone process, there is a corresponding system.
3. Linguistic theory and Empirism
• Hjelmslev distinguished glossematic from other linguistic theories on the basis of his “empirical principle”: the description shall be free of contradiction, exhaustive and as simple as possible.
• The name of the principle could be changed, of course, but the requirements are basic to glossematic.
4. Linguistic theory and Induction
• The source of difficulties in previous linguistic theories has been inductive investigation. It cannot ensure a self-consistent and simple description.
• Hjemslev suggested that we start with the data, which impose the opposite direction on the investigator. This method may be termed deduction, even though the use of the term disturbs epistemologists.
5. Linguistic Theory and Reality
• De Saussure had remarked in passing that “ the point of view creates the object .“
• He decided that the term “theory” can be used in more than one way. Hjelmslev pointed out, there are no axioms or postulates, since those required are not peculiar to linguistics but are the sort necessary to any science
6.The Aim of Linguistic Theory
• As hjelmslev understood it, the aim of linguistic theory is to provide a procedural method by means of which object of a premised nature can be described self-consistently and exhaustively.
7. Perspectives of linguistic theory
Hjelmslev required that linguistic investigation begin with a circumstance of the scope of linguistic study. In this approach he relied on the method of Decartes four rules: 1. to accept nothing is true 2. to divided each difficulty I should
8. The System of Definitions
In Hjelmslev’s approach to linguistics definitions play central role, as the method sketched above suggest. Each definition is to be clearly connected with the others that premise it. Operational definitions will also be admitted at various stages of the analysis.
9. Principle of the Analysis
The principle of the analysis is not to vary from one text to the next, an Hjelmslev recalled de Saussure’s saying that “language is a form, not a subtance”, in order to stress the invariable nature of the procedure. This is a movement from class to component until further analyis is no longer possible and is based on this particular conception of what linguistic “form” is.
10. Form of the Analysis
Hierarchies are classes of classes, and there are two main sorts: processes and system. The analysis of these two hierarchies, and the results of the analysis, require distinc terminologies. The analysis of the process is termed a partition. The analysis of a system is called an articulation. The classes within a process are referred to as chains, but the classes in a system are paradigms. The components of chains are called parts, and the components of system are named members. These distinctions are the result of individual analysis, but when analysis is continued, we must discuss the derivates of a class in a hierarchy.
A precise terminologi will required to distinguish and state the kinds of dependences that hold among linguistic items, and Hjelmslev proposed such a terminology in the section called “Function”. A function, then, is a dependence that fulfills conditions for an analysis, so that there is a function between a class and its components. The terminal of a function are called functives, and a functive that is not itself a function will be called an entity.
12. Sign and Figurae
When we consider language in and for itself, we must
Conclude that :
1. Language is first and foremost a sign system
2. But, it is not a pure system
3. It consist ultimately of a system of nonsign,
the figurae which are used to construct sign
13. Expression and Content
De Saussure had allready shown that we cannot consider expression or content alone and arrive at a worthwhile study of language.
We thus recognize in the linguistic content, in its process, a specific form, the content-form, which is independent of, and stands in arbitrary relation to the purport and forms it into a content-substance.
14. Invariants and Variants
Hjelmslev considered that the distinctive factor as the relevant one in registering invariants and for distinguishing between invariants and variants.
15. Linguistic Scheme and Linguistic Usage
Language best compared to bring out their similiarities and differences based on their meaning.The linguistic hierarchy is called the linguistic schema and the nonlinguistic hierarchies, when they are ordered to the linguistic, are called the linguistic usage.
16. Variants in the linguistic schema
Variants in the linguistic schema can be considered free or bound. It is called “combinatory” variants. Bound variants are found in the chain, and they can be called varieties, while the free variants are.
17. Functions and Sum
• A sum is a class that has function to one more classes within the same rank and a syntagmatic sum called a unit and a paradigmatic sum is called a category.
• Functions are always present either between sums or between functions in other words every entity is a sum of variants.
• Syncretism is generally a fusion of two or more forms(for example, different cases) that were originally different.
• Hjelmslev definition about syncretism is in ter of suspension , since “the commutation between two invariants may be suspended under given condition”.
• We call a dominance obligatory and optional dominance can therefore be distinguished, since the obligatory type is found when the dominant, with respect to the syncretism, is a variety and the optional when the dominant is an invariant
• Catalysis is the unexpressed or missing term should be supplied , and the procedure Hjelmslev’ proposed.
• An example of the need for such a procedure, he mentioned the latin preposition since, which occur only with the ablative case.
• Hjelmslev definition of catalysis is thus a registration of cohesion through the replacement of one entity by another to which it has substitution.
20. Entities of the Analysis
The entities that Hjelmslev dealt with are not the same as those treated by other linguist or by traditional grammar. Linguistic theory as he understood it requires us to analyze a text, a method that leads us to recognize the form behind the “substance” which is empirically accessible, and behind the text, a system consisting categories.
21. Language and Non-Language
A language may be defined as a paradigmatic whose paradigms are manifested by all purports’ and a ‘text correspondingly as’ a syntagmatic whose chains. If expanded indefinitely are manifested by all purports
22. Connotative semiotics and Metasemiotics
• A denotative semiotic, it is described a language whose meanings are referential, not connotational, since emotional and stylistic differences of meaning are not included.
• Demotative semiotics is established the connotative semiotic can be related to it and then , a metasemiotic and a metasemiology must be considered
23. Final perspective
• There are two seemingly opposed result of this method of studying language as a set of dependences or as functions between constants and variables.
• Linguistic theory is led by an inner necessity to recognize not merely the linguistic system.
• At that point linguistic theory has related its prescribed goal “humantes et universitas”